Unthinking Majority wrote:You claimed that BLM in Europe/outside USA are in solidarity and not for protests for problems within their own country. The articles I linked to are undeniable factual proof that your claim is wrong.
Your disingenuous posting has reached the level of pathetic. Let's rewind, because you have swapped your straw-man for the argument and vice versa:
Unthinking Majority wrote:Why would you assume this? What do you mean by "brought down"? They've had BLM protests in other western countries.
Was ist
this?
noemon wrote:In any democratic government in the West, BLM would have brought down any elected government instantly.
I told you that the BLM protests in Europe were in solidarity with the BLM cause in the US and not out of a need to stop a rather enormous pattern of Black people getting killed by European police. There is no such pattern in Europe and if Europe had so many deaths the government would have resigned even before any protests.
noemon wrote:No European government would have survived so many dead Black people to begin with, but even if by some accident they would have, the extent of the BLM protests would have caused the resignation of any democratic government in Europe.
Your 2 articles, 1 from France and 1 from Canada proved my point to the t and also proved that both events took place in
solidarity to the BLM in the US as stated in both of your articles explicitly:
Article 1 wrote:Thousands of people have rallied near Paris to mark four years since the death in custody of Adama Traore. His case, bolstered by the Black Lives Matter movement, has put renewed focus on alleged police racism in France.
Article 2 wrote:It came on the same day that the police services board held a meeting, its first since the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, which sparked a wave of protests around the world. During this, Hart pledged a town hall for the week of July 6.
Article 1 cites the death of 1 Black person in France 4 years ago and the second cites 2 Canadian names, presumably the only 2 names they could muster.
Unthinking Majority wrote:This is all a strawman because I never claimed or even hinted that police mistreatment of blacks is as serious in Europe or the rest of the West as it is in the US. The US is indeed a special kind of effed up. What I said is that there's BLM protests outside of the US in western countries for problems inside their countries, which is an indisputable fact that is a google search away to confirm and I already provided some.
It's funny when people forget the point they were discussing in their ridiculous attempt to strawman themselves. That was the point all along, that was why you asked me the question you originally did, now you think the point is the strawman and your strawman to evade the point the actual point.
The point that I made was that the sheer number of deaths by police brutality in the US would have brought down any western government. And it's true and your articles further buttressed my point because 1 and 2 deaths respectively have caused massive outcry, while in the US it has taken hundreds if not thousands of Black deaths to even make a dent.
France has 5.5 million black people, which is the most in the EU and far more than the UK. Again more incorrect truth claims.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Eur ... n_ancestry
France's Black population of 5.5 is a
guesstimate that includes citizens, refugees, migrants and whatever. Britain's 2.5 million Black population is from an
official census in 2011. Census do not normally catch people outside the system, while guesstimates try to approximate the total number including those outside the system. I live in the UK and visit France 3-4 times a year, every year, I have scoured the country in all 4 corners; the Black population in the UK seems significantly higher than in France. But whatever, it's not even a point of contention in our discussion that has any particular meaning. You can have it and it makes no difference. But giving this away to you would still be disingenuous because what I said was:
Europe does not have a BLM issue namely because a) The Black population is small and b) because the police does not operate like the American police. I further added that in the country with the most substantial Black people in Europe(UK) police do not even carry weapons and your article has shown that in France getting killed by the police if you 're a Black person is not an actual issue as only a single person has died out of 5.5 million in more than 4 years now. The UK and France together account for 2/3 of the entire Black population in Europe(and that includes both Russia & Turkey!).
Your wiki article had you actually bothered to read it, further buttressed my point:
your wiki gotcha that boomeranged wrote:All together, from these estimates and statistics there are roughly 12.2 million Black people in Europe, with over two-thirds from the United Kingdom or France.
I agree it's totally wrong and disgusting and needs to change. My argument is that CHAZ or other riots are not a democratic or just way to deal with that. I think riots are only ethically justified once all peaceful and/or non-violent means of protest have been exhausted. And blocking streets or other civil disobedience should come before vandalism and violence.
How many more Black people need to die before you consider their peaceful protestations as totally worthless and warranting more action?
Apparently, you think France has a problem for 1 Black person dead among 5.5 million in 4 years, the US number is
1 in 1000 Black people at the hands of the police.
That number alone would have caused the downfall of any western democratic government even before protests would kick in, but if it didn't and it reached that number, people would simply burn the entire country down in the face of such an injustice.
I'm not an American, and I agree that different politicians and citizens in the US behave like immature goons and fools and it's a joke.
I don't care what you claim you are. You are here arguing for these crap from the POV of an American nationalist, nobody cares if you actually are one or not.
You either have rights or you don't. Rights are created to protect people from citizens/governments that don't agree with them, that's the whole point. If you think BLM can block streets without a permit then you should also support the right of non-violent rightwingers you don't like to do the same (if they're otherwise following the law ie: not threatening to violence). You don't just get to cause all sorts of illegal mayhem because a lot of people support the goal you're pursuing. However, if you've exhausted basically all legal and peaceful means and the city won't give you a permit then ok it's possible illegally blocking streets is then ethically justified.
My point is IMO your defending CHAZ simply because you believe the end political goal they're pursuing is nonsense, sometimes the ends don't justify the means. As for rioting Trumpsters well they can go eff themselves & their made-up alternate reality.
Of course I do, as long as they can prove the righteousness of their cause, I do not care who is protesting. All protestors are judged by the cause they are promoting, the first thing you ask when you see a protest is "what are they doing it for, what do they want"? I have already provided several examples of murderers and rapists not having a righteous cause to protest for their right to murder and rape respectively. 1 in 1000 Black people dead by police is a righteous cause, seeking your due wages is a righteous cause, Trumpsters performing a pathetic coup is not a righteous cause but that does not mean that right-wing people never have a righteous cause to protest for.
EN EL ED EM ON
...take your common sense with you, and leave your prejudices behind...
- By Pants-of-dog
- By paeng
- By Godstud