Black Lives Matter, The Police, etc.

[Chef]

Tevlin is actually pretty liberal, it is just that he is to the right of this board. You all know it is ok to criticize BLM, right? Lots of black people don't agree with elements of BLM. The central thrust of their goals are laudable, but a lot of what they do is poorly thought out, and their Minneapolis incarnation seem more interested in radical theater than practical problem solving. One of the problems with white, upper middle class progressivism in general is that it assigns special protective status to opinions that come from black and brown voices. This in turn makes honest discourse impossible, and just adds fodder to the right.

[amiller92]

I didn't think it was all that bad, and he's right that a significant question for BLM is whether they can change election outcomes.

[David Greene]

but a lot of what they do is poorly thought out, and their Minneapolis incarnation seem more interested in radical theater than practical problem solving.

Incidentally, MLK got the same criticism.

One of the problems with white, upper middle class progressivism in general is that it assigns special protective status to opinions that come from black and brown voices. This in turn makes honest discourse impossible, and just adds fodder to the right.

In my experience, the biggest problem with this group is that they don't want to follow Black leadership.

Yes, it remains to be seen whether BLM can win elections. Guess what? If everyone who agrees with BLM works at it, they will! There are some smart people behind and allied with BLM. They're not political newcomers.

Tevlin is usually quite good. He's been utterly wrong in his last two columns. People are shouting and swearing and saying irrational things because they've been subject to oppression for centuries. I think we can allow people to be a little angry about it.

Blong Yang's threat was just childish.

[kirby96]

Yes, it remains to be seen whether BLM can win elections. Guess what? If everyone who agrees with BLM works at it, they will! There are some smart people behind and allied with BLM. They're not political newcomers..

Who are some of those allies?

[David Greene]

SEIU, TakeActionMN, ISAIAH, NOC, others I can't name off the top of my head.

[Didier]

For David and Matt and Snelbian etc., what specifically did Tevlin write that was unfair? I'm asking earnestly, because your responses didn't address specific qualms.

[David Greene]

Characterizing testimony as "irrational" and the usual white message of, "these Black folk are crrrraaaaaazy!"

I have no doubt that some of the testimony was over-the-top. But that isn't the point. He should have dug deeper and reported on the REAL story, which is the stuff that leads people to that level of anger and "irrationality."

As it is, the column is basically the same old white "respectable Black" nonsense people of color have been getting for...forever.

[WHS]

I gotta disagree here -- blowing up council meetings doesn't accomplish much and pretty much accelerates BLM's spiral out of popular sympathy, which, as a practical matter, doesn't help BLM very much. Citing centuries of oppression doesn't make those practical consideration disappear. And using it as a justification for disruptive protest is a double-edged sword -- no matter what you do today, those centuries of oppression will still have happened, so if you're not careful it can become a carte blanche for anyone aggrieved to ignore the process, to ignore complicated procedural and legal and policy questions, and so on, until nothing can get done at all.

I'm sympathetic with BLM's aims and certainly sympathetic to its grievances, but that doesn't make counterproductive protests suddenly productive. Incoherent anger isn't very often a solution to anything.

[EOst]

Pretty sure polite, quiet disagreement wouldn't have changed the Council's decision the way their real protest did, so in one very important sense it seems like BLM's methods have been very effective indeed.

[WHS]

Also, has BLM actually united around a package of changes it wants to see? Just because the grievances are valid doesn't mean its members have a monopoly on solutions -- e.g., I've heard Nekima Levy-Pounds, its most prominent member, actually endorse segregated schools for black and Hispanic kids, which I would argue does more to create racial inequality and discrimination than any police department.

These are complicated subjects without easy answers, basically. Unfortunately, it's not something that can be resolved through protests alone.

[WHS]

Pretty sure polite, quiet disagreement wouldn't have changed the Council's decision the way their real protest did, so in one very important sense it seems like BLM's methods have been very effective indeed.

Except Tevlin is right that the stuff will probably get done anyway -- it's not like they're going to abandon the precinct to disrepair -- and what's the long-term plan here? Eventually people will stop listening to you. Every battle can't be no-holds-barred, eventually you have to sit down and start talking.

[EOst]

Except Tevlin is right that the stuff will probably get done anyway -- it's not like they're going to abandon the precinct to disrepair -- and what's the long-term plan here? Eventually people will stop listening to you.

And what's the alternative? What you're saying is true of every democratic protest movement, rude or not. Many have been good fights anyway.

[WHS]

And what's the alternative? What you're saying is true of every democratic protest movement, rude or not. Many have been good fights anyway.

Yeah, and what happened to most of those movements? They faded away and pretty much are forgotten today.


The movement's not the objective. You need substantive policy changes. You know why the Civil Rights movement was a success? Not because it had a lot big marches and rousing speeches -- but because it directed those things towards concrete ends, and we got the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, 1965, and 1968 as a result.

I honestly believe BLM could do something similar, but in Minneapolis, it's moving in the other direction, moving further from institutional levers it needs rather than closer.

[amiller92]

Pretty sure polite, quiet disagreement wouldn't have changed the Council's decision the way their real protest did, so in one very important sense it seems like BLM's methods have been very effective indeed.

Except Tevlin is right that the stuff will probably get done anyway -- it's not like they're going to abandon the precinct to disrepair -- and what's the long-term plan here? Eventually people will stop listening to you. Every battle can't be no-holds-barred, eventually you have to sit down and start talking.

You're doing exactly what the establishment always does to dismiss protest. "Why can't they be more polite?" "How do they expect to convince anyone when they act this way?" "Why can't they state exactly what they want so it can get done?"

All of these things mean, "meh, I don't really care what they are on about."

[amiller92]

You know why the Civil Rights movement was a success?

If it was a success, there would be nothing for these young people to be protesting about today.

but because it directed those things towards concrete ends

This is untrue and I suspect that those "leading" BLM know a lot more about the civil rights movement than you do. They definitely know more than I do.

[David Greene]

Also, has BLM actually united around a package of changes it wants to see?

Jesus Christ, how many times does BLM have to answer this question?

Yes. YES.

They've even managed to get some of them.

They're a bit more than aimless loudmouths.

[WHS]

Also, has BLM actually united around a package of changes it wants to see?

Jesus Christ, how many times does BLM have to answer this question?

Yes. YES.

They've even managed to get some of them.

They're a bit more than aimless loudmouths.

I meant larger-scale proposals with regard to ongoing disparities and discrimination, not with regard to the Jamar Clark shooting. If they do, I'm not aware of it, though I'd be certainly interested in reading it.

[David Greene]

I meant larger-scale proposals with regard to ongoing disparities and discrimination, not with regard to the Jamar Clark shooting.

So did I.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk

[WHS]

but because it directed those things towards concrete ends

This is untrue and I suspect that those "leading" BLM know a lot more about the civil rights movement than you do. They definitely know more than I do.

"This is untrue"? Wait, what now?

The Civil Rights movement wasn't monolithic and certainly didn't always march in lockstep discipline, but you can pretty much correlate, for instance, each of MLK's major campaigns against a particular problem with the passage of a major piece of social legislation aimed at resolving that problem.

[WHS]

I meant larger-scale proposals with regard to ongoing disparities and discrimination, not with regard to the Jamar Clark shooting.

So did I.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk

Well, what is it, then? I can't find much hint of anything on the facebook page or twitter feed. Is it a secret?