Politician booed for saying "All lives matter," apologizes

[Redstreak 6,653]

Alskfhakdhsk 

 

I'm a mess

[Didymus 34,380]

I preach false equality because I dare mention a certain subset of people are facing a heavier problem and therefore need the greater attention? Foh

No.. I was agreeing with your idea of a muddy egalitarianism in practice If you read my post completely and accurately you would've seen I completely agree with all you're saying in this page Except that you can extend the idea of what's a main dish as far as you want, perhaps with advantage

[Redstreak 6,653]

No.. I was agreeing with your idea of a muddy egalitarianism in practice

forgive me, I like to jump to conclusions and it wouldn't be the first time I've been told I preach that for my view :poordat: 

[Jjang 2,262]

I still think that "All Lives Matter" actually addresses the issue in a much more specific way It focuses on equal rights and when you're using it in a context of racism and racist violence everyone still knows it's about black people getting the same rights as everyone else, but the focus remains on the ideal of equality and gets a discussion going about how to spread that message. Plus, it can be used for all kinds of conflicts and, that way, get wider exposure and greater force. When someone writes "Black Lives Matter" everyone thinks of U.S. police violence, not about Nigerian citizens getting massacred by (black) Boko Haram members. Its scope is laughably limited and it doesn't even so much as suggest a solution or direction for solutions. It thrives on a promoted (which is dangerous) divide between white criminals (who often represent the state) and innocent black people and if there aren't enough examples of the risk of falling into dualistic philosophies, it's as simple as this: organizing and systematically selecting events of violence to report and spread according to race is not exactly founded on a racist-less theory either. Yes, I think that an issue like police violence against black people can be discussed under a wider umbrella and I don't see any reason for that being wrong or ineffective.

As I already mentioned : ultimately, the ideology of the statement all lives matter is universally seen as the politically correct mentality to adapt, and I agree on that 100%. But when someone simply states that Black lives matter he is merely and most importantly specifically targeting these words towards the systemic oppression, which is again, specifically targeted towards the black community in the U.S. The same applies with Gay Rights ; essentially all statements and terms lead to the concept of equality, but they will always be directed towards the groups that lack these basic rights or any kind of rights. So in this particular case, saying all lives matter feels like sugarcoating the main issue in hand. I'm sorry, but it just feels asymmetrical. Police brutality is a black issue. This is not an ill afflicting all Americans. Telling us that all lives matter is redundant. We know that already. But, just know, police violence and brutality disproportionately affects 99% of the times a certain group only. Justice is not applied equally, laws are not applied equally and neither is our outrage.

 

 

[Shadow 6,697]

That argument only plays to the hardcore progressive base. Good luck trying to sell it to the white working class or the moderate swing voters who you need for real reform.

If a was a selfish millionaire,  I'd love identity politics, cause it gets everyone fighting about race and gender while ignoring growing economic equality.

This is the real issue, with not just millionaires, but billionaires in the 1 percent of the U.S., not to mention the entire world...  How did the the wealthy take power and how did governments past and present become corrupt and no longer "for the people?" This idea of divide and conquer, Hegelian dialectic (controlled conflict), and misdirection is what has turned most of humanity against each other and tricked them into thinking any one race is better than the other. All humanity is one species just as all dogs and cats of different colors and sizes still fall within the same species.

History has been tainted by many atrocities, but much of all that originally came from the ruling and elite class. They have skewed the value of human life to the point when some who says something that O' Malley said who was perhaps ignorant of the negative connotations that was put over it by distrust and centuries of unequal treatment. However, at face value, a statement that "all lives matter" most of us would agree with on the basic level since that includes you, me, and everyone we care about and so on. Our lives matter, your loved ones matter, thus everyone matters if we just strip away these trappings of political correctness that still divides people among themselves. 

I hope and pray that humanity would wake up one morning and as one refuse to do the bidding of the ruling class elite since we outnumber them by the billions. How could they truly control all of us if we all chose to unite for the common cause that we all matter, just as all life matters on this planet from the algae growing in the swamps to the blue whales of the majestic oceans.

[Economy 52,842]

This is overthinking and being over sensitive

 

ppl cannot get upset everytime someone doesnt word something in a way that emphasises the point as much as you hope

 

like come on, im sure everyone criticizing has said actual offensive things

 

this guy didnt even say anything offensice. He just failed to emphasise the black problem specifically  

[Shadow 6,697]

This is overthinking and being over sensitive

 

ppl cannot get upset everytime someone doesnt word something in a way that emphasises the point as much as you hope

 

like come on, im sure everyone criticizing has said actual offensive things

 

this guy didnt even say anything offensice. He just failed to emphasise the black problem specifically  

O'Malley ought to be able to acknowledge the black community and yet treat all his constituents equally since the Democratic Party has more diversity and giving any one group too much emphasis over others could backfire as well. Unfortunately, it's a balancing act, but if he can manage, he'll have what it takes to represent the USA as President.

[Vernier 3,786]

Why do "All Lives Matter" when "all lives" are not the target of the police brutality/oppression which black people go through that led to the movement being coined?

It's like going to someone's funeral and then saying "yeah you lost someone, but I lost someone too and people die everyday!". It's not your movement and "all lives" being brought under the same umbrella makes no sense. When "all lives" are the victims of what black people are going through, then "all lives" will matter in this instance  

[Didymus 34,380]

As I already mentioned : ultimately, the ideology of the statement all lives matter is universally seen as the politically correct mentality to adapt, and I agree on that 100%. But when someone simply states that Black lives matter he is merely and most importantly specifically targeting these words towards the systemic oppression, which is again, specifically targeted towards the black community in the U.S. The same applies with Gay Rights ; essentially all statements and terms lead to the concept of equality, but they will always be directed towards the groups that lack these basic rights or any kind of rights. So in this particular case, saying all lives matter feels like sugarcoating the main issue in hand. I'm sorry, but it just feels asymmetrical. Police brutality is a black issue. This is not an ill afflicting all Americans. Telling us that all lives matter is redundant. We know that already. But, just know, police violence and brutality disproportionately affects 99% of the times a certain group only. Justice is not applied equally, laws are not applied equally and neither is our outrage.

That's just not a reply to my post. My post was in response to what you repeated here.

Why do "All Lives Matter" when "all lives" are not the target of the police brutality/oppression which black people go through that led to the movement being coined?

It's like going to someone's funeral and then saying "yeah you lost someone, but I lost someone too and people die everyday!". It's not your movement and "all lives" being brought under the same umbrella makes no sense. When "all lives" are the victims of what black people are going through, then "all lives" will matter in this instance  

That's not the same, how dare you It would actually be like going to a funeral and saying "I know. It (must) hurt(s) to lose someone." no matter how that person passed. I admit, not in all cases, but you can't just ignore the people who use the phrase in a way that does not, according to them at least, minimize the issue at hand. Don't twist the story here. I don't understand this obsession with joyfully pointing out that people who look at the situation differently must of necessity be racist, cruel and ignorant with bad intentions.

You might as well extend the line and say that no white men and women should be allowed to promote rights for black people or should be involved in any element of the movement because "it's not our movement". You might as well extend it and say that it should be forbidden for white people to tweet #BlackLivesMatter because in the system that is created by white man's society their lives don't matter. If you people are so eager to chase people away from a funeral because they don't have the right skin color or mental attitude, even though they genuinely care about the passing, then don't be surprised if that sort of behavior results in more and more white people abandoning support for minority issues. 'cause I can tell you right now that things like this thread are inspiring a "If it's your movement, then don't expect any help from me" reaction in me. If all that's seriously on the table in this whole conflict is the pride of black people and the people that feel the doubtful need to identify with them while calling out others for treating the subject with less emotion (which is not the same as being indifferent) and their shared insistence on carrying on the narrative of oppression and separation instead of being seen as equal by people who refuse to waste too much time on the bottomless "oh, poor blacks" pit, in favor of some actual progression, then I gladly drop all my mental and verbal support.

[Vernier 3,786]

That's just not a reply to my post. My post was in response to what you repeated here.

That's not the same, how dare you It would actually be like going to a funeral and saying "I know. It (must) hurt(s) to lose someone." no matter how that person passed. Don't twist the story here. I don't understand this obsession with joyfully pointing out that people who look at the situation differently must of necessity be racist, cruel and ignorant with bad intentions.

You might as well extend the line and say that no white men and women should be allowed to promote rights for black people or should be involved in any element of the movement because "it's not our movement". You might as well extend it and say that it should be forbidden for white people to tweet #BlackLivesMatter because in the system that is created by white man's society their lives don't matter. If you people are so eager to chase people away from a funeral even though they genuinely care about the passing, then don't be surprised if that sort of behavior results in more and more white people abandoning support for minority issues. 'cause I can tell you right now that things like this thread are inspiring a "If it's your movement, then don't expect any help from me" reaction in me. If all that's seriously on the table in this whole conflict is the pride of black people and the people that feel the doubtful need to identify with them while calling out others for treating the subject with less emotion (which is not the same as being indifferent) and their insistence on carrying on the narrative of oppression and separation instead of being seen as equal by people who refuse to waste too much time on the bottomless "oh, poor blacks" pit in favor of some actual progression, then I gladly drop all my mental and verbal support.

No. In the example you gave, that would be empathizing, which is not what "All lives" matter aims to do, because including "all lives" gives the impression that they are suffering the same issues #blacklivesmatter was created to fight, which they are not. I don't think everyone who wants to go with "all lives matter" is necessarily racist(in all instances) or cruel, but I do think they lack an understanding of why the movement was created and why it matters so much to black people not to have their movement sidetracked by an all inclusive umbrella which isn't even factually correct, come on   Sorry if that sounds condescending  

As to your 2nd paragraph, I'm not really sure I can understand the leap you seem to have made from "don't try to bring "all lives" under the umbrella of black lives matter" to "white people can't/shouldn't help". I don't think they correlate at all. It is not the movement of white people, because #BlackLivesMatter was created to shed light on the plight of black people. Are white people/other races being unfairly targeted by the police? No. So why are they being included in this? It's not like people of other races can't help in the movement without being included through "all lives matter".

I think anyone who isn't black who wants to help can do so without having to make it partly about them, because it is not(hence the funeral example)

[Didymus 34,380]

No. In the example you gave, that would be empathizing, which is not what "All lives" matter aims to do, because including "all lives" gives the impression that they are suffering the same issues #blacklivesmatter was created to fight, which they are not. I don't think everyone who wants to go with "all lives matter" is necessarily racist(in all instances) or cruel, but I do think they lack an understanding of why the movement was created and why it matters so much to black people not to have their movement sidetracked by an all inclusive umbrella which isn't even factually correct, come on   Sorry if that sounds condescending  

As to your 2nd paragraph, I'm not really sure I can understand the leap you seem to have made from "don't try to bring "all lives" under the umbrella of black lives matter" to "white people can't/shouldn't help". I don't think they correlate at all. It is not the movement of white people, because #BlackLivesMatter was created to shed light on the plight of black people. Are white people/other races being unfairly targeted by the police? No. So why are they being included in this? It's not like people of other races can't help in the movement without being included through "all lives matter".

I think anyone who isn't black who wants to help can do so without having to make it partly about them, because it is not(hence the funeral example)

Boo at you pretending a sentence has any power.

It's all in the way you use it.

I exemplified the positive ways the "All Lives" phrase can be used without bringing in a silly white fragility many times (and so did the man who started the discussion in the OP) and it has been systematically ignored by everyone in this thread. And I don't care that there are people besides me who use it differently, I count too and there are many people like me and I don't like my statements being mocked because there are some other white people who do things differently. They don't represent me or white people in general.

So a message to everyone: quit using generalizations about white people and their supposed intentions to make your points, it's one of the most dramatic disappointments about discussing racial issues. You should know better

[Kayla 7,595]

The phrase "All Lives Matter" is true. The simple meaning of the phrase itself is correct and should not be criticized. 

However, saying "All Lives Matter" in response to "Black Lives Matter" is like going to a cancer rally and saying "But what about people with leukemia?" Yes, they matter too. No one is arguing that. But this isn't about everyone, this is about a specific group of people. 

Not to mention, responding to "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter" makes it look like you're saying "What makes your life so much more important?" It allows the responder to disregard the specific struggles faced by the lives of a specific group of people by putting them into the same boat.

The value of someone's life should be equal, but here we have a group of people that does not feel that way. So to take their concerns about how society views the value of their life and turn it into something general as opposed to a talking point about them as individuals is rather disrespectful.

[Didymus 34,380]

The phrase "All Lives Matter" is true. The simple meaning of the phrase itself is correct and should not be criticized. 

However, saying "All Lives Matter" in response to "Black Lives Matter" is like going to a cancer rally and saying "But what about people with leukemia?" Yes, they matter too. No one is arguing that. But this isn't about everyone, this is about a specific group of people. 

Not to mention, responding to "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter" makes it look like you're saying "What makes your life so much more important?" It allows the responder to disregard the specific struggles faced by the lives of a specific group of people.

The value of someone's life should be equal, but here we have a group of people that does not feel that way. So to take their concerns about how society views the value of their life and turn it into something general as opposed to a talking point about them as individuals is rather disrespectful.

Again: all suppositions of how the phrase is used. Embrarassing.

If a person says this:

"All lives matter. Which is why this issue is so important."

and gets booed and mocked and has to apologize we have a problem. And it's not about disrespect. It's about people feeling like their cry for help isn't answered. But it doesn't take a long time to realize that, actually, it is or it can be by saying that we should take this specific issue seriously because we believe that all lives matter, in response to a black community standing up for their lives' value.

So no, the man who got booed for saying what he did did NOT mean the phrase the way you're painting it, not at all. I don't see why that is so ignored here. The phrase is the perfect response to a black community's trend and is an example of how people can get united, no matter their differences, to challenge the system and make sure that their ideal of equality is carried out in every department of society. Anyone denying that is just looking for reasons to whine.

Edit: Obviously I do agree that using it in the way you (and others) described is idiotic but that's not what the man or anyone else in this thread, for that matter, did. Which is why it's so frustrating to see the same comment come up again and again when everyone in this thread agrees that the issue of black people being discriminated against by police forces is extremely important I take issue with the preference of discussing an interpretation that's not on the table instead of discussing one that is actually being presented in the OP just to get some unnecessary social justice poison out.

[Kayla 7,595]

(sorry, couldn't take the quote away)  

 

You see, 90% of the people who blast "All lives matter" from the rooftops don't actually think all lives matter. If they did, they wouldn't use that phrase do ba--lize the "black lives matter" movement. They'd educate other people on the struggles of East Asian, South Asian, First Nation and Latinx people in the western world.

That's what I see more of. The people I see saying "All Lives Matter!" tend to be the people who don't stick up for anyone else's lives but their own. 

 

Although I do believe this is true with a lot of people, I think this politician that got booed did not mean it in that way. He seemed very sincere in saying that all lives matter, including blacks, whites, etc. 

I think blacks have gotten so used to being treated like their issues don't matter that they just jumped in on this guy thinking he was doing the same thing. 

Plus, a lot of white Americans are so clueless. Some even think they are being persecuted  

 

Yeah, Bernie is amazing and he'd be the best president to SUPPORT civil rights issues and equality. It's obvious O'Malley's intentions were not to belittle the movement, but I understand why people reacted the way they did, which you mentioned in your second paragraph. 

 

egalitarianism, while a great concept, is such a muddy word to throw around imo. When you take everything, feminism, anti-racism, anti-homophobia, and just mash it all together under some banner word, you take away what makes each case different and why it needs it's different and specific attention and calls to action. When you throw everything in the refrigerator into the pot, you forget what dish you're making.

I like that metaphor! And I agree with you. ALL those things matter, but in order to fix all those things we can't try to help them in the same way. Rights related to females, people of color, s-xual orientation, etc. all matter, but each will need their own unique approach to really work. 

 

Oh for sure, I'm not denying that and that is indeed ridiculous and a prime example of the false equality idea Redstreak described. But unlike the idea that some people in this thread promoted: not everyone. The phrase can be defended on its own terms and there are people who can use it and spread it with good intentions.

I totally agree with this. I think people just jump on those who say #AllLivesMatter, even the people with good intentions, because someone saying "All Lives Matter" and meaning it in a way that is respectful to and meant to acknowledge Black Lives is like finding someone who flies the Confederate Flag and actually isn't racist.

Usually the first people to say "All Lives Matter" are the last to stand up for black people. 

If you're not that type of person, that's great! And I agree- ALL lives do matter.
But "Black Lives Matter" is what the black community chose as their phrase to draw awareness to their situation(s). It is not our place to change their slogan, nor is it respectful to create one that is a copy of it with one word switched. 

Years ago Gaga donated money to the Robin Hood foundation- a foundation that helps homeless LGBT youth.
Should we turn that around and say ALL Homeless Youth matter, not just the LGBT ones?
Should we turn that around and say ALL Homeless matter, not just the youth ones?
Should we turn that around and say ALL people matter, not just the homeless ones?

It's okay if one group gets individual attention.
ALL lives matter, but the lives of non-black people are not hurt by Black Lives being in the spotlight for the moment. 
We know All lives matter, but let's not change the focus of this specific movement. It's not our movement to edit, but it can be ours to support. 

[Kayla 7,595]

Again: all suppositions of how the phrase is used. Embrarassing.

If a person says this:

"All lives matter. Which is why this issue is so important."

and gets booed and mocked and has to apologize we have a problem. And it's not about disrespect. It's about people feeling like their cry for help isn't answered. But it doesn't take a long time to realize that, actually, it is or it can be by saying that we should take this specific issue seriously because we believe that all lives matter, in response to a black community standing up for their lives' value.

So no, the man who got booed for saying what he did did NOT mean the phrase the way you're painting it, not at all. I don't see why that is so ignored here. The phrase is the perfect response to a black community's trend and is an example of how people can get united, no matter their differences, to challenge the system and make sure that their ideal of equality is carried out in every department of society. Anyone denying that is just looking for reasons to whine.

Edit: Obviously I do agree that using it in the way you (and others) described is idiotic but that's not what the man or anyone else in this thread, for that matter, did. Which is why it's so frustrating to see the same comment come up again and again when everyone in this thread agrees that the issue of black people being discriminated against by police forces is extremely important I take issue with the preference of discussing an interpretation that's not on the table instead of discussing one that is actually being presented in the OP just to get some unnecessary social justice poison out.

I totally agree with you here. Intention is SO important, but people often leave that out when they're sharpening their pitchforks. 

The guy in the video is NOT like most of the other people who say "All lives matter."