Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellie0497)
    Police brutality is far more of an issue than black-on-black crimes. The police misuse their authority to aid their racist ideologies considering a large number of US police are openly white supremacists/KKK members.
    (Citation Needed)
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellie0497)
    Police brutality is far more of an issue than black-on-black crimes. The police misuse their authority to aid their racist ideologies considering a large number of US police are openly white supremacists/KKK members.
    Police brutality is a big issue. But police brutality affects all races. Black people are disproportionately killed by police in America, but they commit similarly disproportionate numbers of crimes in America. Since systemic racism has not been shown - at most we can infer racism in some of the horrific individual cases that have come out, and even then this is generally based on intuitive feeling rather than objective reasoning - but police brutality is apparently a very real issue killing many people, it makes sense to tackle police brutality as its own problem, rather than tying it to race.
    Also black-on-black crimes kill a lot more black people than police brutality; hell, they kill a lot more people than police brutality does as a whole. So from a Utilitarian perspective, surely black-on-black crimes are the bigger issue?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellie0497)
    All lives matter is used to disguise and dissemble the 'black lives matter' campaign and that is my issue with it. Yes of course all lives matter (no doubts about that), but black lives don't seem to matter in the US and the campaign is trying to show awareness so people recognise this. People who are getting upset clearly feel threatened that a marginalised minority group are empowering each other.
    No evidence for that.

    Unless you mean that black lives don't matter to other blacks, in which case you may have a point.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    No lives matter.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    common perception is that some ppl feel threatened/offended by BLM as they think it means Black lives> All other lives when in actual fact it means black lives = all other lives

    Stupid people that start saying All Lives Matter are closet racists in my book, the BLM movement started because of injustice towards black people, lack of media coverage of the murder of black lives, and institutional racism that was being condoned against BLACK people.

    I read something that I feel is relevant 'you don't go to the doctor with only a broken leg and say can you heal the rest of my bones too please'
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chzm)
    common perception is that some ppl feel threatened/offended by BLM as they think it means Black lives> All other lives when in actual fact it means black lives = all other lives

    Stupid people that start saying All Lives Matter are closet racists in my book, the BLM movement started because of injustice towards black people, lack of media coverage of the murder of black lives, and institutional racism that was being condoned against BLACK people.

    I read something that I feel is relevant 'you don't go to the doctor with only a broken leg and say can you heal the rest of my bones too please'
    I say all lives matter, guess I must be stupid 🙂

    I'd be more willing to stand for a movement that included all race's and types of people.

    Black lives matter is more of a issue in america than other countries in the west. That's where this whole thing started anyway. Have a look at this picture for proof.

    Name:  ImageUploadedByStudent Room1470436588.412448.jpg
Views: 84
Size:  116.2 KB
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    ,,,,
    Attached Images
     
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chzm)
    common perception is that some ppl feel threatened/offended by BLM as they think it means Black lives> All other lives when in actual fact it means black lives = all other lives

    Stupid people that start saying All Lives Matter are closet racists in my book, the BLM movement started because of injustice towards black people, lack of media coverage of the murder of black lives, and institutional racism that was being condoned against BLACK people.

    I read something that I feel is relevant 'you don't go to the doctor with only a broken leg and say can you heal the rest of my bones too please'
    What is it like living in a Daily Stormer carroon? (Or an MTV Decoded episode for that matter, they're effectively the same)

    There is no institutionalised racism. There is no institutionalised violence. Stats show precisely the opposite. You aren't living in the real world.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chzm)
    common perception is that some ppl feel threatened/offended by BLM as they think it means Black lives> All other lives when in actual fact it means black lives = all other lives

    Stupid people that start saying All Lives Matter are closet racists in my book, the BLM movement started because of injustice towards black people, lack of media coverage of the murder of black lives, and institutional racism that was being condoned against BLACK people.

    I read something that I feel is relevant 'you don't go to the doctor with only a broken leg and say can you heal the rest of my bones too please'
    There are well documented instances of the BLM movement as a group endorsing racial segregation in university student accommodation, calling for the murder of members of the police force, white people in general and leading members of the movement in America literally incited and were key members in starting riots in certain black majority cities. They are a racist, anti police hate group whose only real goal is black supremacy and the promotion of hatred against whites. They should be treated like the KKK.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellie0497)
    Police brutality is far more of an issue than black-on-black crimes. The police misuse their authority to aid their racist ideologies considering a large number of US police are openly white supremacists/KKK members.
    And why is that more of an issue? I thought BLM was about making sure that the life of a black individual 'matters'. If that is indeed the case, why does it matter who does the killing? Shouldn't the fact that they are dying be of concern? It seems that this is simply masking an anarchic agenda.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aceadria)
    And why is that more of an issue? I thought BLM was about making sure that the life of a black individual 'matters'. If that is indeed the case, why does it matter who does the killing? Shouldn't the fact that they are dying be of concern? It seems that this is simply masking an anarchic agenda.
    Spot on
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    All lives don't matter..

    These lives don't matter or if they did, they would receive the same attention the Jews receive...

    Before any six million Jewish Holocaust was invented this happened.

    Name:  soviet famine.jpg
Views: 60
Size:  16.5 KB

    Look up Lazar Kaganovich. Are you going to deny this man was Jewish and his involved in the above famine?


    They confiscated their food and millions starved to death. This was a genocide not a natural famine.

    Yet we don't have Holodomor education, we don't have movies and books written by people who survived this crime...

    Why?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Dictionaries are inherently oppressive

    Language evolves; everyone has a hand in its evolution, therefore the people own the language. So who are some bourgeoisie academics to tell me what words mean?
    I take it this is sarcasm, but if anyone here either believes this or wonders what dictionaries actually do, the whole point of lexicography is to track changes in usage (for example, it recorded the shift in the semantics of "decimate" from "destroying 1/10 of something" to "destroying all of something"). The first dictionary ever compiled took many decades to finish, was published in volumes spanning 2 letters at a time, and was created by one man scanning pretty much every text he could find from the 1300s up until his current period, and then getting people from all over the world to send in their submissions for his dictionary. The first ever dictionary came from the people, just as the language itself was changed by the people. Dictionaries are not there to give a prescriptivist overview of HOW to use language, but they simply exist to track changes and record usage in the incredible phenomenon we know as "language".
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Right, so I can't discuss the numbers of black on black crimes or the statistics of black people killed by the police, but I can give you a brief linguistic overview of the 3 word phrase "black lives matter", a phrase that has become symbolic for the controversy it has inspired.

    To deconstruct this sentence, we would say S -> NP VP, or the sentence is made up of a noun phrase ("black lives") and a verb phrase ("matter"). The use of "lives" instead of saying "black people" is significant here, suggesting there is a threat to the lives of black people rather than to the race themselves. This is the point at which our first problem arises: many people do not recognise the distinction between "black lives" and "black people", and therefore see this noun phrase as excluding the other people and creating all black people into victims of police oppression. However, the focus of this movement is solely on the "lives" taken by the police - that's where it stemmed from, the taking of lives by the police in America.

    There's an idea in linguistics which is that of implicature, it was 'discovered' by a man named Grice and it is a key feature in the study of semantics. Implicature is all about what we're really saying when we speak; if I said to my boyfriend that "it's really cold out here", I'm not remarking on the weather, but it's a subtle hint for him to offer me his jacket. Women are often stereotyped as being "crazy" or "sneaky" or "tricky" because they don't say what they mean, they rely on the principles of implicature to communicate their true meaning - in the way that all men know "it's fine." to mean "it's really not fine, and I want you to recognise that". However, the implicature here can be looked at through 3 distinct "focuses": attentive focus, verum focus and exclusive focus.

    In the phrase "black lives matter", there are three ways we could see this phrase through the information it lacks:
    - "Black lives matter too" - attentive
    - "Black lives do matter" - verum
    - "Only black lives matter" - exclusive

    The first two are what supporters of BLM see, the latter is what the "all lives matter" movement is about. "Black lives matter" is a declarative statement, but it's also a response. Picture this:
    - "White lives matter, Asian lives matter" "And black lives matter too"
    - "Black lives don't matter" "No, black lives do matter"
    - "Only black lives matter" "No, all lives matter!"

    The BLM statement can therefore be seen as a response to a question or a statement, and this question/statement depends on the way you perceive the events around you. If you think that, around you in society, preventative measures are being taken to make sure white people are okay and safe (for example, just after the Nice, Paris attacks there were similar attacks in Africa - I can't remember where though - but those were far less reported) then you'll be inclined to see the focus as attentive, because you want your voice to be heard defending black lives as much as people defend white or Asian lives. If you see the police attacks to show that people don't believe black lives are important, see black people as dispensible and will therefore fire "warning shots" at anyone for doing anything, you'll be demanding through your declaration of 'black lives mattering' your own personal defiance against society telling you they don't matter. However, if you think that BLM is about excluding the lives of anyone who isn't black, and invalidating the suffering of white people under police brutality, you'll be inclined to state that "all lives matter". Interestingly, this 'exclusive focus' is the only time where the BLM cry isn't seen as a response to something, and through this linguistic nuance it could be said that supporters of "all lives matter" would see themselves as attempting to correct the linguistic injustice of BLM supporters, who through their own movement are trying to defend the social injustice of "black lives don't matter".

    Side note: I find it incredibly interesting that, if 5% of police officers use their weapons incorrectly, fire "warning shots" into people's backs, and generally abuse their power, the media and other Americans rush to reassure us that "not all police officers are like that". However, when there's a terror attack orchestrated by ISIS and other organisations affiliated with the Islam faith, all Muslims are condemned for the actions of that 5%.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KillaryKlinton)
    All lives don't matter..

    These lives don't matter or if they did, they would receive the same attention the Jews receive...

    Before any six million Jewish Holocaust was invented this happened.

    Name:  soviet famine.jpg
Views: 60
Size:  16.5 KB

    Look up Lazar Kaganovich. Are you going to deny this man was Jewish and his involved in the above famine?


    They confiscated their food and millions starved to death. This was a genocide not a natural famine.

    Yet we don't have Holodomor education, we don't have movies and books written by people who survived this crime...

    Why?
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    At a guess, it would be because Germany is closer geographically and culturally to us, so we have higher standards of it.

    Same reason we don't care about the Armenian genocide (or heck, even officially recognise it), and why terrorist attacks in France get WAAAAY more coverage than attacks in the middle east.

    Also, the Germans were ruthlessly efficient with the killings - they shuttled jews into camps and gassed them - whereas most other genocides were much cruder, for example the Turks marching millions of Armenians and Greeks into the desert, or one country denying another food, in order to starve the population.
    First, I'll just let you know that at A Level I've studied this Soviet famine (1932-33), so yes, there are systems through which people learn about these events. Why this event isn't in mainstream curriculum, I'll explain in a few moments.

    I want to address the use of "invented" to describe the Holocaust. I honestly didn't believe that there were people out there who can actually attempt to deny the Holocaust, but here you are. The reason why we know how many people were killed, how many Jews were tortured and murdered in the mass genocide we now associate with the dangers of an oppressive dictatorial leadership, is because of the records kept by the Nazis in camps such as Auschwitz; the Nazis were incredibly efficient at keeping count of the people they systematically murdered. The first mention of the 6 million number came just after the liberation of the camps, by a historian who occupied a number of high up ranks in the SS, the second, third and fourth historians used the data from pre-war birth figures to establish an estimate between 5.5 and 6.2 million. However, the 6 million figure has been around in public consciousness for so long that, if significant data came along to destroy it, historians would be forced to publish their findings and correct the matter. No such findings have been made.

    There are many reasons why Holocaust education has become part of the curriculum in many thousands of schools across the country, and in other countries too. The difference between the Jewish Holocaust and imposed famines such as the Soviet famine of 1932-33 is that the Holocaust was caused by people, and contains an incredibly important lesson. The fact that Hitler and his Nazi regime managed to brainwash an entire country through propaganda, hate speech and existing anti-semitism to kill millions of people (not just Jews, but homosexuals, gypsies, Communists, different ethnicities, the disabled, the lazy and workshy and more) shows us that ordinary people are capable of atrocities. The Nazi party started with 6 members and yet it managed to cause events so awful that their consequences sent shockwaves across the globe for decades afterwards. We must learn about the Holocaust because we must understand how to recognise hatred and how to fight against radicalism: "we must learn from History or we are doomed to repeat it". The Holocaust has not been the only atrocity in the modern world as you've acknowledged, but it is the one we are taught because it happened in a country not unlike our own; it shows that the conditions for mass genocide need not be centuries and centuries of war, but just resentment, propaganda and oppression. We need to hear about the Holocaust, listen to the survivors, persecute the war criminals, because we need to be continually reminded of the fact that we did not intervene whilst a whole race was being eradicated from many countries. We could have done something, but we didn't. Our willful ignorance led to mass suffering and genocide.

    The reason why we're taught about the Holocaust is most often due, pragmatically, to the fact that it's tied to a major event in our modern history - World War 2. This way, when children learn about the wars in secondary school, the Holocaust becomes a component of it. However, the mass extinction of life during the Soviet regime, or under Mao's rule, or in Armenia or Ukraine, or the racial genocide between the Bosnians and Serbs in 1993-4, or the Irish potato famine killing 1 million, is simply because they aren't as accessible on a school curriculum. However, all these events are explored in history syllabuses at GCSE or A Level if we choose them; I've learnt about the Soviet atrocities and Serbian conflict and Mao's China all through AS. These issues aren't buried, but their background is more suited to GCSE teaching rather than year 7 or 8 glossing over of WWII. There is a lot of background to the Irish potato famine - hundreds of years of conflict between the British and Irish - which is critical in understanding why the Irish were subjugated and forced to send all their food to England, wiping out approximately 20-25% of their population in the process.

    Now, back to your original point about Lazar Kaganovich. I'm sorry to burst your anti-seminist bubble, but the famine was caused by the failings of Communism: "the government's forced collectivization of agriculture, a part of the Soviet Union's first five-year plan, forced grain procurement and political repression in the countryside were the main reasons for the famine" (from Wikipedia). What this means is that collectivisation, the process which is crucial in Marxist-Leninism, caused this famine. It wasn't a racially motivated genocide per se, but it was a famine brought about by the cruel and repressive policies of the Soviet Union. This event cannot be compared to the Holocaust, which was the systematic killing of one race by another race, but the starving of a group of people through the warped economics of a deluded state, through Lazar's implementation. Lazar was born to Jewish parents, but the other people involved with implementing this process of collectivisation and urbanization in Ukraine (Postyshev, Kosior, and others) had no connection to the Jewish faith. The British men who created the laws which led to the Irish potato famine were Christians, so does that mean we should condemn the Christian faith for allowing mass starvation? No. Because the actions of those people were motivated by the shifting socio-political scene in England in the 1700s and 1800s.

    In short: the Holocaust happened, all genocides are serious, but don't blame a person's actions on their race and then condemn the whole race for it.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellie0497)
    Police brutality is far more of an issue than black-on-black crimes. The police misuse their authority to aid their racist ideologies
    Whoah!
    What are "the police's racist ideologies"? Where did you find out about them?

    considering a large number of US police are openly white supremacists/KKK members.
    When you say "large numbers", what do you mean exactly, and where did the numbers come from?

    I'm not accusing you of making stuff up, but you have to admit that it does sound a bit like you've just made stuff up.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    The important statistic is the number of "innocent" people (ie. those who posed no perceived threat to the police or public) deliberately killed without cause.
    When only these cases are counted, there are relatively few, and there is no marked demographic discrepancy.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellie0497)
    Police brutality is far more of an issue than black-on-black crimes. The police misuse their authority to aid their racist ideologies considering a large number of US police are openly white supremacists/KKK members.
    Depends upon your metric. If you're talking about which ends more black lives though ... I'm afraid police brutality is way down on your list.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jake4198)
    Dictionaries are on offer at WHSmiths
    Haha well said
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 10, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.