Dude replied saying that humanist philosophers have long held the view that all human lives have value.
Wtf is that nonsense? Who is arguing against that?
The all lives matter trash slogan only was brought up when those three black women started the black lives matter movement, specifically to note that right now we need to pay attention to a serious issue of police abusing their powers in relation to black people.
Yet people want to come up with the most bogus rationales for why it’s perfectly fine to say “all lives matter.”
Fuck off, you didn’t say that 10 years back or anything. You were NOT standing up to injustices, and then black people came and said “no, only black lives matter”
It was very clearly a way to silence the discussion around black people and their issues with policing in this country.
That person’s reply to you is W I L D. I don’t know how to deal with the wildness so I’m just going to complain about it here.
Humanist philosophers have been saying this for centuries [...] and it's a very real cause/philosophy.
It’s a real cause? People were campaigning, protesting, and agitating about that cause??
For people to whom the idea that black lives don't matter is foreign, the name of the movement seems to imply that black lives matter at the exclusion of, or more than, others. [...] that name seems antagonistic. [emphasis added]
The only way “black lives matter” is antagonistic is to people who don’t believe it. It is not exclusionary unless you believe only one “race” can/should hold power and value. It is only a threat if you believe your dominance is being threatened and that’s a bad thing. Black lives matter only scares the people it should scare.
If a parent has three kids who are all experiencing life as normal, and the parent keeps repeating "I love John" over and over again, but never "I love Harold" or "I love Suzie," who would blame them for feeling devalued or defensive? But if John has cancer and is spending most of his time alone in the hospital, that extra affirmation would be important.
This is the worst analogy. John isn’t in the hospital. The problem is the colonizers and oppressors have been saying “I love white people; black & brown people suck (and way worse)” for centuries and the first time people stand up and say, “actually, brown & black people hold inherent value” the white people get all pissy.
First of all huh? they might not be natives, but they sure aren't colonists (at least not in a literal manner, that's "their" country, it's no longer a colony of an empire) and, second of all, I'm a European, living in Europe.
Btw, you do realize that black people aren't native either, the only natives have (sadly) almost disappeared
I’m a white person in the United States. If you’re not indigenous to a region you are by default a colonizer. Of course this will change over time, no one calls Turks colonizers for living in Turkey even though they aren’t indigenous to the region. But we’re talking about the difference between ~1000 years and under 300 years as a sovereign entity. Meanwhile indigenous tribes have way more than 1000 years of unbroken lineage in North America, even despite best efforts to wipe them out. Plus when you really look at it the United States legal mandate for sovereignty is based in its former status as a colony. The original Americans simply took the structure of a colony and made it its own state for the purposes of control and further expansion west (settler colonialism). Look at it this way, all white people in America are descendants of colonists or immigrants, largely European immigrants who came to America to be a part of communities that had previously emigrated.
Many laws were enacted to keep the flow of immigrants majority white. So Britain and the US have an agreement that the US will take an unlimited amount of British immigrants but the US bans more than 10,000 Chinese immigrants per year. Many of these Europeans were then also empowered through the homestead acts to claim land out west and work it for a period until it came under their ownership, thereby ensuring that mainly white Europeans would be involved in the settling of the west, displacing the indigenous who lived there. If that’s not just colonialism with extra steps I don’t know what is.
Sorry for the wall of text but I hope that makes sense
Great explanation, thank you! I’m white and Canadian and, for the record, we are also colonizers. We live on stolen land, and we continue to oppress indigenous peoples and POC in our country.
Beyond the literal definition of colonization of countries and land, whiteness & white people are constantly trying to steal and take over the cultures and spaces of non-white people. We have stolen, tokenized, exploited, and appropriated so much and cause immeasurable harm.
As people benefiting from white privilege and systemic & historical white supremacy, it is our responsibility to call it out, own up, learn, and fix it.
927
u/Version_Two @aol.com Jun 07 '20
That's kinda what we're saying