White people and BLM

[DrZoidberg]

In an article from The Guardian, David Shariatmadari argues that the typicality of virtue signalling to show off one's own values makes it no different than the acts that it was supposed to abhor. That is, virtue signalling is designed to call out individuals on their lack of action, but the very act of doing so is an act of virtue signalling in itself. He addresses the recognition of one's virtue signalling as "smug" and points out that it comes from individuals with a false sense of power or superiority.


Hopefully this ad hominem attack, "virtue signalling" will die the quick death it deserves. To assume someone is disingenuous in their attempt at empathy or to qualify oneself as some authority (more in tune to someone's else cultural experience) in judging other's attempts at empathy can only exacerbate divisiveness.

I'm not sure what you mean? In the first paragraph you point out what is wrong with virtue signalling. And in the second paragraph you reject that it is virtue signalling. Or am I reading you wrong?

 

[Politesse]

With respect, I don't think you really understand the situation in my country. Whites have a strong numerical majority and effective control of most media outlets and police agencies in the U.S. An unknown but substantial portion of us are unashamed racists, actively working to undermine civil rights of black people, and a much larger proportion quietly allow them to act, simply by failing to really do anything about them. What are the rest of us supposed to do, just shut up and let the racists and their sympathizers be our only spokespeople? I do think that black people should lead #BLM first and foremost, and that virtue signalling can get sometimes get ahead of sense, but your idea of a "solution" is absurd. Ultimately, whites of good conscience must speak out on behalf of BLM, because whites of no consicence are the principal opponents of BLM, and all of us together have been, these past decades, those to whom Black lives do not seem to matter enough to act on behalf of.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Whites have a strong numerical majority and effective control of most media outlets and police agencies in the U.S. A substantial portion of us are unashamed racists, actively working to undermine civil rights of black people. What are the rest of us supposed to do, just shut up and let the racists be our only spokespeople? I do think that black people should lead #BLM first and foremost, and that virtue signalling can get sometimes get ahead of sense, but your idea of a "solution" is absurd. Ultimately, whites of good conscience must speak out on behalf of BLM, because whites of no consicence are the principal opponents of BLM, and all of us together have been, these past decades, those to whom Black lives do not seem to matter enough to act on behalf of.

We agree on everything except your insistance that whites must speak out. Yes, it can be frustrating to not be able to do anything. But doing anything isn't always better than doing nothing. Whites virtue signalling on social media is drowning out all thoughtful and meaningful conversation. The discussion about how to solve racism, as far as I can see, isn't happening. Instead it's this public ritual of support for BLM which whites are pressured into taking part in. The obvious effect of this is that a lot of people will say things they don't believe in, just to avoid being a target for woke hate. Flooding media channels with what is essentially empty noise. How will that stop racism? If anything it'll turn thoughful people off taking part in any public discourse. And leave the stage open to the idiots. Which, in my impression, is the situation now.

What was my idea of a solution? I don't think I have proposed anything other than that whites should talk less and listen more. While not a solution, surely can't hurt the current situation?

 

[Politesse]

Whites have a strong numerical majority and effective control of most media outlets and police agencies in the U.S. A substantial portion of us are unashamed racists, actively working to undermine civil rights of black people. What are the rest of us supposed to do, just shut up and let the racists be our only spokespeople? I do think that black people should lead #BLM first and foremost, and that virtue signalling can get sometimes get ahead of sense, but your idea of a "solution" is absurd. Ultimately, whites of good conscience must speak out on behalf of BLM, because whites of no consicence are the principal opponents of BLM, and all of us together have been, these past decades, those to whom Black lives do not seem to matter enough to act on behalf of.

We agree on everything except your insistance that whites must speak out. Yes, it can be frustrating to not be able to do anything. But doing anything isn't always better than doing nothing. Whites virtue signalling on social media is drowning out all thoughtful and meaningful conversation. The discussion about how to solve racism, as far as I can see, isn't happening. Instead it's this public ritual of support for BLM which whites are pressured into taking part in. The obvious effect of this is that a lot of people will say things they don't believe in, just to avoid being a target for woke hate. Flooding media channels with what is essentially empty noise. How will that stop racism?

What was my idea of a solution? I don't think I have proposed anything other than that whites should talk less and listen more. While not a solution, surely can't hurt the current situation?

If whites don't engage in this dialogue, it will die, and these will just be another riot summer in a long and hopeless list of riot summers this country has seen since before the Civil War. Black protests are usually ignored by the vast majority of the public, and their cause goes unheard. They have no voice, no platform from which to speak, at least no platform that matters in the course of what should be our shared democracy. I definitely agree that whites should "listen more", but "talking less" is a violent act in a democratic system. Talking less means ceding ground to those who are willing and enabled to speak. Namely, our racist compatriots and their conscious or unconscious enablers.

Ask yourself: are white voices on social media drowning out black voices on this issue because virtue signalling is just that darn powerful? Or is it because white voices always, 365 days a year, on every issue under the sun, drown out black voices on social media? Social media platforms largely designed BY and FOR rich, college-educated white kids from Silicon Valley?

 

[Elixir]

.... are white voices on social media drowning out black voices on this issue because virtue signalling is just that darn powerful? Or is it because white voices always, 365 days a year, on every issue under the sun, drown out black voices on social media? Social media platforms largely designed BY and FOR rich, college-educated white kids from Silicon Valley?

Yes and yes. Also, due to the persistence of segregation, most white people don't have many black friends and vice versa. When a white person loudly advocates for black people because they believe in equality in the abstract rather than because people they love are suffering, the pleas sound like complaints and ring fairly hollow. It's a dilemma that self-perpetuates and is intentionally propped up by racists and the systems and institutions they control.

 

[DrZoidberg]

If whites don't engage in this dialogue, it will die, and these will just be another riot summer in a long and hopeless list of riot summers this country has seen since before the Civil War. Black protests are usually ignored by the vast majority of the public, and their cause goes unheard. They have no voice, no platform from which to speak, at least no platform that matters in the course of what should be our shared democracy. I definitely agree that whites should "listen more", but "talking less" is a violent act in a democratic system. Talking less means ceding ground to those who are willing and enabled to speak. Namely, our racist compatriots and their conscious or unconscious enablers.

I reject the belief that whatever idea gets the most airtime will (for that reason) sway opinion. Ideas get traction because they are persuasive. Not because they are oft repeated. Getting things you don't agree with relentlessly hammered into your brain will most likely send you running in the opposite direction. That is certainly true for me. On this forum, how fun is it to talk to people who spam but don't listen? Do you think Syed managed to convert anybody to Islam on this forum? It wasn't for lack of making posts.

And virtue signalling is not dialogue. It's the opposite of dialogue.

Ask yourself: are white voices on social media drowning out black voices on this issue because virtue signalling is just that darn powerful? Or is it because white voices always, 365 days a year, on every issue under the sun, drown out black voices on social media? Social media platforms largely designed BY and FOR rich, college-educated white kids from Silicon Valley?

If it is so darn powerful, surely we should be seeing all kinds of positive effects. Can you think of anything concrete the Black Lives Matter movement have had a part in or succeeded with other than getting Trump elected? I looked at the BLM Wikipedia page... its not an impressive track record. It's nice that Ferguson got a black police chief in 2016. Good for him. But otherwise... nothing positive of any consequence. Black people are still harrassed and shot.

Virtue signalling as a political tool was super effective in the civil rights movement and to push for gay rights. But that only seems to work as long as the virtue being signalled isn't the mainstream opinion yet. Once the opinion is mainstream virtue signalling seems to turn in on itself and it stops being about identifying allies, and becomes more about attacking anybody not smart enough to figure out what the acceptable thing to say is.

 

[Politesse]

Even if I were convinced by your argument about social dynamics, where on earth do you get the idea that Black Lives Matter constitutes the "mainstream opinion"?

Again, I think you do not have the clearest view of what goes on in my country on a daily basis. Segregation is severe, especially in the North and West, and vast ghettoes have been constructed to hold minorities. Their economic and social opportunities are slight, and they are constantly harassed by police. Ghetto schools are prisons in disguise, and the actual prisons employ nearly 1 in 6 black American men as legal slave labor, often for profit. Income inequality grows every year, and educational opportunities are scant. Not every black person lives in such circumstances, but more do than don't. I'm not sure exactly whose perspective you consider "mainstream", but if it's middle class whites, opinions range from "we should do something about this [sotto voce: as long as it doesn't cost TOO much money or put my own family in perceived jeopardy]" to "I am actively terrified by the thought of our schools and neighborhoods integrating, or prisoners being released".

And speaking as a gay man: things are better for us than they used to be, especially if you are gay, male and white. But I would only describe the major urban centers as generally LGBT-friendly. Nationally, powerful forces are mobilizing to take marriage away from us again, and trans youth are in as much mortal peril as they have ever been, possibly more so now that their existence and plight has been more publically acknowledged.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

it's worthwhile to explain that BLM isn't a demand for "special" treatment, it's a call for help in a time of need.

That's very pithy. But I don't get it. Who is getting helped by white people making hyperbolic posts on their FB wall? Nobody is helped by hysterics. Unless there's a mission with a clear goal, what is being acheived?

The events of the last couple weeks have had more impact on SCROTUS's approval rating than anything that's happened in the past three and a half years. That 43% he's always relied on may not be so solid (or so solidly racist) after all.

So it's not about black people, it's demonstrations against Trump? Really? If that's what it is I think it's even dumber. And disengenous. And counter productive.

You never mentioned "hyperbolic posts" or "hysterics", and I never defended "hyperbolic posts" or "hysterics". Are you claiming that a white person quoting MLK (which you did mention) is "hyperbolic" or "hysterical"? That's a bit much. In fact, I'd say you're the one being hyperbolic.

 

[DrZoidberg]

That's very pithy. But I don't get it. Who is getting helped by white people making hyperbolic posts on their FB wall? Nobody is helped by hysterics. Unless there's a mission with a clear goal, what is being acheived?



So it's not about black people, it's demonstrations against Trump? Really? If that's what it is I think it's even dumber. And disengenous. And counter productive.

You never mentioned "hyperbolic posts" or "hysterics", and I never defended "hyperbolic posts" or "hysterics". Are you claiming that a white person quoting MLK (which you did mention) is "hyperbolic" or "hysterical"? That's a bit much. In fact, I'd say you're the one being hyperbolic.

The basis for this thread is my liberal left friends on Facebook. So there's a selection bias. Other people may have other kind of friends. I do suspect that the articles they have been sharing are representative of the stuff that has been going around.

There's also the possibility that I see something as hyperbolic when you don't

 

[DrZoidberg]

Even if I were convinced by your argument about social dynamics, where on earth do you get the idea that Black Lives Matter constitutes the "mainstream opinion"?

I was talking about the statement "black lives matter". Even racists typicaly agree, using bizarre somersault logic proving that they don't. But they still say they matter. I doubt it'll be easy find someone who is open about thinking that black people are intrinsicaly worth less than whites.

Again, I think you do not have the clearest view of what goes on in my country on a daily basis. Segregation is severe, especially in the North and West, and vast ghettoes have been constructed to hold minorities. Their economic and social opportunities are slight, and they are constantly harassed by police. Ghetto schools are prisons in disguise, and the actual prisons employ nearly 1 in 6 black American men as legal slave labor, often for profit. Income inequality grows every year, and educational opportunities are scant. Not every black person lives in such circumstances, but more do than don't. I'm not sure exactly whose perspective you consider "mainstream", but if it's middle class whites, opinions range from "we should do something about this [sotto voce: as long as it doesn't cost TOO much money or put my own family in perceived jeopardy]" to "I am actively terrified by the thought of our schools and neighborhoods integrating, or prisoners being released".

And speaking as a gay man: things are better for us than they used to be, especially if you are gay, male and white. But I would only describe the major urban centers as generally LGBT-friendly. Nationally, powerful forces are mobilizing to take marriage away from us again, and trans youth are in as much mortal peril as they have ever been, possibly more so now that their existence and plight has been more publically acknowledged.

I don't disagree with any of this

 

[Toni]

Even if I were convinced by your argument about social dynamics, where on earth do you get the idea that Black Lives Matter constitutes the "mainstream opinion"?

I was talking about the statement "black lives matter". Even racists typicaly agree, using bizarre somersault logic proving that they don't. But they still say they matter. I doubt it'll be easy find someone who is open about thinking that black people are intrinsicaly worth less than whites.

Again, I think you do not have the clearest view of what goes on in my country on a daily basis. Segregation is severe, especially in the North and West, and vast ghettoes have been constructed to hold minorities. Their economic and social opportunities are slight, and they are constantly harassed by police. Ghetto schools are prisons in disguise, and the actual prisons employ nearly 1 in 6 black American men as legal slave labor, often for profit. Income inequality grows every year, and educational opportunities are scant. Not every black person lives in such circumstances, but more do than don't. I'm not sure exactly whose perspective you consider "mainstream", but if it's middle class whites, opinions range from "we should do something about this [sotto voce: as long as it doesn't cost TOO much money or put my own family in perceived jeopardy]" to "I am actively terrified by the thought of our schools and neighborhoods integrating, or prisoners being released".

And speaking as a gay man: things are better for us than they used to be, especially if you are gay, male and white. But I would only describe the major urban centers as generally LGBT-friendly. Nationally, powerful forces are mobilizing to take marriage away from us again, and trans youth are in as much mortal peril as they have ever been, possibly more so now that their existence and plight has been more publically acknowledged.

I don't disagree with any of this

Typically, a racist will counter Black Lives Matter with ALL Lives Matter, or in the case of my childhood friend who works for the state police department in her state: Blue Lives Matter.

It is difficult to know what to say or how to phrase your support on social media. But, to paraphrase better minds than mine: To be silent is to be complicit.

It’s imprtant to speak up as these women are: http://www.citypages.com/news/subur...y-dont-want-an-apology-for-protests/571108911

 

[prideandfall]

I feel the same way about white people and BLM. No white person can possibly know how it is to be black. Just sit the fuck down and listen instead of posting shit. You are not helping.

Anyhoo.. I'm white BTW

Thoughts?

DISCLAIMER: what i am about to say is an observation about reality, none of it is an endorsement of whatever political or philosophical view you may want to draw from it

the irony here is that for the entirety of the existence of the US, the lives of black people have been dictated by white people, and this includes the positive as well as the negative.
for all that can be and should be said about all the leaders and speakers and people of influence within the black community over the centuries, the sad reality is that due to the fact that black people are numerically a significant minority and economically/socially/militarily have basically zero bargaining power within US society means every gain made was only because white people allowed it to happen.
there's nothing black people can do in america to improve their lot except convince white people to do it, and not because black people are inferior and require help or any of that crap, but because when someone has you on the ground and their knee on your neck the only thing you can do is ask them to stop, and then its entirely up to them to decide whether or not they will do so.

thusly, perpetuating a general sense of social outrage among white people about the situation that black people are facing is not only a viable strategy for change, it's the only strategy for change.
yeah, white people posting BLM stuff on facebook might in and of itself be individually pointless, but in the grander scope the only way anything happens is enough white people want it to.
so in that sense, turning white sentiment into a meme is effective.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Typically, a racist will counter Black Lives Matter with ALL Lives Matter, or in the case of my childhood friend who works for the state police department in her state: Blue Lives Matter.

That's how I see it to. Yeah, absurdly insensitive to bring focus to killed cops during the BLM thing. And not to point out the obvious, but being a police officer is like being a soldier, getting maimed and killed is a real risk of the job. They signed up for that when joining the force. Black people didn't.

It is difficult to know what to say or how to phrase your support on social media. But, to paraphrase better minds than mine: To be silent is to be complicit.

I'm aware of the trope. But I think the Internet and social media has changed all this. Information is now spread at lightning speed. We are overwhelmed by chattering voices. Supporting a cause on social media without adding anything of value and dumbing down the discourse by spouting badly phrased one liners is not helping. I think it is ruining it for your own team. The new trope should be "mindlesly spreading badly written articles is to be complicit". Today being silent is more golden than ever.

The highest value in the public discourse is today curation. Somebody takes their time to master a subject. They read an article carefully and thoughtfully and if they think it's good they write their own well formulated short abstract and post the link of their social media. I started systematically blocking people who continually make thoughtless posts years ago. I don't care what side they are for. I hate the behaviour. I loathe ideological social media bubbles where members continually just validate each other and there's zero critique. Which is one of the reasons I like this forum.

It’s imprtant to speak up as these women are: http://www.citypages.com/news/subur...y-dont-want-an-apology-for-protests/571108911

So the news here is that one politician makes a statement that he immidiately regrets and then does damage control. How is this news? Or relevant? Do you really think that there's a causal connection between what these suburban moms say and any meaningful change in society? To me it looks like nothing but noise. The kind of stuff I was whining about in the above paragraph. We need less of these kinds of articles being spread, because they add nothing IMHO. It's articles like this that dumb down the entire discourse and has led to the return of 1930'ies style utopian mass movements led by charismatic leaders IMHO.

 

[ruby sparks]

It’s imprtant to speak up as these women are: http://www.citypages.com/news/subur...y-dont-want-an-apology-for-protests/571108911

So the news here is that one politician makes a statement that he immidiately regrets and then does damage control. How is this news? Or relevant? Do you really think that there's a causal connection between what these suburban moms say and any meaningful change in society? To me it looks like nothing but noise. The kind of stuff I was whining about in the above paragraph. We need less of these kinds of articles being spread, because they add nothing IMHO. It's articles like this that dumb down the entire discourse and has led to the return of 1930'ies style utopian mass movements led by charismatic leaders IMHO.

It seems oddly contrary to decry that rather than support or applaud it. Almost a bit unconvincing and suspect, in fact.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It’s imprtant to speak up as these women are: http://www.citypages.com/news/subur...y-dont-want-an-apology-for-protests/571108911

So the news here is that one politician makes a statement that he immidiately regrets and then does damage control. How is this news? Or relevant? Do you really think that there's a causal connection between what these suburban moms say and any meaningful change in society? To me it looks like nothing but noise. The kind of stuff I was whining about in the above paragraph. We need less of these kinds of articles being spread, because they add nothing IMHO. It's articles like this that dumb down the entire discourse and has led to the return of 1930'ies style utopian mass movements led by charismatic leaders IMHO.

It seems oddly contrary to decry that rather than support or applaud it. Almost a bit unconvincing and suspect, in fact.

I'd applaud it if anything happened. That article seems to be a non-event. What exactly was the outcome of those suburban moms protesting? I couldn't find anything. Please enlighten me? The article is framed as a feel good story where "the man" listens to the little people. But Gazelka says that his comment was taken out of context, ie he didn't mean what he said. So he didn't listen to the little people. Which is what BLM is supposed to be working towards, isn't it?

Toni posted it as an example of how important it is to speak up. But I don't think that article proves that. Rather it proves that politicians are slippery fucks, which certainly isn't news.

 

[ZiprHead]

I was talking about the statement "black lives matter". Even racists typicaly agree, using bizarre somersault logic proving that they don't. But they still say they matter. I doubt it'll be easy find someone who is open about thinking that black people are intrinsicaly worth less than whites.



I don't disagree with any of this

Typically, a racist will counter Black Lives Matter with ALL Lives Matter, or in the case of my childhood friend who works for the state police department in her state: Blue Lives Matter.

It is difficult to know what to say or how to phrase your support on social media. But, to paraphrase better minds than mine: To be silent is to be complicit.

It’s imprtant to speak up as these women are: http://www.citypages.com/news/subur...y-dont-want-an-apology-for-protests/571108911

To counter the all lives matter was explained to me like this.

Imagine you're eulogizing the death of your child. Your explaining how much you loved and cared for your child and how much the child matters to you.

Someone grabs the mic and says "All children matter."

That's why all lives matter is offensive.

 

[ZiprHead]

My niece, a 22 yo white woman, arranged a Floyd protest here in our city. Over a thousand people showed up including the chief of police and other cops who also participated. It was peaceful and well received.

 

[Politesse]

I was talking about the statement "black lives matter". Even racists typicaly agree, using bizarre somersault logic proving that they don't. But they still say they matter. I doubt it'll be easy find someone who is open about thinking that black people are intrinsicaly worth less than whites.



I don't disagree with any of this

Typically, a racist will counter Black Lives Matter with ALL Lives Matter, or in the case of my childhood friend who works for the state police department in her state: Blue Lives Matter.

It is difficult to know what to say or how to phrase your support on social media. But, to paraphrase better minds than mine: To be silent is to be complicit.

It’s imprtant to speak up as these women are: http://www.citypages.com/news/subur...y-dont-want-an-apology-for-protests/571108911

To counter the all lives matter was explained to me like this.

Imagine you're eulogizing the death of your child. Your explaining how much you loved and cared for your child and how much the child matters to you.

Someone grabs the mic and says "All children matter."

And then, when you get upset, tells you to be "more civil", and implies that rude people like you are the reason kids die so often.

 

[abaddon]

... black people [have] basically zero bargaining power ... every gain made was only because white people allowed it to happen ...
there's nothing black people can do in america to improve their lot except convince white people to do it ... its entirely up to them to decide whether or not they will do so... the only way anything happens is enough white people want it to...

John Henry Falk was a white fellow who recorded several ex-slaves in the early 1900's before they passed on. Later, he recalled once bragging about what a different kind of white man he was, and going on about the importance of giving black people their rights. He said a black man responded like this: "You know, you still got the disease, sonny. I know you think you're cured but you're not cured. You can't 'give me' the right to be a human being, I was born with that right. Now you keep me from having that. If you got all the policemen and all the jobs on your side, you can deprive me of it. But you can't 'give' it to me 'cuz I was BORN with it just like you was."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZfcc21c6Uo

I think the notion of "zero bargaining power" and dependence on whites to give or else they don't get is not an accurate "observation about reality".

I support BLM because any chance to slap authority in the face and tell them "you are not going to wield so much power anymore" is an important fight.

 

[prideandfall]

I think the notion of "zero bargaining power" and dependence on whites to give or else they don't get is not an accurate "observation about reality".

it absolutely is.
being realistic about the mechanics of US society, what exactly can black people do to force change other than convince white people to enact that change?
white people are in charge of all the laws, all the law enforcement, all the economic power, and all the foundational processes by which civilization functions in the US.
so if black people are oppressed and want to stop it, they can't rise up and overthrow white people, they can't leverage economic power to strong-arm society into changing, and they can't telepathically alter human minds to their way of thinking.

this isn't about suggesting some BS white savior mentality, i'm just saying that from a purely logistical standpoint there isn't anything black people can actually do in US society to change their circumstances other than to convince white people to alter their behavior.

I support BLM because any chance to slap authority in the face and tell them "you are not going to wield so much power anymore" is an important fight.

yes but that's the point - that only works if authority goes "oh well FINE ok" and decides to change. or do you not understand the general concept that short of violent revolution, the only way to effect social change is to get those with all the power to enact that change to agree to go along with it?

btw that quote is great from a rhetorical standpoint, but utterly irrelevant in terms of what you're trying to argue against. whether or not one has some nebulous "inalienable right" is completely meaningless if nobody in a position to respect that right or not gives a shit whether you do.