DomJethro

For example: The frequency of police to rely on violence and the subsequent lack of accountability Is concerning, and BLM does highlight this issue. BLM also portrays the issue of police violence as racial (relying primarily on the disproportionality of racial demographics in statistics), and prescribes viral, anecdotal incidents of police violence like the killings of George Floyd or Breonna Taylor as centrally influenced by the race of the deceased (without any evidence).

It’s concerning the rising level of ignorance about racism, mainly how much of what’s considered anti-racism is demonstrably racist and how the definitions of racism are mangled so badly in the country’s collective mind that traditional racism towards non-white citizens is overlooked.

With the BLM movement becoming ubiquitous in contemporary American life, how much of the movement is oriented towards solving real problems with achievable solutions and how much is drummed up, misinformed hysteria driving people insane?

I would love for someone to explain how any president has done anything for “blacks”

How do people just start making more money? Where is the new found wealth coming from?

I don’t accept this as an answer. You didn’t address any point I made. What you have said isn’t very clear

I think you’re a terrible writer. Nobody understands anything you are saying so you need to work on clarifying your ideas. Maybe you are trying to express a great idea, but nobody is able to tell. Stop trying to sound smart, and start trying to sound simple.

What did I say about Fox?

I don’t understand what you said

On some deeper lever I agree with you, but I’m trying to help you not sound like a doofus. You are saying we should ignore racist ideas, yet how do you know if an idea is ever racist if you’ve actively avoided ideas you deem to be racist?

Let’s put my theory to the test: What is racism? What are racist ideas? Who are racists?

You’ve already screwed up. You have associated Richard Spencer’s arguments as “racism”. But you don’t know his arguments and he knows your arguments. If calling an idea you’ve never heard racist is an emotional, ethical, spiritual, and intellectual argument, than technically you’re argument sucks.

Obviously you are not required to listen to anybody. If you actually think racist ideas are bad and you actually want people not to hold them, then listening to people who supposedly have racist ideas is the only way to adequately counter racism. If you refuse to learn the ideology of racists, and your only defense against their ideas is that they are garbage or that they are Nazis, then you have helped strengthen their own ideas in their own heads. You prove to them that their opponents are naive to their world view, uninterested in what they are saying, and willing to slander and

If you dislike “racist” ideas, then you must listen and hear them out. You must never silence nor discourage them from being expressed. By doing so you give the “racist” ideas a winning argument simply by the fact you are ignorant to them. When going head to head against any ideas you disagree with, not knowing the opponents narrative ensures you will lose the debate. I can almost guarantee 99.9% of liberals, Democrats, progressives, conservatives, and republicans have never spent more than 10 minutes listening to Richard Spencer speak. Do you think Richard Spencer has spent more than 10 minut

If you dislike “racist” ideas, then you must listen and hear them out. You must never silence nor discourage them from being expressed. By doing so you give the “racist” ideas a winning argument simply by the fact you are ignorant to them. When going head to head against any ideas you disagree with, not knowing the opponents narrative ensures you will lose the debate. I can almost guarantee 99.9% of liberals, Democrats, progressives, conservatives, and republicans have never spent more than 10 minutes listening to Richard Spencer speak. Do you think Richard Spencer has spent more than 10 minut