Quinny wrote:ninjamissile wrote: BLM are a political organisation, no debate.
BLM is a movement, not a political organisation. It is not registered as a political organisation, it has no political affiliations, it does not have a leader. But apart from that, yeah, it has all the hall-marks of being a political organsation.They want to abolish the police.
No, they want to defund the police. That's entirely different. They want part of the police budget to go into community-led enterprises to lift people out of poverty and gang-violence. After all, with a budget of around $6billion, the NYPD is ranked #33rd largest military spender in the world. And there is a mountain of evidence that when you can afford to buy ex-military equipment, you find an excuse to use it.They get their point across by violence and intimidation, burning down their neighbourhoods and indiscriminately destroying the property and livelihoods of all people, both black and white. But their protests are largely peaceful of course...
No, the vast majority of demonstrations by the BLM and their supporters have been peaceful, but the peaceful ones don't make the news. And you only have to look at London a few weeks ago where they called off a demonstration rather than face a confrontation with the white-right (who decided to attack the police instead, bless their patriotic shaven white heads).
Yes, some demonstrations have turned to violence, and I for one second (as a pacifist) don't condone any of it ... but I understand why it happens. After all, they've been victims of violence for decades, and they have no alternative to make a point: more anti-hate laws, more dialogue and more focus-groups aren't going to help. It's been done before throughout the centuries to gain rights: you only have to look at the violent actions of the suffragettes at the turn of the 20th century (they attacked homes, churches, works of art ... even put a bomb in St Paul's in London) for example, and that was a major move in giving women rights. But then I suppose you'd be opposing women a hundred years ago for their liberal demands for equality and (shock) the vote.It really saddens me how quickly people have jumped on the bandwagon without pausing for thought about what they're supporting. Players and officials on their knees before a football match and their names removed from their shirts and replaced with the logo of this Marxist organisation? People are waking up to it but too late I'm afraid.
I know what I'm supporting. Other than thinking that this is a Marxist organisation, I am curious as to the real reason why you (and others) are opposing.
Up to a few days ago the UKBLM gofundme page stated that one of their aims was to defund and abolish the police. Since then there has been a bit of a backlash from various people and organisations including Starmer, Lineker and to some extent the Premier League. Last night, during the Brighton v Man U match, the pundits Patrice Evra and Jamie Redknap decided not to wear the BLM badge.
There are reports from the USA that donations are being syphoned into organisers own companies. UKBLM make a statement that for legal reasons they cannot be transparent as to where the money is going.