.
.
.
And let’s remember that the translation of “Black Lives Matter” into Orange Countian is usually “Brown Lives Matter.”
Here’s a story that I’d like you to read about “white liberal racism,” focusing on a bunch of emails from a wealthy and enlightened-seeming school in Seattle that criticized the school for participating in a citywide “Black Lives Matter” day, for which their teachers wore t-shirts with that slogan. From it I’ll call out the customary three paragraphs:
“As a white person myself, I hear and I know how white people think about race, and I wasn’t surprised to see just a basic lack of understanding of how racism functions,” Harvey said. “This would not be unique to Seattle liberal whites, nor among liberals who didn’t vote for Trump. These kind of sentiments are very deep seated.”
She continued: “What I see when I read these emails is this utter failure to value black life. Because if you value black life you go, ‘Oh my god, even if I don’t understand this, why is it that African-Americans need to have this movement for black lives, and what is it like to be a 10-year-old child who’s black?
“It’s like there’s this total white vortex that just screams out from these emails, whether they are being nasty intentionally or just saying, ‘I don’t get it.’ They make me really sad.”
That piece got me thinking — and that thinking got me writing. The following initially appeared on my Facebook feed:
Implicit in the phrase “Black Lives Matter” is a fourth word: “Also” or “Too.” “Black Lives Also Matter”; “Black Lives Matter Too.” We don’t use it because it’s too “on the nose.” “Black Lives Matter” is a statement of defiance and pride; “Black Lives Matter Too” sounds plaintive and defensive. But maybe, at least some of the time, it has to be said out loud.
Once one rephrases “Black Lives Matter” as “Black Lives Matter Too,” it becomes immediately apparent why the criticisms of the term are misplaced.
“All Lives Matter Too” is nonsensical. “Blue Lives Matter Too” is unnecessary. “White Lives Matter Too” is, unless someone is talking down to someone who denies it, absurd. These statements do not respond to challenges to their truth. “Black Lives Matter Too” does.
Leaving out the “also” or the “too” in “Black Lives Matter” refashions the message from defensive to positive, but it is also a *kindness* to whites —one that is perhaps counterproductive because it skirts the issue. You see, “Black Lives Matter Too” is itself short for something — and that is this:
“Black Lives Matter Too, but you and your police and your prosecutors, and your judges and juries, *act as if you don’t believe it*.” And even this in turn leaves out a concluding five-word phrase: “and damn you for that.”
That’s too long for a hashtag, so let’s just stick with “Black Lives Matter,” the equivalent to Sojourner Truth’s “Ain’t I A Woman?”, the Civil Rights Era sign “I AM a man!”, and plenty more besides.
Stop pretending that it is a claim to exclusivity, when you know damned well that it is a statement of pain, of reproach, and of a demand to right injustice. Sometimes, I suppose, we just have to spell it all out.
This is your made-it-just-by-a-whisker Weekend Open Thread, which you can use for the rest of the week or until whenever the next one pops up. Talk about that, or whatever else you’d like, within reasonable bounds of decorum and discretion.
The two words Attorney General Sessions can’t say: “Consent Decree”.
I often wonder if the people who don’t understand the point of “Black Lives Matter” just have lower IQ’s, or if they’re just purposely not getting it as a way to continue belittling black lives.
Basically it’s when you utter a three-word sentence, you are generally not trying to paint a picture of the entire truth, you are just emphasizing what needs to be emphasized.
Ice-T recently put it best: NO LIVES MATTER! (When you’re poor.)
I thank providence every day I’m in the local blogosphere that I am not Chumley. I’m sure that he’ll, as a tit-for-tat, write the same about me — but he’s got lousy judgment so that doesn’t matter.
Here’s what he’s written today about his encounter last night with OCVMP’s Bill Cook at some Lou Correa event, starting shortly after he had introduced himself. My emphasis throughout.
I really don’t think that storming away from Chumley as an alternative to a physical altercation — for doing, by the way, what many of us have seen Chumley himself do to others, including at DPOC meetings — is some sort of sign of guilt. I think that it’s a sign of maturity. Bill has a pretty good life — one without a new Five Point home, I’m happy to add — and does not need even a justifiable homicide on his record. If Chumley wants to meet a veteran with less self-control, I’m sure that they’re out there, just waiting to be accused of lying about accepting bribes.
And yes, it IS difficult to “expose or reveal” things that aren’t true — but has that ever stopped Chumley before? (Hey, I’m ONLY asking a QUESTION there!) So — in my opinion — he’s got nothin’ on Chaplain Cook, ‘cept for a small and increasingly readership including commenters who thank god every time they post in Liberal OC for the blessing of anonymity.