Protests and police confrontation aren't about civil inequality.

[Holos]

Black Lives Matter, for example, does not oppose any race, even as it uses race as motivation.

"The faster we accomplish our goals, the fastest we eliminate the concept of race from our lives."

Somehow the motto seems to provide easy liberation. Keep speeding to finally arrive at the desired stop, thereon never having to speed again.

Should we, however, eliminate the concept of race from our lives according to those precepts? It's as though control isn't recognized as an authentic civilian, constitutional right, but only attributed to external, foreign agents which need to submit into providing instead of depriving.

Even if biologically inappropriate considering the passage of centuries, races still are legitimate philosophical pursuits. Most essentially, race is but acceleration which requires no group associations beyond singular individuality. I can race myself, and may even allow my individual, self-centered race to be recognized by curious citizens who may then might want to comment on it or participate, in turn using their legitimate control and their rights.

The perception of anything black as providing life has probably been around ever since ink was pressed out of plants.
Black Lives Matter then is simply bringing attention back to the very origins of written language, made black as standard by industrialization so our eyes wouldn't burn over time, affording us more retained energy to read longer and think greater.

In this sense, it can be understood as a diligently progressive plan along with technological and mechanical history, but somehow erratically reduced to a single race of blacks, or a single civil race.

The actual importance of black lives, or civil lives, is beyond matter, and therefore does not bequest protest, but education.

It is admirable that three words are able to encapsulate the progress of literature, but those three words should not be trespassing or inciting unnecessary physical contact (especially when the words are written so big on signs). No problem with finding a nice space to stand, sit and educate any who may be finding interest in the public ways, but that's not a protest, and it shouldn't be, that's just free education, test-free and efficient.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Wow. Richard Brautigan has joined the forum.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Black Lives Matter, for example, does not oppose any race, even as it uses race as motivation.

"The faster we accomplish our goals, the fastest we eliminate the concept of race from our lives."

Somehow the motto seems to provide easy liberation. Keep speeding to finally arrive at the desired stop, thereon never having to speed again.

Should we, however, eliminate the concept of race from our lives according to those precepts? It's as though control isn't recognized as an authentic civilian, constitutional right, but only attributed to external, foreign agents which need to submit into providing instead of depriving.

Even if biologically inappropriate considering the passage of centuries, races still are legitimate philosophical pursuits. Most essentially, race is but acceleration which requires no group associations beyond singular individuality. I can race myself, and may even allow my individual, self-centered race to be recognized by curious citizens who may then might want to comment on it or participate, in turn using their legitimate control and their rights.

The perception of anything black as providing life has probably been around ever since ink was pressed out of plants.
Black Lives Matter then is simply bringing attention back to the very origins of written language, made black as standard by industrialization so our eyes wouldn't burn over time, affording us more retained energy to read longer and think greater.

In this sense, it can be understood as a diligently progressive plan along with technological and mechanical history, but somehow erratically reduced to a single race of blacks, or a single civil race.

The actual importance of black lives, or civil lives, is beyond matter, and therefore does not bequest protest, but education.

It is admirable that three words are able to encapsulate the progress of literature, but those three words should not be trespassing or inciting unnecessary physical contact (especially when the words are written so big on signs). No problem with finding a nice space to stand, sit and educate any who may be finding interest in the public ways, but that's not a protest, and it shouldn't be, that's just free education, test-free and efficient.

Amazing how you think BLM or any other black racist organization actually wants to do away with racism and the reason for their "cause".

 

[Iceweasel]

Whoa dude. That was deep.

 

[Holos]

Wow. Richard Brautigan has joined the forum.

Welcome Richard.
And a poem too.

 

[Holos]

Amazing how you think BLM or any other black racist organization actually wants to do away with racism and the reason for their "cause".

That's not what I think.
That's not even what I assume.

I see purpose.
I did say there was no singular cause, but I thought it was implicit there that there were multiple causes.

 

[Holos]

Whoa dude. That was deep.

I hadn't realized to what extent one could space travel.
My mom told me I shouldn't take rides with alien crafts.

Would you mind telling me exactly what part of it was deep?
Or what was it you thought was deep?

 

[Iceweasel]

Whoa dude. That was deep.

I hadn't realized to what extent one could space travel.
My mom told me I shouldn't take rides with alien crafts.

Would you mind telling me exactly what part of it was deep?
Or what was it you thought was deep?

Oh it's pilin' up higher and higher as we go ....

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Amazing how you think BLM or any other black racist organization actually wants to do away with racism and the reason for their "cause".

That's not what I think.
That's not even what I assume.

I see purpose.
I did say there was no singular cause, but I thought it was implicit there that there were multiple causes.

Well let me simplify it for you. Advocacy groups don't work themselves out of a job. The victims of injustice that give rise to their power will always be victims because they need to be. These groups don't work to better the lives of those they claim to represent, they work to sustain, expand, and perpetualize the organization.

Understand now?

 

[Holos]

Amazing how you think BLM or any other black racist organization actually wants to do away with racism and the reason for their "cause".

That's not what I think.
That's not even what I assume.

I see purpose.
I did say there was no singular cause, but I thought it was implicit there that there were multiple causes.

Well let me simplify it for you. Advocacy groups don't work themselves out of a job. The victims of injustice that give rise to their power will always be victims because they need to be. These groups don't work to better the lives of those they claim to represent, they work to sustain, expand, and perpetualize the organization.

Understand now?

Consider there are five variable interpretations for each letter you are using, another five for each word, and another five for each sentence.

How should I know what exactly you are trying to communicate?

Keywords.

1. Don't
2. Always
3. Don't

My answer then has to be "No, I don't understand".

My comment, anyhow, is, I disagree.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Amazing how you think BLM or any other black racist organization actually wants to do away with racism and the reason for their "cause".

That's not what I think.
That's not even what I assume.

I see purpose.
I did say there was no singular cause, but I thought it was implicit there that there were multiple causes.

Well let me simplify it for you. Advocacy groups don't work themselves out of a job. The victims of injustice that give rise to their power will always be victims because they need to be. These groups don't work to better the lives of those they claim to represent, they work to sustain, expand, and perpetualize the organization.

Understand now?

Consider there are five variable interpretations for each letter you are using, another five for each word, and another five for each sentence.

How should I know what exactly you are trying to communicate?

Keywords.

1. Don't
2. Always
3. Don't

My answer then has to be "No, I don't understand".

My comment, anyhow, is, I disagree.

Don't understand and disagree all you want. What I said is true. Your OP takes at face value the claim that BLM wants to erase the concept of race and racism, and the rest of your argument is built on this false premise. Victim based advocacy groups do not do this.

 

[BlueGin]

Black Lives Matter, for example, does not oppose any race, even as it uses race as motivation.

"The faster we accomplish our goals, the fastest we eliminate the concept of race from our lives."

Somehow the motto seems to provide easy liberation. Keep speeding to finally arrive at the desired stop, thereon never having to speed again.

Should we, however, eliminate the concept of race from our lives according to those precepts? It's as though control isn't recognized as an authentic civilian, constitutional right, but only attributed to external, foreign agents which need to submit into providing instead of depriving.

Even if biologically inappropriate considering the passage of centuries, races still are legitimate philosophical pursuits. Most essentially, race is but acceleration which requires no group associations beyond singular individuality. I can race myself, and may even allow my individual, self-centered race to be recognized by curious citizens who may then might want to comment on it or participate, in turn using their legitimate control and their rights.

The perception of anything black as providing life has probably been around ever since ink was pressed out of plants.
Black Lives Matter then is simply bringing attention back to the very origins of written language, made black as standard by industrialization so our eyes wouldn't burn over time, affording us more retained energy to read longer and think greater.

In this sense, it can be understood as a diligently progressive plan along with technological and mechanical history, but somehow erratically reduced to a single race of blacks, or a single civil race.

The actual importance of black lives, or civil lives, is beyond matter, and therefore does not bequest protest, but education.

It is admirable that three words are able to encapsulate the progress of literature, but those three words should not be trespassing or inciting unnecessary physical contact (especially when the words are written so big on signs). No problem with finding a nice space to stand, sit and educate any who may be finding interest in the public ways, but that's not a protest, and it shouldn't be, that's just free education, test-free and efficient.

Black Lives Matter is all about retaliation for gang members against the police.

Period.

 

[Holos]

Amazing how you think BLM or any other black racist organization actually wants to do away with racism and the reason for their "cause".

That's not what I think.
That's not even what I assume.

I see purpose.
I did say there was no singular cause, but I thought it was implicit there that there were multiple causes.

Well let me simplify it for you. Advocacy groups don't work themselves out of a job. The victims of injustice that give rise to their power will always be victims because they need to be. These groups don't work to better the lives of those they claim to represent, they work to sustain, expand, and perpetualize the organization.

Understand now?

Consider there are five variable interpretations for each letter you are using, another five for each word, and another five for each sentence.

How should I know what exactly you are trying to communicate?

Keywords.

1. Don't
2. Always
3. Don't

My answer then has to be "No, I don't understand".

My comment, anyhow, is, I disagree.

Don't understand and disagree all you want. What I said is true. Your OP takes at face value the claim that BLM wants to erase the concept of race and racism, and the rest of your argument is built on this false premise. Victim based advocacy groups do not do this.

I actually do want to understand. Do I get the same sentiment and intention from you? I don't deny truth.

My OPs take nothing at face value in this web forum, I'm using a computer machine to continue improving my knowledge. My avatar is not my face. It is a picture which was taken with a machine on a pleasant walk. That being mentioned as a reference, I've actually been face to face with BLM supporters - myself being one.

Erasure communicates "we are not keeping it".
Elimination communicates "it is being put aside".

The significant difference is that elimination still relates to the variety previously imposed, while erasure relates only to homogeneity.

 

[Holos]

Black Lives Matter is all about retaliation for gang members against the police.

Period.

I comprehend perfectly where you are coming from.
For a person who is not involved in any community rallies, but is somehow receiving televised messages of the procedures, that's truly what it is without question. People grouped together attempting to participate towards improvement, often becoming confusingly undistinguished in the hesitant but well meant uncertainty of joined destination.

 

[theHawk]

Black Lives Matter, for example, does not oppose any race, even as it uses race as motivation.

"The faster we accomplish our goals, the fastest we eliminate the concept of race from our lives."

Somehow the motto seems to provide easy liberation. Keep speeding to finally arrive at the desired stop, thereon never having to speed again.

Should we, however, eliminate the concept of race from our lives according to those precepts? It's as though control isn't recognized as an authentic civilian, constitutional right, but only attributed to external, foreign agents which need to submit into providing instead of depriving.

Even if biologically inappropriate considering the passage of centuries, races still are legitimate philosophical pursuits. Most essentially, race is but acceleration which requires no group associations beyond singular individuality. I can race myself, and may even allow my individual, self-centered race to be recognized by curious citizens who may then might want to comment on it or participate, in turn using their legitimate control and their rights.

The perception of anything black as providing life has probably been around ever since ink was pressed out of plants.
Black Lives Matter then is simply bringing attention back to the very origins of written language, made black as standard by industrialization so our eyes wouldn't burn over time, affording us more retained energy to read longer and think greater.

In this sense, it can be understood as a diligently progressive plan along with technological and mechanical history, but somehow erratically reduced to a single race of blacks, or a single civil race.

The actual importance of black lives, or civil lives, is beyond matter, and therefore does not bequest protest, but education.

It is admirable that three words are able to encapsulate the progress of literature, but those three words should not be trespassing or inciting unnecessary physical contact (especially when the words are written so big on signs). No problem with finding a nice space to stand, sit and educate any who may be finding interest in the public ways, but that's not a protest, and it shouldn't be, that's just free education, test-free and efficient.

If you think the elites funding and running BLM care anything for actual equality then you really don't understand what the Progressive Agenda is all about. BLM's only goal is to agitate it's base. They want people to become disenfranchised with society. They want people to get angry. They want people to riot and cause chaos. The more frightened the electorate is, the more they will be willing to hand more power to central government. The progressives love nothing more than to watch a society tear itself apart, and for a society to burn itself to the ground. Why do you think progressives so vigorously defend Islam? It's the most barbaric, anti-Semitic, homosexual-executing, women-subjugating ideology on the planet, but they support it.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Black Lives Matter, for example, does not oppose any race, even as it uses race as motivation.

"The faster we accomplish our goals, the fastest we eliminate the concept of race from our lives."

Somehow the motto seems to provide easy liberation. Keep speeding to finally arrive at the desired stop, thereon never having to speed again.

Should we, however, eliminate the concept of race from our lives according to those precepts? It's as though control isn't recognized as an authentic civilian, constitutional right, but only attributed to external, foreign agents which need to submit into providing instead of depriving.

Even if biologically inappropriate considering the passage of centuries, races still are legitimate philosophical pursuits. Most essentially, race is but acceleration which requires no group associations beyond singular individuality. I can race myself, and may even allow my individual, self-centered race to be recognized by curious citizens who may then might want to comment on it or participate, in turn using their legitimate control and their rights.

The perception of anything black as providing life has probably been around ever since ink was pressed out of plants.
Black Lives Matter then is simply bringing attention back to the very origins of written language, made black as standard by industrialization so our eyes wouldn't burn over time, affording us more retained energy to read longer and think greater.

In this sense, it can be understood as a diligently progressive plan along with technological and mechanical history, but somehow erratically reduced to a single race of blacks, or a single civil race.

The actual importance of black lives, or civil lives, is beyond matter, and therefore does not bequest protest, but education.

It is admirable that three words are able to encapsulate the progress of literature, but those three words should not be trespassing or inciting unnecessary physical contact (especially when the words are written so big on signs). No problem with finding a nice space to stand, sit and educate any who may be finding interest in the public ways, but that's not a protest, and it shouldn't be, that's just free education, test-free and efficient.

Amazing how you think BLM or any other black racist organization actually wants to do away with racism and the reason for their "cause".

Just another utility of the democrat party exacerbating segregation.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Black Lives Matter, for example, does not oppose any race, even as it uses race as motivation.

"The faster we accomplish our goals, the fastest we eliminate the concept of race from our lives."

Somehow the motto seems to provide easy liberation. Keep speeding to finally arrive at the desired stop, thereon never having to speed again.

Should we, however, eliminate the concept of race from our lives according to those precepts? It's as though control isn't recognized as an authentic civilian, constitutional right, but only attributed to external, foreign agents which need to submit into providing instead of depriving.

Even if biologically inappropriate considering the passage of centuries, races still are legitimate philosophical pursuits. Most essentially, race is but acceleration which requires no group associations beyond singular individuality. I can race myself, and may even allow my individual, self-centered race to be recognized by curious citizens who may then might want to comment on it or participate, in turn using their legitimate control and their rights.

The perception of anything black as providing life has probably been around ever since ink was pressed out of plants.
Black Lives Matter then is simply bringing attention back to the very origins of written language, made black as standard by industrialization so our eyes wouldn't burn over time, affording us more retained energy to read longer and think greater.

In this sense, it can be understood as a diligently progressive plan along with technological and mechanical history, but somehow erratically reduced to a single race of blacks, or a single civil race.

The actual importance of black lives, or civil lives, is beyond matter, and therefore does not bequest protest, but education.

It is admirable that three words are able to encapsulate the progress of literature, but those three words should not be trespassing or inciting unnecessary physical contact (especially when the words are written so big on signs). No problem with finding a nice space to stand, sit and educate any who may be finding interest in the public ways, but that's not a protest, and it shouldn't be, that's just free education, test-free and efficient.

Black Lies Matter has been videoed calling for the killing of cops, attacking counter protesters and advocating the primacy of black people.

I do believe that most of them mean well, but George Soros who is funding the movement is not trying to find a peaceful middle, but is trying to get 99% black turnout for Hillary this November and so he is trying to alienate blacks from the rest of America in order to do that.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Well let me simplify it for you. Advocacy groups don't work themselves out of a job. The victims of injustice that give rise to their power will always be victims because they need to be. These groups don't work to better the lives of those they claim to represent, they work to sustain, expand, and perpetualize the organization.

Consider there are five variable interpretations for each letter you are using, another five for each word, and another five for each sentence..

Then you are too stupid to get it, and that is your problem, not ours.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Amazing how you think BLM or any other black racist organization actually wants to do away with racism and the reason for their "cause".

That's not what I think.
That's not even what I assume.

I see purpose.
I did say there was no singular cause, but I thought it was implicit there that there were multiple causes.

Well let me simplify it for you. Advocacy groups don't work themselves out of a job. The victims of injustice that give rise to their power will always be victims because they need to be. These groups don't work to better the lives of those they claim to represent, they work to sustain, expand, and perpetualize the organization.

Understand now?

Consider there are five variable interpretations for each letter you are using, another five for each word, and another five for each sentence.

How should I know what exactly you are trying to communicate?

Keywords.

1. Don't
2. Always
3. Don't

My answer then has to be "No, I don't understand".

My comment, anyhow, is, I disagree.

Don't understand and disagree all you want. What I said is true. Your OP takes at face value the claim that BLM wants to erase the concept of race and racism, and the rest of your argument is built on this false premise. Victim based advocacy groups do not do this.

I actually do want to understand. Do I get the same sentiment and intention from you? I don't deny truth.

My OPs take nothing at face value in this web forum, I'm using a computer machine to continue improving my knowledge. My avatar is not my face. It is a picture which was taken with a machine on a pleasant walk. That being mentioned as a reference, I've actually been face to face with BLM supporters - myself being one.

Erasure communicates "we are not keeping it".
Elimination communicates "it is being put aside".

The significant difference is that elimination still relates to the variety previously imposed, while erasure relates only to homogeneity.

Just how involved are you with BLM? When you snap, will I be the first to go? The rest of your post was unintelligible.

 

[Holos]

Well let me simplify it for you. Advocacy groups don't work themselves out of a job. The victims of injustice that give rise to their power will always be victims because they need to be. These groups don't work to better the lives of those they claim to represent, they work to sustain, expand, and perpetualize the organization.

Consider there are five variable interpretations for each letter you are using, another five for each word, and another five for each sentence..

Then you are too stupid to get it, and that is your problem, not ours.

Precisely what I was attempting to respond to with my previous post.
Read the post prior to my previous one.
Read my previous post again.
Read your post which quoted my previous one again.
Know.