Is Black Lives Matter Marxist? No and Yes.

[JimL]

This is arguing moderation in a thread, Jim, and it's none of your business. I had asked politely, and warned that my next step would be banning.

That was my point CP, you didn't warn that your next step would be banning, until you banned them.

[mossrose]

That was my point CP, you didn't warn that your next step would be banning, until you banned them.

The next step isn't banning from the site, twit. It's banning from the thread. Stop discussing moderation that has neither taken place, nor is directed at you.

[JimL]

What does BLM stand for, SuperWoke Jim?

And I don't mean the letters "BLM" --- what is their platform - what are they about?

You made the claim CP, "there is the "black lives matter" "movement" which is blatantly Marxist and supports NUMEROUS things blacks, in general, do not support." It's your case to make.

[Cow Poke]

That was my point CP, you didn't warn that your next step would be banning, until you banned them.

Not that I owe it to you, Jim, but because you're spreading outright lies (or you're so screwed up in the head)..... [and, I suspect you may be dinged for arguing moderation, especially after being warned]

I started by asking very politely.... FIRST REQUEST

Can we please take the "religion" discussion elsewhere?

Thanks

She obviously saw that, and appears to agree.

I recommend the moderator of this board moves the salient posts to new threads on Apologetics 301.

Then she continues....

It took a few centuries before f.....

I REMIND her.... SECOND REQUEST

I asked you politely....

And that comes with a warning.... (sizing and bolding added for your benefit) WARNING

As much as I don't enjoy doing it, my next step will be to formally ban you from the thread.

Whereby she tries to set the terms for her departure. This was not a negotiation - it was a warning that she would be banned.

Tell the others as well then. If they desist so will I.

It was after THAT, that I said.... BANNING

No, that's not how it works -

I had asked you politely, and you kept it going -- sometimes others don't see the notice until they have already responded. You knew better.

You may now leave the thread. You are entitled ONE response for the SOLE PURPOSE of agreeing to leave - that's it.

She was asked politely, she was reminded, she was warned, then she was banned.

Again, this is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS, but I can't let your screwed up false version stand.

[Cow Poke]

You made the claim CP, "there is the "black lives matter" "movement" which is blatantly Marxist and supports NUMEROUS things blacks, in general, do not support." It's your case to make.

I've made my case --- you're just too stupid to see it. It's time for YOU to show what YOU know, because I think you're absolutely ignorant of what BLM is actually all about.

[JimL]

I've made my case --- you're just too stupid to see it. It's time for YOU to show what YOU know, because I think you're absolutely ignorant of what BLM is actually all about.

No, actually you didn't make a case at all, you merely made an unsubstantiated assertion. And might I suggest that you knock it off with ad hominem attacks CP. Thanks.

[Cow Poke]

No, actually you didn't make a case at all, you merely made an unsubstantiated assertion.

Well, I would suggest that you haven't read the thread, because that's a possibility, but I think it's just as likely that you may have read it and were more like a chicken watching a card trick.

And might I suggest you knock it of with ad hominem attacks CP.

Obviously, you don't know what an ad hominem is, but if you want me to be nicer to you,

Stop Saying Stupid Stuff.gif

Thanks.

You're welcome.

Now, have you actually been to the BLM website and seen what they believe and promote?

[JimL]

Well, I would suggest that you haven't read the thread, because that's a possibility, but I think it's just as likely that you may have read it and were more like a chicken watching a card trick.



Obviously, you don't know what an ad hominem is, but if you want me to be nicer to you,

[ATTACH=CONFIG]46539[/ATTACH]



You're welcome.

Now, have you actually been to the BLM website and seen what they believe and promote?

Well, I guess i'll just have to assume you have no actual case to make. And btw, if you can't be civil yourself, you shouldn't go around whining about everyone else.

[Cow Poke]

Well, I guess i'll just have to assume you have no actual case to make.

Well, it doesn't surprise me in the least that you would come to such an birdbrained buttdumb assumption.

Fact is, you have NO IDEA what the agenda of the BLM movement is. You only THINK you do because you're a super-woke white dude.

[JimL]

Well, it doesn't surprise me in the least that you would come to such an birdbrained buttdumb assumption.

Fact is, you have NO IDEA what the agenda of the BLM movement is. You only THINK you do because you're a super-woke white dude.

Then why don't you tell us CP. You said that BLM was Marxist and that it supports things that blacks in general don't support. All I'm asking is what those things that you say "blacks in general don't support," CP?

[Cow Poke]

Then why don't you tell us CP. You said that BLM was Marxist and that it supports things that blacks in general don't support. All I'm asking is what those things that you say "blacks in general don't support," CP?

Dear Jim,
You are contributing nothing of value to this thread.
This is my VERY POLITE request for you to tone it down, or leave.
Thank you EVER so much.
Your buddy, CP

[Cow Poke]

So, another thing I learned from my "boss" at the faith-based mission was --- when I said the BLM movement had hijacked the "black lives matter" sentiment - he very sternly corrected me, and said - NO, they didn't HIJACK it, it was Marxist right from the start.

His point was that, from the very beginning, it was a bunch of MARXISTS who discovered that, if they could "wrap themselves in black skin", nobody would have the courage to denounce them, and they could implement their agenda, which includes all of the things from their website.

[Cow Poke]

In a meeting this afternoon with my "boss", and his boss, and my police captain friend, the issue was addressed whereby it was only the black clergy who had several meetings with the various law enforcement agencies.
No white or non-black clergy invited.

It was explained to me that it was limited to black clergy, because only black clergy could understand the "black experience" with regards to interaction with police.
He (my "boss") made a lot of sense, gave some excellent recent examples (some of which I was aware) and said that was only the initial phase of "talking it out".

He explained that he intended to widen the scope, and bring in ALL the interested clergy, but the black clergy wanted to be heard.
It was a very cordial meeting, and I explained that the Sheriff and Chief both seemed to express concerns that this seemed to be more of a "what are YOU going to do......" than "how we can manage this problem.

He (my "boss") conceded that, yeah, he can understand that the Chief and Sheriff (and their command staff) would perceive it as confrontational, and would do better at framing it as a "WE" instead of "us" and "them".

I'm getting the distinct impression that there's wider support than I had imagined for BLM to be NOT welcome by the black community.

The video of my "boss" on YouTube (did I mention that here?) with what LOOKED like a Black Lives Matter t-shirt was discussed, and he gave me permission to share that video with interested parties.

I think things are really settling down in our area.

[Sparko]

Point of information "she" did not "criticize" any comments. She initially wrote that “Many ideals contained within Marxist thinking would chime quite well with the compassionate aspects that are to be found within Christianity..

You replied with “ Please list the Marxist countries that have lived up to the ideals you claim they espouse,!

Given that I had not mentioned any specific Marxist regime that was purely an assumption on your part concerning my reply.

For impoverished societies where the majority of the population has been dominated by any, or all, of the following: rapacious landowners, autocracies, corrupt legislatures and judiciaries that worked for the benefit of the wealthy/aristocracy/landowners, and against the interests of the rest of the populace, or the undue influence of foreign business, as well as the denial of basic rights. Being provided with universal healthcare, education, a degree of involvement in politics, jobs and a modest standard of living might be considered by those experiencing that change, a degree of success.

As I previously noted “success” depends on how one interprets that term.

So still no answer as to a successful Marxist state? And you now seem to be talking about a welfare state rather than Marxism.

And by successful, I already said, one where the goals you states were achieved and the people were content and not living in poverty or oppression. So, where people have a good standard of living (say equivalent to Middle Class USA or Europeans) universal health care, education equivalent to capitalist europe or USA, good housing (again same as USA middle class), fresh and plentiful variety of food, and so on.

So what Marxist countries have that without capitalism?

[Cow Poke]

So still no answer as to a successful Marxist state? And you now seem to be talking about a welfare state rather than Marxism.

And by successful, I already said, one where the goals you states were achieved and the people were content and not living in poverty or oppression. So, where people have a good standard of living (say equivalent to Middle Class USA or Europeans) universal health care, education equivalent to capitalist europe or USA, good housing (again same as USA middle class), fresh and plentiful variety of food, and so on.

So what Marxist countries have that without capitalism?

She has been banned from the thread, so....