The facts, not so much…
“Trayvon Martin was a teenage boy literally walking in his own neighborhood doing what most teenagers do: Wearing a hoodie, buying snacks and talking on his cell phone. His family and Trayvon would not know that his life would end that night because a white vigilante would be empowered by his own racist beliefs and murder a 17-year-old boy in cold blood.”
——Patrisse Cullors, cofounder of Black Lives Matter and founder of Dignity and Power Now, in an op-ed on the NBC News website, via the “THINK” page, ironically enough.
Cullors’ op-ed is, quite simply, a lie on multiple levels. Nevertheless, NBC News allowed it to be published on its website to mislead readers and the public, to be passed along as fact on Facebook, and to further the racist objectives of Black Lives Matter, which is built on a foundation of this lie and other false narratives, like the assertion that Mike Brown was shot by a racist cop as Brown cried “Don’t shoot!” with his hands up.
Black Lives Matter is still officially supported by the Democratic Party, meaning that the party is complicit in advancing the hateful and divisive “alternative facts” that Trayvon Martin was “murdered in cold blood.”
A jury found George Zimmerman not guilty of murdering Martin, ruling that based on the evidence, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. All the evidence supported that conclusion, as even one of the prosecution’s own witnesses admitted. Forensic experts concluded that the larger Martin was bashing Zimmerman’s head into a concrete sidewalk when Zimmerman pulled his gun and shot the 17-year-old. No evidence pointed to Zimmerman instigating the attack on Martin: Martin attacked him, and knocked him to the ground. Zimmerman certainly shared culpability for the episode, but “murder in cold blood” is pure fantasy under any analysis of the facts.
Never mind: Cullors is engaging in an example of the unethical device of repeating the same false narrative until people believe it. (Martin was not “walking through his own neighborhood,” either; he was walking through a gated community where he did not normally reside. Compared to the rest of Cullers’ lies, however, that description is relatively accurate.)
Last night I watched a new episode of “Chicago P.D.,” one of Dick Wolf’s trio of Chicago procedurals on NBC. (“Chicago Justice,” which I erroneously called “Chicago Law” in the first version of thiss post, has expired) The story involved a rising young black basketball player with NBA hopes, who has been made ‘woke” by his girlfriend, the daughter of a retired black cop. Needing cash, the player agrees to shave points in a big game so a neighborhood gang member can win his bet. But the player’s girlfriend walks into the gym just as the National Anthem is being played. He emulates Colin Kaepernick and the NFL Kneelers to show her his devotion to her cause, and as a result is benched by his coach. He can’t shave points if he doesn’t play. In the end, his NBA dreams are dead and so is the cop’s daughter.
I wondered: has there ever been a more useless, destructive and interminable protest than the kneeling during the National Anthem? Not only did it align the NFL and other athletes with Black Lives Matter (See: The Cognitive Dissonance Scale), but it was incoherent, divided the nation, devastated the popularity of pro football, and accomplished nothing positive or beneficial to anyone.
And it got that nice young girl killed on “Chicago P.D.”…
Ethics Alarms 
Yeah, but the basketball player on “Chicago P.D.” did it for a good cause, with his heart full of pure intentions. It just proves his point how racist America is, since the coach benched him because he was black, and his girlfriend got killed, because she was black. This guy can now start fighting for what is right in Trump’s racist America, which has caused all the grief in his short life. He can stand up to the Republicans, who are owned by the NRA, to fight to bring common sense gun policies. Lack of common sense gun policies result in loose guns and racism to kill innocent black people! He needs to run for Chicago councilman now!
Ah, Jack, Chicago PD did have a story about the Black basketball player whose hoops and dreams were dashed by a silly, college indiscretion – point shaving to make a ton of money for the local gang leader. The players thought that they would break the yolk of the gang leader by being benched for kneeling during the National Anthem. Hey, if they got benched, then they couldn’t play and didn’t have the opportunity to shave points. But, then that other team’s player had a great night scoring a million points and the gang leader lost a ton of money. The players had to pay him back. Most unfortunate.
But you left out the first part of the story – the protest involving those nasty white supremacists/white nationalists busting up a peaceful protest march against police brutality and official oppression, in which the players and the police officer’s daughter participated. We all know white nationalists are bad people so when one of the players ended up a dead guy, clearly the head white nationalist guy was guilty. Then, things got a bit murky. The daughter was woke, decrying her father’s police department’s racialist and racist history vis-a-vis African-American males. So, she was among the protesters and just knew it was the white nationalist who murdered her boyfriend’s cohort in point-shaving. It turns out, though, that the white nationalist had nothing to do with the shooting and was released back into the general population to spew his nastiness.
In fact, the local Black gang leader killed the co-point-shaver. He was pissed that the National Anthem stunt cost him a ton of money and the players had to pay up, which meant a bullet. A life for lost revenue. Seems reasonable. The gang leader is supposed to be taken down by the remaining point-shaver, who agrees to wear a wire and record the gang leader admitting to the crime. A nice package, wrapped up in a recording, allowing the police to swoop in and arrest the gang leader.
The police officer’s daughter crushes the sting operation’s plan. She finds her misunderstood boyfriend in the bar and blows the whole thing wide open. A hostage situation ensues, resulting in a fully-fueled get away car provided by Chicago PD, with the promise that the hostage takers would release everyone and drive off into the sunset with their ill-gotten gains. Things get messy when the police officer’s daughter tries to break free into the racialist and racist arms of her father’s fellow nasty brethren and sistren only to end with the gang leader’s lead in her back, peacefully expiring in a local hospital while the attending physicians try to save her life.
jvb
Yeah, that too. I tuned out the white nationalist part of the story when the leader something like, “When a black guy wears a T-shirt saying “black power” that’s swell, but when a white guy wears a T-shirt saying “White power,” he’s a racist.” The show acted like that contradiction is easily explained:there was no response, just an actor with “How disgusting these people are” in his eyes. No, please go on: why aren’t black racial slogans just as troubling as white racial slogans, and why wouldn’t a backlash be both predictable and equitable?
They should be troubling- they are far more frequent (we’ve just trained ourselves to be cool with them) and they represent a greater percentage of the black population than the white supremacists represent of the white population (we’ve just comfortably carved an exception for black extremism.)
Yeah, that too. I tuned out the white nationalist part of the story when the leader something like, “When a black guy wears a T-shirt saying “black power” that’s swell, but when a white guy wears a T-shirt saying “White power,” he’s a racist.” The show acted like that contradiction is easily explained:there was no response, just an actor with “How disgusting these people are” in his eyes. No, please go on: why aren’t black racial slogans just as troubling as white racial slogans, and why wouldn’t a backlash be both predictable and equitable?
You’ve got to be kidding me. Because history exists. Because the meanings of words and phrases are based on social context. “Black power” means blacks rising up from their history of slavery, segregation and discrimination and toward equality. Whites have no history of any of that in our society, so “White power” means white supremacy.
The reason the show didn’t explain that with anything more than an eyeroll is because it’s so obvious any idiot can figure it out on their own.
Both are racist statements, saying that the individual values one race over the other. History used this way is a rationalization, and in the case of racial discrimination and prejudice, hypocrisy. Two wrongs still don’t make a right, and in this case, the second wrong ensures the continuance of the first.
Both are racist statements, saying that the individual values one race over the other.
No, that is not what “Black power” says. I just told you what “Black power” says.
Who appointed you the supreme judge of definition? It’s posts like this that make you sound like a jerk. “It’s this way because I say it’s this way” is a father barking at his son, or a coach putting a wayward player into his place, or a teacher taking a student out in the hall for a little talk, although I dunno if I can see you grabbing some student by the collar and telling him not to call you “teach” again. It isn’t a guest talking to his host.
No, you pretended like “Black Power” was about bringing individuals whose rights as Americans were not being protected due to their skin color into a situation in which their rights as Americans were protected as equal citizens:
““Black power” means blacks rising up from their history of slavery, segregation and discrimination and toward equality.”
Except, in true form, you’ve made a highly generalized statement, that though technically true and including the connotation of “equality” before the law, in practice “Black Power” sought *MORE* equality through self-isolationism, a self-sufficient internal economy for African Americans. In practice, “Black Power” ended up pursuing a type of self-imposed separate-but-equal sub-community within the greater culture. It is as isolationist and racist like “White Power”.
You, like most of us, have permitted ourselves to become comfortable with this racism, because it’s impact is less than the impact of “White Power” (if the goals of “White Power” ever even get close to being considered by our political establishment).
In it’s *best form*, Black Power seeks mere equal treatment before the law, but that is a tiny fraction of what it also pursued, and disinginuous to use that fraction as the counterbalance to claim it isn’t racist but “White Power” is. In it’s *worst form*, it is Black Nationalism, separatism, and equal anti-white attitude as “White Power” is. This doesn’t occupy the full goal of “Black Power” either, but I would submit that most of the attitudes and actions take for “Black Power” skew more that side than to the mere “equal rights” side.
There are way better terms to use to pursue protection of rights and equal treatment under the law than “Black Power”. And “Black Power” never was just for that single goal either.
Yes, Black Power is racist like White Power is. We’ve just become comfortable with it and so rationalize to ourselves that it’s ok.
In it’s *best form*, Black Power seeks mere equal treatment before the law, but that is a tiny fraction of what it also pursued, and disinginuous to use that fraction as the counterbalance to claim it isn’t racist but “White Power” is. In it’s *worst form*, it is Black Nationalism, separatism, and equal anti-white attitude as “White Power” is. This doesn’t occupy the full goal of “Black Power” either, but I would submit that most of the attitudes and actions take for “Black Power” skew more that side than to the mere “equal rights” side.
There are way better terms to use to pursue protection of rights and equal treatment under the law than “Black Power”. And “Black Power” never was just for that single goal either.
Now that is a good point. You are absolutely correct that much of the “Black Power” movement was straight-up racist and segregationist, and counterproductive toward the Civil Rights Movement’s goal of equality. You’re also right that the impacts of “Black Power” on our society are less than the impacts of “White Power,” but that that doesn’t necessarily make “Black Power” less racist.
You’ve changed my mind on this.
Good for you. Anytime anyone says this here, we should have a party.
Great!
But:
“You’re also right that the impacts of “Black Power” on our society are less than the impacts of “White Power,” but that that doesn’t necessarily make “Black Power” less racist.”
I did not say that.
This I think is an “era” thing. I think there was a time Ante-bellum through Jim Crow, where enacted policies that would have been supported by people nowadays who would claim the phrase “White Power”. I think, though, nowadays, when we have something to compare the actual contemporary “White Power” movement to…which is “Black Power”…we see that the “White Power” guys are a fringe movement that draws little attention and possesses less actual political force. I think we see that “Black Power” isn’t a fringe movement and possesses or at least has backers who possess actual political force.
In this regard, I think Black Power is more dangerous, but that White Power, if it actually gained traction would be MORE dangerous.
Which is why I included the parenthetical in that one paragraph:
“You, like most of us, have permitted ourselves to become comfortable with this racism, because it’s impact is less than the impact of “White Power” (if the goals of “White Power” ever even get close to being considered by our political establishment)”
I see the difference in context: white people (or cultural groups correlated with them) have de facto “power” and black people or cultural groups don’t, so advocating for “black power” is more defensible, if equally vague and simplistic. What concerns me is how we tell when “black power” starts looking like “Hutu power.”
OUCH!
There are a lot of (dead) Tutsi that appreciate that comment.
+1 cultural reference
Btw, the now departed show was called “Chicago Justice,” BUT don’t despair! Philip Winchester brings his Peter Stone character to Law and Order SVU for the rest of this season, as ADA Rafael Barba left the office after pulling the plug on a brain-dead baby (?!) Dick Wolf’s stuff is becoming wackier and wackier.
Will Mariska Hargatay be using a walker by the time they kill SVU?
I’ll fix the title of the the show: thanks.
Olivia Benson, if she were a for-real person, would be closing in on having enough time to retire from the NYPD with full benefits (you need 30 years in and she has 20 and change). However, maybe she wants to make captain and be one long enough to retire at that rank. One of Dick Wolf’s greatest disappointments was that he didn’t get to take the original L&O into a Season 21 and break Gunsmoke’s record as the longest-running primetime drama. I am sure he is hoping to make it happen this time around. SVU is finishing up season 19 now. He needs to go through the 2018-2019 season, and get renewed for 2019-2020. At that point he can call it quits and put the Law and Order brand out to pasture.
To put this in perspective, Peter Stone (the new ADA on SVU) would have been in middle school during the first season of Law & Order, playing Street Fighter II with his friends.
Yup, and to this day he sometimes introduces Paul Robinette as MISTER Robinette to others, via force of habit from those days, when he was a kid and Robinette an adult.
Jack:
Your summary of the episode makes no sense with the information provided. Why was the girlfriend killed? The gang member knew they dated and killed her in retaliation? She was accidentally shot while they tried going after her boyfriend? She committed suicide because she was so racked with guilt? She was an Ethics Alarms reader who hated indirectly getting mocked?
Also, you (and those like you on the RIGHT and LEFT) are to blame for kneeling having become divisive. Who cares what a group of mentally-retarded future CTE patients have to say about anything pro or con? It only became a protest when morons started paying attention to what the players did with themselves during the anthem. Why do you even care? And who cares about the anthem? It’s a sappy poem written by a mediocre lawyer which is played to music that doesn’t quite fit. In all likelihood, the protests are of a musical nature more than anything.
Right in the ranking of your most idiotic comments. Maybe #6?
A detailed explanation of the plot was included by a helpful, as opposed to a trolling, commenter. My summary was sufficient for my set up: in the episode, the kneeling stint just set in motion events that accomplished nothing good, and a lot bad.
You know who cares about the anthem: millions of people, including military families like mine, and those who associate it with the nation itself, and its history. It was a protest from the beginning, because players traditionally stand in respect for the anthem, and the protesters were subjecting a captive audience ofticket holding fans to a political display they didn’t pay for or want to see. Then, even more offensive to me, they and their defenders in the media falsely and ignorantly claimed that they had a right to an on the job protest. No, they don’t.
I’ve gone over all this, many times, as you know.
Next post this gratuitously obnoxious I’m just going to trash, Neil. If you can’t contribute something constructive, I’d suggest doing something else. You embarrass yourself.
To us patriotic Americans, the kneeling was almost as offensive as the Westboro Baptist Church picketing the funerals of people who died of AIDS.
To us patriotic Americans, the kneeling was almost as offensive as the Westboro Baptist Church picketing the funerals of people who died of AIDS.
Then you have absolutely no sense of proportion whatsoever, and the term “triggered snowflake” is too generous for you.
This exchange was worthless. To coin a phrase, WTF, Chris? WTF do you think you accomplish by slinging these poison arrows at the other posters?
I stand by it, Steve, and I would call ME’s comparison of kneeling to picketing a funeral far more of a “poison arrow” than anything I wrote.
THIS is another reason why Trump won the election. THIS is the attitude of progressives that most motivates the usually uninvolved mainstream American to vote against those that advocate it.
Please continue.
That’s quite a quote. If you edited it by removing everything that was either a lie or embarrassingly irrelevant, it would read:
“Trayvon Martin was a teenage boy. His family and Trayvon would not know that his life would end that night.”
I think that having “devastated the popularity of pro football” did indeed accomplish something “positive or beneficial,” if only as a by-product of the kneel-in.