Ethics Observations On Declining Support For Black Lives Matter

Here are two charts from a New York Times opinion piece on changing public views regarding Black Lives Matter:

BLM support 1

BLM support 2

The piece compares polls to polls, so perhaps justifies more faith than the usual poll-based analysis. The authors’ biases are nicely flagged by their occupations and affiliations. Both are professors at extremely Left-tilted institutions with faculties where conservatives have to wear disguises, if they exist there at all. Jennifer Chudy is an assistant professor of social sciences and political science at Wellesley College who studies white racial guilt, sympathy and prejudice. The fact of that area of concentration defines the confirmation bias involved. Hakeem Jefferson is an assistant professor of political science at Stanford University, and he studies studies race and identity. To be direct, both professors depend on finding racism in America to justifying their academic existence. They are part of the race grievance industry. Chudy is Asian-American; Jefferson is black.

The article introduces its subject, the changing level of support for Black Lives Matter—the organization, not its deceitful slogan—this way:

“Though there is, in the data, reason for some optimism, the more general picture contradicts the idea that the country underwent a racial reckoning. Last summer, as Black Americans turned their sorrow into action, attitudes — especially white attitudes — shifted from tacit support to outright opposition, a pattern familiar in American history. Whereas support for Black Lives Matter remains relatively high among racial and ethnic minorities, support among white Americans has proved both fickle and volatile.”

Talk about broadcasting one’s bias up front! By “some optimism,” it is clear (especially after reading the whole article) that the authors mean “public support for the admirable movement/group Black Lives Matter in American society may have staying power if we can just find a way to deal with these racist white people.” I have some optimism after seeing those charts as well. In my case, however, “some optimism” means “maybe the public is finally catching on to this destructive con job by Marxist race-hustlers.”

Other observations:

  • If a reader is anything short of steeped in Critical Race Theory and Black Lives Matter propaganda, the authors’ comments contain one unjustifiably presumed conclusion after another.  Looking back nostalgically at last summer in the very first paragraph, Chudy and Jefferson write, “[S]urveys suggested that white Americans, many of whom had long opposed efforts to advance the goals of racial equality, were having a change of heart.” That’s an outrageous generality: how many is “many”? What is meant by “the goals of racial equality”? Quotas—what we are seeing now, which is any criticism of a black individual or race-based policies being tarred as “racist”? Why are supposed scholars ascribing opinions on Black Lives Matter to “heart”? That’s a direct appeal to emotion…indeed, it’s an endorsement of emotion over reason.
  • Here’s another, also in the first paragraph: “If previous instances of violence against Black people were quickly forgotten, the sense among many Americans was that George Floyd’s death would usher in a durable shift in attitudes regarding race and justice.” If that was the sense, it was the sense of gullible individuals who were reacting to emotion and extreme rhetoric rather than reality. Other than the  convenient symbolism of a white cop’s knee on a black man’s throat, why was George Floyd’s death assumed to be about race at all? I feel like I am shouting this into the storm, but I’ll repeat this until I go metaphorically hoarse: there has never been any evidence that the officer involved would have treated Floyd differently if he had been white—not in the trial, not on the facts. None. If it was assumed by the authors that a bad cop abusing a perp because that’s what he tended to do would “usher in a durable shift in attitudes regarding race and justice,” then they were convinced that the majority of the American public could be manipulated and confused permanently.
  • Abe Lincoln is often quoted as saying (which he probably did not), “You can fool all the people some time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can not fool all the people all the time.” Whether Abe said it or not, it applies to this matter.
  • Incredibly, the article, which purports to examine why public support for Black Lives Matter has declined precipitously, never mentions last summer’s riots, the later BLM led riots every time a black citizen was harmed by police regardless of the actual facts of the event and behavior of the victim, the billions of dollars in property loss or the lives sacrificed in the “mostly peaceful” protests. Nor does the “analysis” mention such Black Lives Matter tactics as invading restaurants and bullying patrons into declaring their support of their cause. To the authors, this was all merely “protesting.”
  • The authors write, “Democrats also exhibit higher, and relatively stable, support for B.L.M. Perhaps this helps us understand why every Democratic presidential candidate stressed the importance of racial justice while campaigning. And they did so not only to appeal to their diverse base, but also to white members of their party, many of whom have become engrossed in these issues. Insofar as white support for B.L.M. is distinctly low, it would be even lower were it not for white Democrats.” Chudy and Jefferson need help to understand why “racial justice,” another one of those phrases like “sensible gun reform” that are meaningless other than to signal to uncritical minds that “something” needs to change, was flogged by Democratic candidates whose party now depends entirely on promoting racial conflict and group identification spoils? Are the authors deliberately hiding reality, or are they that naive? If they are that naive, why is the Times publishing their essay?
  • The real mystery is why Democrats maintain their support for BLM matter despite direct statements of anti-white hate by the group’s leaders, and such evidence of the group’s corruption as BLM co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors,  an avowed Marxist who was revealed as buying up high-priced property in wealthy white neighborhoods. Well, okay, it’s not much of a mystery. The authors write, at one point, “Some have wondered whether support for B.L.M., especially among white people, is genuine or merely virtue-signaling.” Gee, ya think? All those corporations, schools, non-profits and sports organizations plastering “Black Lives Matter” in their ads and workplaces might have been engaging cynical, fear-based, bottom-line motivated virtue-signaling? “Some” wonder about that? Do you wonder about that?
  • The op-ed ends: “This conversation, however, misrepresents racism as a social problem rooted in individual values rather than as a system forcefully sustained by our institutions. In our opinion, a more fruitful conversation would consider how to transform support for B.L.M., wherever and how tenuous it exists, into more enduring political change. Whether or not this effort will involve substantial numbers of white Americans remains to be seen.” So this piece, like so much alleged “scholarship,” is really just an excuse to advocate the destructive, violent and anti-American Black Lives Matter movement as a tool, along with Critical Race Theory and The 1619 Project, to install a far left agenda. If only there was some way to crush those troublesome white, Republican racists….

Finally, just for fun, here are some comments on the article collected by Glenn Beck’s “The Blazeregarding the essay’s musings about what might have caused support for BLM to decline:

  • “Relatable” podcast host Allie Beth Stuckey:  “Riots, murder and anarchy will do that.”
  • Washington Examiner reporter Jerry Dunleavy : “The drop in support for BLM probably has a lot to do with the true idea that black lives matter being juxtaposed with the violence & rioting that accompanied many BLM protests nationwide last year as well as the BLM national org being exposed as run by shameless Marxist grifters.”
  • Political commenter Stephen L. Miller: “Hey it turns out people hate billions of dollars in riot damages to their businesses while our media ignores and waives it away.”
  • Author Jim Hanson:  “Weird Maybe that 2020 long #insurrection by #BLM w/ Dozens of deaths Thousands of injuries & $2B+ in damage Had something to do with it.”
  • Political writer A.G. Hamilton: “That’s because the support was for the concept, which then got confused with the Marxist and bigoted organization of the same name and the violence that followed.”
  • Townhall senior writer Julio Rosas:  “The word ‘riot’ does not appear once in the article but they did manage to include ‘Latinx.’ Another attempt to memory hole the massive riots from last year.”
  • Author and mathematician James Lindsay : “This graph, frankly, shows that Democrats are willfully blind to what’s going on in the county, probably mostly because they don’t want to be accused of having ‘conservative’ views, which is a mode straight out of Maoism.”

I am proud to say that my opinion of Black Lives Matter hasn’t changed one iota. I recognized it as dishonest and manipulative  anti-white, anti-law enforcement, Marxist scam from the moment it arose out of the false Trayvon Martin narrative. It has been useful, however, as a means of self-indictment by the Machiavellian politicians, hypocrites, the weak-minded, the cowardly, the intellectually lazy and the easily led.

 

 

11 thoughts on “Ethics Observations On Declining Support For Black Lives Matter

  1. More insights from Jennifer Chudy’s website:

    I study race and ethnicity in American politics. Within this broad field, I focus on White racial attitudes generally and the attitude of racial sympathy – defined as White distress over Black suffering – specifically. Racial sympathy is a distinct, but understudied, White racial attitude with important political consequences. Using multiple methods including survey research, experimental studies, participant observation, and long-form interviews, my book project examines the origins and depths of this phenomena as well as the conditions that give rise to its political expression.

    https://www.wellesley.edu/politicalscience/faculty/chudy

    Don’t know about you, but this sort of “research” sure seems like the proverbial “self-licking ice cream cone”.

  2. I am shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

    I’m not sure though, what to make of the continued Democrat voter support. Frankly, that is a little amazing. Denying the obvious seems to have become a part of being a Democrat: Palestinians and Iranians are our friends, America is awful but all kinds of people want to come here because America has made their home country awful, fewer police and fewer criminals in jail will make us safer, if we take guns away from hunters and sportsmen gang bangers will stop shooting up poor people and each other, etc. Idiocy.

    • fewer police and fewer criminals in jail will make us safer, if we take guns away from hunters and sportsmen gang bangers will stop shooting up poor people and each other, etc. Idiocy.

      These people claim that cops are irredeemable racists, and yet somehow think these racist cops will target White Trump supporters when en forcing common sense, sensible gun legislation.

  3. They never had my support and they never will. St. Louis police officer Deron Riley said it best in 2017, that Black Lives Matter was just “the Klan with a tan.” Of course there was clamor for him to be fired, as there is against anyone who dares tell it like it is. I’d call it antifa with the whole face black instead of just the mask. Unfair? Not really. Apart from the fact that the Klan and antifa hide their identities while BLM does not, there isn’t much difference. These are all angry people driven by hate who are using civil unrest as a chance to attack those they disagree with. The tactics are pretty much the same: fire still burns if it’s set by a Klansman with kerosene or a BLM guy with fireworks, your head is going to open up whether a redneck in a white hood hits you with a 2 x 4 or a black thug clobbers you with a pipe, etc. The GOP was maybe initially on their side, right after the killing of George Floyd, but now they’ve seen what they’re about, and want no part of this enemy who would just as soon kill them or eradicate them as look at them.

  4. Though there is, in the data, reason for some optimism, the more general picture contradicts the idea that the country underwent a racial reckoning.

    This country underwent a racial reckoning in the 1960’s.

    This conversation, however, misrepresents racism as a social problem rooted in individual values rather than as a system forcefully sustained by our institutions.

    That system was shattered in the 1960’s.

    And then the fragments were shattered.

    Some fragments still exist.

    The thing is, if you are looking for pebble-sized fragments of Jim Crow, you will tend to come up with plenty of false positives.

    Finally, if the riots and stuff did not cause Blaxck Lives matter support to plunge, this surely did.

  5. Aren’t the authors guilty of conclusion based research? They disregard any facts not on keeping with their position, and declare that Black Lives Matter support cratered because whites are racists. Idiots. Could it be that lots of people do, in fact, believe that black lives matter but reject the Marxist violent separatist apartheid ideology of BLM?

    The civil rights leaders in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s were integrationists. The civil rights leaders of the 2000s, 2010s and 2020s are violent, vicious, rejectionist, apartheid supporting separatists. Whoddathunk that would not play well across the country?

    jvb

Leave a Reply to Michael T Ejercito Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.