Then again, a conservative might believe the fact that President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize—commendation by an international council before he took office as the leader of a sovereign nation—was an indication that he was in the pocket of the world government. Yet, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s receipt of the award could lead to a similar allegation, which just plays into the trope that black leaders in our country are always being directed by some more-powerful, more-strategic, hidden white person.
TW36
Good section, easy to digest about a complex topic. You do a good job critiquing people who broadly dismissed BLM as having nothing to say or those who dismissed it for racist reasons (some tried to hide their racist undertones and some were overtly racist).
That said, I think there are good faith disagreements to be acknowledged about BLM. From my outsider view, people who align with BLM have a wide variety of views many moderate and some extreme. Two examples come to mind:
- Police reform vs defund vs abolishment – The people on the police reform side have my attention and sympathy, but the police abolishment generally do not. Who would arrest perpetrators of child abuse? Usually the answer from people who say “abolish the police” is just “the police” but with a different name.
- Dismantling of capitalism / socialism / Marxism – Not everyone in BLM does this, but there are those that combine BLM and expanding government control (progressive / socialism / Marxism, whatever you want to call it). It’s a legitimate concern to me because I earnestly believe that it would not inherently fix the oppression of minorities. An easy example is the Chinese Communist Party’s treatment of Uyghur Muslims in China. Communism did not solve the brutal treatment of that minority population and there are many other examples in communist countries (the Soviet Union and others did this plenty).
Clearly a good thought provoking section because this is my longest comment!
TW46
I want to push back on the line that progressives always want progress (especially when it comes to race). I think that is sometimes true, but not always. While many on the left now want progress, abundance, and thriving lives for all, that wasn’t always the case. Expansive government power (with the government’s monopoly of violence enforcing it) was something that Southern Democrats loved in order to enforce Jim Crow and enforce racial hierarchies. That Southern Democratic coalition wanted to use the force of the state to keep minorities “in line.” In modern times, I agree that the racists fled Democrats and prefer conservatives, but I think that just shows that racists don’t actually care about the size of government, they just care about whatever group will give them the political power to enforce racial hierarchies. The fact the Trump is improving Republican votes with Black and Hispanic voters further muddies this whole picture.