- HubPages»
- Books, Literature, and Writing»
- Commercial & Creative Writing»
- Creative Writing»
- Humor Writing
Black On Black Lives Do Matter
We Have Turned A Blind Eye To The Disease That Has Plagued The Inner Cities For Decades
The Black Lives Matter movement not only represents and embodies Black victimhood ideology, it also perpetuates it. Not only this, but they too seem to only be interested in their own political advancements, by way of opportunistic exploits at the expense of the Black community. This is an exploration of a question that has been observed to be on many peoples’ mind and though the truth may hurt, it is the truth still to matter. In better words, to quote the 20th president of the United States James A. Garfield, "the truth shall set you free, but first it shall make you miserable" and if America be the home of liberty then let freedom reign.
Black On Black Lives Do Matter
These days it seems truth does not matter. What does matter is peoples' emotions. This is shameful to any area science and most positivist scholars and enthusiasts who have been lost to the depths of time have rolled in their grave as this piece is written, it must be assured by this as well.
What's Really Going On
Some questions that are asked by many people are to the effect of “why are they focused on the police?", as if police are systematically and unlawfully in the process of the extermination of Black people. “Why is everyone who disagrees with the Black victimhood ideology considered to be a racist, accused of ruthless exacerbation of the power of the almighty White supremacist institution and of relentless combat with the progression of Black lives to a state of perpetuity?” However, the question of interest here and to be addressed is “why do the Black Lives Matters folk neglect the more serious issue of Black on Black crime?” This question would seem sincere enough but somehow Black Lives Matter members continue to side-step the issue and dismiss it away. Some have gone as far, to say "Black on Black crime does not exist". Therefore, it is only appropriate to address this matter statistically, first.
In 2005, "Blacks were victims of an estimated 805,000 nonfatal violent crimes and of about 8,000 homicides. While blacks accounted for 13% of the U.S. population in 2005, they were victims in 15% of all nonfatal violent crimes and nearly half of all homicides", according to data from the bureau of justice statistics's website (BJS information can be found at: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bvvc.pdf.) "Nearly half of all homicides"? Still, activist are inclined to assert that Whites commit White on White crime too, as to dismiss the notion that Black people killing Black people is wrong. Rather they make the implication that it is okay, because everyone else does it too. Of course, the third grade rationale of a seven year old, this is really appropriate for fully grown adults. Such a disposition makes it necessary to compare the effects of White and Black crime.
Statistically, significant as it is, 90% of Black victims of violent crimes, they are victimized at the hands of other Black people (see statistics for homicides in 2013 at fbi.gov). Now the number one killer for White people is not murder. In fact, Whites are more likely to die from car accidents, cancer, and many other non-violent forms of death than of homicide and they only commit roughly 70% of crimes against themselves, whereas the two top killers of Black men is homicide and AIDS. It should be apparent then, Whites are not threatened by murder to the same degree as is a Black male between the ages of 16 and 35. Mathematical competency would entail recognition of the value in these numbers.
The reasons why the Black Lives Matter movement gives zero effort to the regression of Black on Black murder might possibly be better understood by an inspection of the education of its members. This is not to insinuate ignorance. Maybe naive, but the Members of BLM are far from ignorant.
If one was to pillage a group of BLM members for answers, as to "why", what they should not be so surprised to find is that most are of the college student population (aside from professors and the uneducated) and their area of study (or major) will predominately include areas of "social studies". They will be students of Liberal studies, Pan African studies, Latin/Chicano studies etc. It is these very concepts of "studies" which contribute to the madness; the craziness; the insanity of these people. All this is not to exclude the brainwash techniques imposed on the gullible 18 to 24 y/o's who have just left home, by their socialist professors, before they have yet to enter the real world, but there is an element here which is very important.
The reality is that social studies is inefficient to the likes of social sciences in the effort to remedy national (social) injustice. On point, this context and contrast is important because the bulk of membership of the Black Lives Matter movement comes from the college and university institutions and in more scope the social science departments. Therefore, it is important to address this contrast and to make it clear.
In declaration, the phrase “I am a scientist” can be broad brushed and misunderstood, like the author of this piece. Anyway, there must cease to be confusion between the social sciences and social studies. Unfortunately, social studies programs tend to be housed in the school of social sciences at the majority of colleges and universities. However, the two are not one in the same. Social science is essentially a deeper conception of research than is social studies, to gauge understanding. Social studies is merely a review of work to which reactive opinions are concluded to its end. (Social) Science is very much more intricate to which it begins where (social) studies ends (with review). That is, social science begins with review and then moves into design of research, methodology of research, collection of data and then to the analysis and exploration of data to which there are then conclusions based on the findings. The process continues. “Yes, I am a social scientist”, in declaration, should be taken with much more vigorous rigor, from now on. Still, how does this relate to Black lives matter and their negligence of Black lives? To follow is a presentation of the many reasons why Black Lives Matter neglects Black on Black violence.
The first reason is personal association; the second reason is naivety; the third reason is political opportunism. These three main reasons will here forth be reviewed.
BLM Does Not Care About You
It must be assumed, just by the moniker that “Black Lives Matter” implies that Black lives are the matter. Obviously, evidenced by the in-depth media coverage, the individuals whom initiated the movement are Black too. Since this is so, it can be assumed that the lives which matter and the lives to whom they matter have some sort of connection; possibly, deeper rooted than the color of their skin. It can be inferred that maybe they (BLM members) are relatives, friends or intimate partners, with some of these “victims”. Bottom line, there is a personal association with those who are shot by officers and those who are members of Black Lives Matter protest. This presents a problem, where justice is concerned.
Factually, there is some element to jury selection in any court trial process in the United States administration of justice process. That is, the element of challenge for cause on the grounds of implied bias (there is also actual bias but it is not appropriate here). The reference to “jury” is not to specify any one trial but to metaphorically illustrate their (Black Lives Matter) fight for justice and to compare it with a process of justice deliverance. This factuality of implied bias is applicable here, since the Black Lives Matter movement member’s motivation for being a part of the group is likely the loss of a loved one (sister, father, neighbor, friend) to the deadly force of law enforcement. This causes a sort of one-tracked mindedness in judgement and all that is desired by them is retribution on behalf of their loved one. This much is understandable (hence the “implied bias” implication), although, it does disqualify them from sitting on the jury panel of this issue. In other words, with all of the emotion in frustration and rage, the Black Lives Matter movement is partisan on the issue and cannot be allowed to be the minds of determination in this matter. Nonetheless, the plot thickens, once one delves into the issue of naivety and indoctrination.
University used to be a realm of intellectual query. Nowadays, it seems to be a place of illogical dysfunction and irrational rage. There are these kids in the colleges and universities, some of which have just experienced the world for the first time and desire to belong to something. They want to sincerely do the right thing. They want to bring about change. These are not bad principles. Unfortunately, there are these opportunist socialist professors in their institutions who are able to exploit those principles. Those kids are in these social studies programs (ethnic studies) and they go to school forced to attend indoctrination sessions (not classes) in socialist ideologies which enrage them against capitalism (i.e. liberty, free trade, enterprise, that thing that America thrives on). These naive students--who have no real world experience and who lack the mental dexterity to understand the situation because of their social studies background (which lacks the element of scientific objectivity and analytical thinking)—are turned into a bunch of anarchistic Hitlers, Stalins, Castros, and Pol Pots (all of whom were socialist), to bring down the government and enslave the people. They have short sighted vision and in their quest for instant gratification and freebie handouts, they are oblivious to the consequences of their actions. The point of socialist exploitation within higher learning institutions leads into the third reason why the Black Lives Matter movement fails to address Black on Black violence.
Book sales rise, fan bases can possibly increase, political office post may become available. These are all reasons to the fact that Black on Black violence is irrelevant to Black Lives Matter. It is because it serves no political purpose on the grander stage of exploitation or influence to address it. The race hustlers and social justice warriors make a living off of this stuff. Every time a cop (White or Black) kills a Black person, it can be chalked up to racism and people buy into it, simply. Mostly, it is socialist exploitation of White guilt/fear and Black rage stemming from slavery (ended in 1865), Jim Crow and poor economic conditions of Black people due in-part largely to lack of leadership of Black people and lack of Black community cohesion. And so, the professors of ethnic studies take their socialist ideologies into their classrooms and form clicks of social agitators who really mean well. Unfortunately, their actions do more harm than good.
Once upon a time, there were people like Martin Luther King who actually had something to fight against. They did not ride the coat-tails. They were really physically oppressed. His fight was real but most of all it was practical. He fought toward a socially and legislatively integrated nation. He braved dogs, water hoses and batons. Nowadays these people are in protest of what a member of Black Lives Matter movement is recorded saying on a Jesse Lee Peterson show “I suffered racism because my job made me cut my hair”. Can it be assumed racism, because a job (yes, the job they were actually hired to work at, in the first place) suggested that one cut one's hair, as it was not representative of the company, mindful of the fact that a male made the statement? This is the form of oppression they claim to be in combat with, a place that was graceful enough to hire them in the first place. King rolls in his grave.
Book sales rise, fan bases can possibly increase, political office post may become available. These are all reasons to the fact that Black on Black violence is irrelevant to Black Lives Matter. It is because it serves no political purpose on the grander stage of exploitation or influence to address it. The race hustlers and social justice warriors make a living off of this stuff. Every time a cop (White or Black) kills a Black person, it can be chalked up to racism and people buy into it, simply. Mostly, it is socialist exploitation of White guilt/fear and Black rage stemming from slavery (ended in 1865), Jim Crow and poor economic conditions of Black people due in-part largely to lack of leadership of Black people and lack of Black community cohesion. And so, the professors of ethnic studies take their socialist ideologies into their classrooms and form clicks of social agitators who really mean well. Unfortunately, their actions do more harm than good.
Once upon a time, there were people like Martin Luther King who actually had something to fight against. They did not ride the coat-tails. They were really physically oppressed. His fight was real but most of all it was practical. He fought toward a socially and legislatively integrated nation. He braved dogs, water hoses and batons. Nowadays these people are in protest of what a member of Black Lives Matter movement is recorded saying on a Jesse Lee Peterson show “I suffered racism because my job made me cut my hair”. Can it be assumed racism, because a job (yes, the job they were actually hired to work at, in the first place) suggested that one cut one's hair, as it was not representative of the company, mindful of the fact that a male made the statement? This is the form of oppression they claim to be in combat with, a place that was graceful enough to hire them in the first place. King rolls in his grave.
Marcus Garvey, again a case of practicality, established the Black Star Line which enabled Blacks to safely travel back and forth from the US to Liberia, to not only escape physical oppression or to repatriate with countries on the shores of Western Africa but to do so at no economic harm which they faced otherwise by White ship companies.
The two men, who are just mentioned, along with a host of others actually had concrete and relevant oppression to battle. Furthermore, they actually built things conducive to Black improvement. Today, Black Lives Matter is known widely for the creation of mass confusion and lack of practicality. Their only answer to everything is “blame the Whiteman” and they make no sequential efforts to bring about progression. That is, they have not built and are not building any infrastructure to enable them to propel out of their self-proclaimed inferior state of existence. In fact, they continue to reach out to the White people whom they hate so much to ask them for handouts and favors. The last thing Marcus Garvey did was ask for handouts from White people. How much money do they believe slavery was worth anyway? How come they are not in open protest of none of their own leaders who, make more than those slave owners proportionately, if not equivalently intake finance. To keep in mind Michael Strahan just made a boom deal at a major news network, and Dr. Dre just recently made a one Billion dollar deal, and the list goes on, examples of how the Black Lives Matter group refuses to take their issues into their own hands. Why not protest Oprah or Jordan or Terence Howard or Neil Degrasse who are obviously guilty of the perpetuation of the so-called White supremacy? If it is true that they (BLM) have romanticized the struggle, it is detrimental to the livelihood of White people and Black people for groups like this to continue to polarize this otherwise solidified state union.
The Black Lives Matter movement has created a name for itself, as an outrages and insane society. They have even gone as far as demanding that the police be disbanded; this, with the dreadfully high frequencies of murder in their own racial demographic community, they would demand a reduction in police force and presence in their community, might seem to some, evidential to the validity of the argument that Black Lives Matter is a disfunctional, socialistic, anarchistic organization, asserted by the many sharp and alert critics of BLM. Sure enough, this is evidence of the impractical, the illogical ideology that is possessed by the people of Black Lives Matter. It must be understood by--Black Lives Matter, a group that perpetuates the incoherent hateful state of its self-prescribed inferiority--them, that slavery ended in 1865, Jim Crow in 1965 and that it was those "White-devils" that marched with Black people on Bloody Sunday; it was those "evil" White people who fought and died to end the government imposed slavery of Black people; they fought to solidify the union that was divided on the very issue of the expansion of slavery in the rest of the union (see: PBS's Causes of the Civil War).
Relatively, it has been over 150 years since the Antebellum Era and Black people seem less likely to embrace the capitalist freedom concept, in current times, a concept established and maintained in the USA since 1776. If they are ever to reach the fete of acceptance, Black people will need to understand how to critically think for themselves, and free from the tyrannical dictation of those opportunistic social justice war mongers/peace-by-any-means mongers that want only to exploit and misguide the masses of people, so to carry out their terroristic agenda to inhibit the liberties awarded the citizens of this state union by the amendments in the United States constitution. To any matter, these points will add interest to talk, another time.
In the end, it can be said, Freddy Gray was not brutally murdered by cop. He was arrested after attempting to flee capture and died as a result of his capture. Mike Brown was a careless individual who had committed strong armed robbery and was shot while wrestling with an officer. It is wise to bet, if the Grandmother of a Black Lives Matter member was the innocent store clerk shoved by Mike Brown, they would sing a different tune (possibly singing no tune at all) on this matter, or if a rival gang member would have killed him or if he would have killed some innocent little boy walking to school. It is a secure thought, they have not and will not say anything to regard Black on Black murder, because Black on Black lives do not matter.
Surely, it must be and should be agreed, here, that Black lives do not matter to the Black Lives Matter affiliates. Until it is the innocent kids going to school that are killed by gangs that matter; until it is justice for the babies at home being precious that are murdered by Blacks; until it is justice for the fathers killed by the bullets of gangsters while in their backyard grilling burgers with their family; until the regression of Black on Black violence is the issue at hand then it is only their socialist political agenda that matters. It is their publicity and paycheck that matters but black lives mean less than dog feces to the Black Lives Matter movement.
Click on the link below and see how Spike Lee agrees with this article:
