• ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    30 days ago

    When people complained about the BLM protests blocking traffic, I liked to reply with pictures of MLK leading massive marches down the street.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      29 days ago

      but it doesn’t do anything!!! all it does is inconvenience the average person!! concepts such as solidarity and collective messaging are meaningless to me (i choose to ignore them)! you should go and protest in front of lawmakers’ homes quietly where i can safely choose to ignore you instead!!!

      /satire

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Some neo-Nazi mouthpiece in Germany got stabbed before a scheduled speech, and some Lemmy comments are all ‘oh now you’re just giving them what they want.’

    I mean, if that’s what they want, they’re welcome to it. Drink your fill.

  • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    “In a racist society, it is not enough to be non-racist, we must be anti-racist.” - Angela Y. Davis

    • Wilzax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Note that anti-racist doesn’t mean “Racist against the race that isn’t currently the victim”, and it doesn’t mean “giving the targeted population special privileges in unrelated fields, to make up for it”. It means “Calling out all prejudice/hate when it happens, and addressing and reversing systemic biases that keep the underprivileged people underprivileged”

      If one can’t agree with this description of being anti-racist, they’re either not helping bring about the equality they may claim to want, or they’re actually just a racist themselves and lack either empathy, perspective, or both

      • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        it doesn’t mean “giving the target population special privileges in unrelated fields to make up for it”

        Your language overall makes me think you’re fine but I’d be lying if I didn’t say this particular part didn’t catch my attention. Is there a reason you felt the need to say this? In the context of affirmative action being repealed in the US it feels a tad loaded. Giving the benefit of the doubt here truly, but still curious why you felt the need to say this.

        • Wilzax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          30 days ago

          This is a common argument against affirmative action (which was not repealed in the US overall, just banned in a few very conservative states (although if I missed some major news about it being repealed on a federal level please don’t hesitate to educate me) ), I’m addressing that common counterargument by saying that it’s not what anti-racism seeks to do. Same as the example counterargument before it. That one’s referring to the types who spout nonsense such as “But that’s just being racist to white people!!1!”. They’re correct that it wouldn’t be helpful, but incorrect in their assessment that that’s the main goal of the movement.

          That said, I do think that some movements and initiatives, which I will preemptively decline to name because the details and scope of these initiatives are irrelevant, are misguided in how they want to bring about equity. These movements do feed into the arguments of people who claim that affirmative action is just giving queer/nonwhite/poor/otherwise marginalized people special privileges, and that’s why I want to set them aside as separate from the concept as anti-racist.