Black Lives Matter's "Guiding Principles"

After all the recent protests, I've been wondering what exactly it is that BLM wants? Sure, it's to 'stop police brutality', but I haven't seen much from them besides their 'peaceful protests'.

So I went to their website and found this; a list of their Guiding Principles

Diversity - We are committed to acknowledging, respecting and celebrating difference(s) and commonalities.

Restorative Justice - We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension all people. As we forge our path, we intentionally build and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.

Unapologetically Black - We are unapologetically Black in our positioning. In affirming that Black Lives Matter, we need not qualify our position. To love and desire freedom and justice for ourselves is a necessary prerequisite for wanting the same for others

Globalism - We see ourselves as part of the global Black family and we are aware of the different ways we are impacted or privileged as Black folk who exist in different parts of the world

Black Women - We are committed to building a Black women affirming space free from sexism, misogyny, and male‐centeredness.

Collective Value - We are guided by the fact all Black lives, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status or location

Transgender -We are committed to embracing and making space for trans brothers and sisters to participate and lead. We are committed to being self-reflexive and doing the work required to dismantle cis-gender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.

Black Villages - We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

Empathy - We are committed to practicing empathy; we engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts

Black Families - We are committed to making our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We are committed to dismantling the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” that require them to mother in private even as they participate in justice work.

Loving Engagement - We are committed to embodying and practicing justice, liberation, and peace in our engagements with one another.

Queer Affirming - We are committed to fostering a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking or, rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual unless s/he or they disclose otherwise.

Ageism - We are committed to fostering an intergenerational and communal network free from ageism. We believe that all people, regardless of age, shows up with capacity to lead and learn.

Personally, there is a lot disturbing within this. The one that bothers me the most is "We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" under their "Black Village" section.

And I had a good laugh under their "Black Families" section that states "We are committed to making our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children."

Ghost

originally posted by: ghostrager


Personally, there is a lot disturbing within this. The one that bothers me the most is "We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" under their "Black Village" section.

I think this may be saying that if a neighbor parent sees a kid doing something bad, that person should do something about it and not say "not my kid, not my problem." I've heard people on ATS look fondly back on their youth, when they said if a neighborhood adult saw a kid doing something bad, they would swat them on the behind without having to worry about being sued by the kid's parent. Does that concept of everyone in the community taking responsibility for any and every kid really disturb you? Why?

So basically a political agenda.

When ALL that is already the platform of one political party, and a caucus.

They are trying to have it both ways though.

Only paying lip service to diversity.

Sounds good to me.

I don't see the problem here.

It might help to understand that the organization formed the day George Zimmerman was acquitted for killing Treyvon Martin. Blacks knew the verdict was a miscarriage of justice, like so many others. Michael Brown and Eric Garner for instance.

Every time theres an unjust killing by police (on camera even) and nothing is done, it should remind us of that.

The discussions about that will remain in the forefront as long as people are protesting and demonstrating for a redress of grievances. Thats a good thing, change can only be effected through ongoing discussion.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: ghostrager


Personally, there is a lot disturbing within this. The one that bothers me the most is "We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" under their "Black Village" section.

I think this may be saying that if a neighbor parent sees a kid doing something bad, that person should do something about it and not say "not my kid, not my problem." I've heard people on ATS look fondly back on their youth, when they said if a neighborhood adult saw a kid doing something bad, they would swat them on the behind without having to worry about being sued by the kid's parent. Does that concept of everyone in the community taking responsibility for any and every kid really disturb you? Why?

why?....because they are black.....any organizing done by black people comes under scrutiny, and is often times considered threatening to white America.....remember a couple of years back, when a fuss was raised about the reemergence of the Black panthers, turned out to be a couple of black dudes dressing and acting the part.

a reply to: ghostrager

The one that bothers me the most is "We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" under their "Black Village" section.

Why does that bother you so much?

The rest of the quotation is as follows:

by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

What's wrong with that?

Instead of sticking parents and old folks in homes or pushing them aside out of convenience, it sounds like they accept the very strong familial bonds that extend beyond the traditional nuclear element, which include parents and grandparents, the community at large, etc.

This is something I see in the black community a lot (extended families) and it's nothing negative or anything of which to be ashamed. And that quotation pretty much reflects that.

So what's the problem? They sound like good tenets to me.

originally posted by: neo96
So basically a political agenda.

When ALL that is already the platform of one political party, and a caucus.

They are trying to have it both ways though.

Only paying lip service to diversity.

It's the same on the other side. The problem with politics is everything is extremely left or extremely right these days. I guess all us folks that like things from both sides are screwed. Partisan politics is the true tool of the elite and obviously have everyone drinking their brand of Kool-aid lately.

And there it is, under the guise of being about 'stopping cops from shooting blacks' (a premise that's highly controversial) they're pushing the entire SJW platform. Considering the divisive hate that tends to rise out of the SJW minded, which drips with hypocritical bigotry, to pork barrel the SJW platform into such a sensitive surface issue is entirely dangerous and already proven wreckful.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Of course it would appear that they are pushing a social just platform, because their goal is social justice.

Considering the divisive hate that tends to rise out of the SJW minded, which drips with hypocritical bigotry, to pork barrel the SJW platform into such a sensitive surface issue is entirely dangerous and already proven wreckful.

I think it is very dangerous and disingenuous to label this group a threat or call them a terror group. While individuals have done and said some things in the name of BLM that we can easily disagree with, the group and their philosophy is not dangerous in an of itself.

If we were to use the same thinking people use in regards to BLM and apply it elsewhere, we can easily see the folly in that thinking. For example: At some Trump rallies we have seen black people pushed-around, assaulted and calls of "seig heil". Does that mean Trump and the GOP are a party that hates black people and love Hitler?

No. Of course not. Those are acts of individuals. We have to be consistent and apply that way of thinking to BLM as well.

What I have come to understand is that the demonization of this group has become so rampant recently because some people simply do not want to address the issues BLM brings to the conversation. Their political partisanship will not allow them to engage in a much-needed conversation because any results of such a conversation will not comply with their political agenda.

It's sad, really.

originally posted by: ghostrager
After all the recent protests, I've been wondering what exactly it is that BLM wants? Sure, it's to 'stop police brutality', but I haven't seen much from them besides their 'peaceful protests'.

So I went to their website and found this; a list of their Guiding Principles

Diversity - We are committed to acknowledging, respecting and celebrating difference(s) and commonalities.

Restorative Justice - We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension all people. As we forge our path, we intentionally build and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.

Unapologetically Black - We are unapologetically Black in our positioning. In affirming that Black Lives Matter, we need not qualify our position. To love and desire freedom and justice for ourselves is a necessary prerequisite for wanting the same for others

Globalism - We see ourselves as part of the global Black family and we are aware of the different ways we are impacted or privileged as Black folk who exist in different parts of the world

Black Women - We are committed to building a Black women affirming space free from sexism, misogyny, and male‐centeredness.

Collective Value - We are guided by the fact all Black lives, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status or location

Transgender -We are committed to embracing and making space for trans brothers and sisters to participate and lead. We are committed to being self-reflexive and doing the work required to dismantle cis-gender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.

Black Villages - We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

Empathy - We are committed to practicing empathy; we engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts

Black Families - We are committed to making our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We are committed to dismantling the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” that require them to mother in private even as they participate in justice work.

Loving Engagement - We are committed to embodying and practicing justice, liberation, and peace in our engagements with one another.

Queer Affirming - We are committed to fostering a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking or, rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual unless s/he or they disclose otherwise.

Ageism - We are committed to fostering an intergenerational and communal network free from ageism. We believe that all people, regardless of age, shows up with capacity to lead and learn.

Personally, there is a lot disturbing within this. The one that bothers me the most is "We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" under their "Black Village" section.

And I had a good laugh under their "Black Families" section that states "We are committed to making our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children."

Ghost

Hey BLM start taking on the music industry....

Black Women - We are committed to building a Black women affirming space free from sexism, misogyny, and male‐centeredness.b]Black Villages - We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

Empathy - We are committed to practicing empathy; we engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contextsLoving Engagement - We are committed to embodying and practicing justice, liberation, and peace in our engagements with one another.

That's not what they really stand for though is it.

Organized through Soros foundation funding,
guided by communist organizers,
disseminating black panther militarism,
rioting for free liquor, reeboks and iphones, looting 101 lots and lots of looting,
arson,
embracing the radical act of Molotov cocktail throwing,
marching while chanting kill cops kill whitey,
taking over interstate highways to exert power through blocking commerce and
disruption of free elections through intimidation of political events.

Any other group who perpetrated only of few of these would be hounded by the FBI till they didn't exist as a group.

The principles they list do not match their actions other than following the Soros foundation goals of globalism, aligning with lgbt liberal movements and supporting youth rebellion with new age terms like ageism.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: ghostrager


Personally, there is a lot disturbing within this. The one that bothers me the most is "We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" under their "Black Village" section.

I think this may be saying that if a neighbor parent sees a kid doing something bad, that person should do something about it and not say "not my kid, not my problem." I've heard people on ATS look fondly back on their youth, when they said if a neighborhood adult saw a kid doing something bad, they would swat them on the behind without having to worry about being sued by the kid's parent. Does that concept of everyone in the community taking responsibility for any and every kid really disturb you? Why?

How does that not disturb you?
Do you not understand the value of having both parents?
And because it's you I have to add gender of parents doesn't matter just so long as the child is taught about femininity and masculinity equally.

They are saying they agree with the destruction of the nuclear family.
That is one of the primary problems in the black community.
Do you not see the correlation between lack of parenting and increased violent behaviors? It's literally written on the wall...

This has got to be the most misdirected movements ever. They gleefully embrace the very thing that is destroying them. While attacking and protesting the people trying to keep a lid on the resulting chaos. Sure the cops need to be reformed. So does the judicial system. But so does the black community and society as a whole. This destruction of the male role model and the nuclear family has done nothing but create an entire generation of young men out of touch with themselves and the world around them.

It doesn't take a village to raise a kid it takes decent parents.

The Ferguson effect is a real thing and the police will just stop enforcing the law in these communities of they continue to be vilified.

a reply to: ghostrager

I don't see what the problem is. If you're not black, it doesn't apply to you. They can live however they want and affirm whatever values they see fit. As long as they aren't breaking the law, who cares what they do in their community?

originally posted by: JAY1980

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: ghostrager


Personally, there is a lot disturbing within this. The one that bothers me the most is "We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" under their "Black Village" section.

I think this may be saying that if a neighbor parent sees a kid doing something bad, that person should do something about it and not say "not my kid, not my problem." I've heard people on ATS look fondly back on their youth, when they said if a neighborhood adult saw a kid doing something bad, they would swat them on the behind without having to worry about being sued by the kid's parent. Does that concept of everyone in the community taking responsibility for any and every kid really disturb you? Why?

How does that not disturb you?
Do you not understand the value of having both parents?
And because it's you I have to add gender of parents doesn't matter just so long as the child is taught about femininity and masculinity equally.

They are saying they agree with the destruction of the nuclear family.
That is one of the primary problems in the black community.
Do you not see the correlation between lack of parenting and increased violent behaviors? It's literally written on the wall...

This has got to be the most misdirected movements ever. They gleefully embrace the very thing that is destroying them. While attacking and protesting the people trying to keep a lid on the resulting chaos. Sure the cops need to be reformed. So does the judicial system. But so does the black community and society as a whole. This destruction of the male role model and the nuclear family has done nothing but create an entire generation of young men out of touch with themselves and the world around them.

It doesn't take a village to raise a kid it takes decent parents.

The Ferguson effect is a real thing and the police will just stop enforcing the law in these communities of they continue to be vilified.

They sure have a lot in common with the Communist Manifesto......village taking the place of family.....where have we all heard that failed mantra from before?

originally posted by: introvert

I think it is very dangerous and disingenuous to label this group a threat or call them a terror group.

If white libertarians were running around murdering government officials you'd most definitely call them a threat, a terror group, insurrectionists, secessionists, you name it--every type of derogatory, politically charged and emotionally-laden term you can think of.

You'd be openly calling for them to be rounded up, disarmed, and locked away.

If not worse. "Sorry, warden, I seem to have misplaced the key."

You pretending that this wouldn't indeed be the case is the funniest thing I've heard all day. You'd be having an orgasm of political persecution.

I'm sorry I can't take you seriously you when you say we need to focus on the message of a group, and not on the actions of a few. It rings completely hollow, and sounds like, for lack of a better term, total bulls#.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Of course it would appear that they are pushing a social just platform, because their goal is social justice.

THE IRONY! One of the tenants of the SJWs which we have heard time after time is the ideology that "actions have consequences" in regards to free speech which they may find offensive. Yet here is an entire herd of SJWs, formed to remove the natural consequences of bad behavior by their own. The percentage of people (of any color) killed by police in this country who weren't acting like thugs or jackasses is extraordinarily small. Bad behavior has consequences...

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Of course it would appear that they are pushing a social just platform, because their goal is social justice.

And what does that even mean? What is the GOAL? What are you trying to achieve???

Everyone has equal rights now. BUT that's not good enough:



So then, besides trying to reduce cops shooting blacks, what purpose other than driving divides does any of this represent???

When you go and create this situation where only straight white males "can be" racist/bigoted/etc, while everyone has equal rights, and you pit everyone against SWM, the only real outcome that can be expected is radicalizing basically everyone and creating total social chaos. And that's exactly what we're already seeing in this is only what year 3, year 4??

a reply to: NthOther

If white libertarians were running around murdering government officials you'd most definitely call them a threat, a terror group, insurrectionists, secessionists, you name it--every type of derogatory, politically charged and emotionally-laden term you can think of.

No I wouldn't. The individual is responsible, unless the group itself exists for the purpose of perpetuating those acts. BLM does not exist for the purpose of killing government officials, officers, etc.

You pretending that this wouldn't indeed be the case is the funniest thing I've heard all day. You'd be having an orgasm of political persecution.

Nice bit of projection there.

I'm sorry I can't take you seriously you when you say we need to focus on the message of a group, and not on the actions of a few. It rings completely hollow, and sounds like, for lack of a better term, total bulls#.

Is BLM's official stance pro-murder?

You are saying we should let the actions of the few reflect entire groups? Well, that could come back to bite you in the ass.

Not very smart.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Yes, bad behavior has consequences.

Is the group advocating for people to engage in that behavior, or is it a matter of personal responsibility?