[manfredo]

> So, when I say, "break a leg" to an actor most people pick up on the subtext, and realize I'm not wishing the actor actually break their leg.

Incorrect, this isn't subtext, this is an idiom.

> When someone responds to "Black lives matter" with "All lives matter", most people get the subtext is that assuredly racist.

Complaints about "subtext" is often an excuse to construct and attack a straw man. Consider the phrase "listen and believe". Plenty of critics complained that this had the subtext of taking actions against the accused on testimony alone, and doing away with the principles of due process. Some users of the phrase may have attempted to advance those views, but "listen and believe" in and of itself is not about eroding due process - just that we should support people who believe they are victims. Similarly "All lives matter" is not a racist viewpoint - unless someone genuinely believes that the idea that any unjustly extinguished life is a tragedy is somehow racist.

"All lives matter" when specifically used to the exclusion of "black lives matter" (e.g. telling BLM activists to say "all lives matter" instead) may have a racist subtext. And as I have mentioned repeatedly elsewhere, I do not approve of these usages. That said, the blanket statement that "all lives matter" is racist is as wrong as saying "listen and believe" is about punishing people on baseless accusations.

[bobdole12345]

Man you can really miss a point there.

Look at the people saying "All lives matter", then look at the people saying "Black lives matter".

Lo, and you are enlightened my child.