[tootie]

I don't think identity politics is really the problem. That's not synonymous with wanting representation. And BLM isn't political. It's just acknowledging that black lives matter. It becomes political when a political party makes a point of not refusing to say it.

[gorydetails]

And clean coal simply means coal that is clean.

[tootie]

Yeah and it would be great if it existed. I don't get your point. Some movements are fundamentally insincere and some are genuine.

[LegitShady]

I've read their platform and I disagree.

[tootie]

They don't have a platform besides what's in the name. Any website with a formal agenda isn't "official" in any sense nor have 99% of people marching for justice read whatever you read. It's just black lives matter. And people engineering reasons to avoid saying it without explicitly saying black lives don't matter.

[LegitShady]

You have it exactly backwards - I believe black live matter, but I don't believe in the organization BLM and they do have an an organization and an agenda.

It's a kafka trap to name your organization with political goals some obviously positive name, and then declare anyone who does not support your organizations methods or particulars of its agenda as a hater of that positive name.

It's so transparent we're just in an age where being honest is rare, and people will convince themselves obviously untrue things - 'they don't have a platform' but they removed their 'what we believe page' including being against the nuclear family https://nypost.com/2020/09/24/blm-removes-website-language-b... .

It's a weird sort of denial of reality to just insist things don't exist, like an organization (which BLM is) with a formal agenda (which BLM has, even if they tried to obfuscate after being criticized for it's more radical and harmful ideas).