Navigating Difficult Conversations: Addressing Propaganda and Hate Towards BLM

Black Lives Matter (BLM) has become a rallying cry for countless individuals, fighting for racial equality and justice. However, despite the intentions behind BLM, it is not without criticism and backlash. The prophecy of propaganda and hate towards BLM is a reality that many of us must navigate.

Based on data from the U.S. Department of Justice, between 1980 and 2008, 93 percent of black murder victims were killed by other blacks. Similarly, FBI statistics indicate that in 2012, 90% of black murder cases involved black perpetrators. This highlights a significant issue within black communities, but does not diminish the fact that black lives matter. It is a complex issue that cannot be simplified by such statistics alone.

Privilege and Ignorance

In conversations about BLM on YouTube and in other forums, it is often difficult to address the issue of privilege and ignorance. Many people dismiss arguments about black lives mattering, especially when they are proposed by non-people of color (Poc). It is important to recognize that non-Poc individuals may have little relatable experience with the challenges faced by Poc in and out of the criminal justice system. Providing these individuals with a harsh reality can be challenging, but it is necessary to foster understanding and change.

The reality of disproportionate police violence against black individuals is difficult for some to accept, but it is a reality that needs to be addressed. Ignoring or dismissing these facts only perpetuates inequality and injustice.

Fallacies and Logical Shortcuts

Arguments intended to validate or delegitimize BLM often rely on fallacies. Fallacies are logical errors that can be detected and addressed, making them relevant tools in discourse. However, it is important to remember that not all fallacies are created equal. The No True Scotsman fallacy is one such example, where someone dismisses a claim by redefining the claimant as not fitting within the group they are claiming.

The No True Scotsman fallacy can be seen in religious and philosophical debates. For instance, the argument that atheists are not truly human because they do not follow religious doctrine can be challenged by the no true Scotsman fallacy. This fallacy can be a useful tool in redefining terms and in clarifying what is meant by a particular group. However, it should not be used to dismiss valid arguments outright.

It is crucial to address these fallacies and clarify their relevance in the context of the discussion. This helps to maintain the integrity of the discourse and to ensure that the arguments made are sound and relevant.

Concluding Thoughts

The journey towards racial equality and justice is fraught with challenges, and it is natural to encounter resistance and hate. By engaging in meaningful and respectful dialogue, we can work towards a more inclusive and just society. It may be difficult to swallow at times, but addressing the harsh realities is essential for progress.

Let us remember that every life matters, and that our shared humanity must guide us towards a better future. Together, we can navigate these difficult conversations and create a world where justice and equality prevail.