The nuclear family was a reaction to a requirement for mobility following the industrial revolution.
Prior to that families were what we would call extended, including grandparents and near relatives in a more or less settled household. The move to a smaller family unit left the elderly to care for themselves, resulting in the aged care industry we see today. — Banno
What I don’t agree with is to do so to disrupt the “Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement”. — NOS4A2
There is no nuclear family structure requirement. This whole thing is bullshit.nuclear family structure requirement — Kenosha Kid
I wouldn't think it's super bizarre. In fact, the Netherlands has (or had) a group solely focused on rape of men by women because it's totally unrepresented and not taken seriously. — Benkei
Er, yeah, nvm about that, what I meant was that BLM is focusing on state-related offences, you made no mention of any "all lives matter" and idk what made me think you did. Crime is obviously a problem but it doesn't need to be the only problem that gets addressed... why frame it like we need to pick one or the other? — Judaka
BLM doesn't even address crime right now. It is focused only on certain forms of violence towards black folks - namely, state violence and vigilante groups. If you read the BLM "what we believe" statement there are 0 mentions of crime or gang violence which claim far more black lives than cops or George Zimmerman or the KKK. — BitconnectCarlos
No, it's not. A part of the problem is just the name: Black Lives Matter. If you want to call it blacks against state violence that's fine, but there's a disconnect with the name BLM when you have many black victims being ignored and others deified. — BitconnectCarlos
But there isn't a disconnect, is there? The name is perfectly in keeping with the aims of the movement, given that the tolerance of murder of black people by racists is a testimony that black lives don't actually matter compared to whites. — Kenosha Kid
Which just returns us to the idea that a campaign can not be specific and therefore effective: — Kenosha Kid
This is why the change of subject is so racist: you lay the responsibility of black gang culture on a group of people legitimately campaigning against a very real threat from their own law enforcers on the basis of what? — Kenosha Kid
Can you explain how they can possibly implement the extended family model while obeying the nuclear family structure requirement? Again, you seem to be contradicting yourself, twice in this case.
My concern comes when out of this campaigning emerges a certain unbalanced worldview that implies that white people are the biggest threat to black men and that the way to solve this is more black nationalism. — BitconnectCarlos
I never mentioned "who is to blame" for black gangs. I'm solely concerned here with what is actually killing black men if we're talking about violence. I'm just looking at the numbers; it's not hard to see. — BitconnectCarlos
There is nothing to obey. There is no requirement. They can live and gather as they wish in an open society. And they can do so without disrupting anything. — NOS4A2
Okay, so just to be clear then. Your anti-black-lives-matter position is that you are troubled by the support networks you say they are not putting in place to disrupt a nuclear social requirement you say doesn't exist. :up:
Just to be clear, your only arguments are straw men. Is that because you think you’re clever, or because you have no other argument? — NOS4A2
That was all faithful to your responses. That your argument lacks any degree of coherence, only you are to blame.
You've just met the most unreflexive guy on the forum. Was it fun? — Benkei
the obvious and necessary qualifier "also" from their anti-racist cri du coeur which should have been, more aptly, BLACK LIVES ALSO MATTER. — 180 Proof
Like after "9-11", the oft-repeated question (vis-à-vis jihadi terrorists) that made the rounds with media pundits & talking heads: "Why Do They Hate Us?" Or how the Black Panthers were/are officially designated "a terrorist organization" and yet the KKK still are not. 'White Supremacy' is manifestly tolerated by many (most?) whites because it doesn't threaten them - white people as such - or the caste-priviledges of Whiteness in America (& Europe); it's the defeated (treasonous, pro-slavery) Confederate Flags, Statues, Monuments & Generals' Names everywhere to honor a dishonorable "heritage" and "lost cause" in order to prop-up bloated White Priviledge grown so cripplingly obese from centuries of cannibalizing Black Brown Yellow & Red bodies that Whiteness now can barely stand or trundle or even wipe itself (e.g. MAGA tRumpers, dog-whistle (dixiecrat) Reagan Republicans, boll weevil/blue dog Democrats). The plea "Stop killing us" threatens their ancestral prerogatives to do just that with impunity and without troubling their KKKhristian consciences. — 180 Proof
Lastly though (just riffin' here mind you), perhaps more fundamentally, many white people (seem to me/us to) feel threatened merely by discussing "racism" because they do not believe the survivors of white terror and their continually brutalized descendents only want "Social Justice" and "Equality", but, what we're really after instead, I believe whites believe, is revenge. — 180 Proof
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.