argument top image

Is BLM (Black Lives Matter) good or bad? Show more Show less
Back to question

BLM the organization has seen countless donations in order to fight police brutality and has made a huge splash on America during a time of distress. Although they have brought a lot of recognition to the issue, they have come under extreme scrutiny for things their leaders have said, the damage that they have caused to communities, and the lack of involvement in Chicago.

The BLM organization are good Show more Show less

They bring invaluable attention to the issue that blacks aren't being treated correctly
(1 of 3) Next position >

The BLM organization is good, it promotes peaceful protests to get the voices of minorities heard.

The BLM organisation is good. It encourages people to engage on community level to get involved and peacefully protest for ethnic minority rights.

The Argument

Black Lives Matter was formed in 2013, after the acquittal of George Zimmerman who shot an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin. Opal Tometi, one of the founders, decided to build the Black Lives Matter website. Before the movement gained traction after the killing of George Floyd, Tometi spent years encouraging people to get involved in their community based organisations and engage in actions to promote change. The name encompasses the structural racism in all institutions from schools to the criminal justice system. The website itself seeks to cover the individuality of each person.[1] Tometi herself described the organisation as “leaderful”. There are many leaders within the organisation giving voices to many others globally, where if one individual were to get assassinated, the organisation would not come to a halt.[2] The organisation has generated leaders, and the words a global movement, where 93% of the protests by Black Lives Matter have been peaceful, and to the contrary, the protesters have been victims of violence. Tometi and the organisation she is part of encourage people to work together with their communities to generate sustainable changes through these voices. The organisation received several donations which it stated would go to black communities in need and towards movements of advocacy to bring legal changes, developing educational resources and police monitoring.[3]

Counter arguments

It is averred that anti-racism activists are using the same approach as racists. If someone from an ethnic minority group does not follow the common thinking of the rest of that particular group, they branded to be brainwashed, perpetuating the idea that minorities cannot think for themselves, and require someone to advocate for their needs, which does not allow the divergent thinking minority to think for themselves. This is reinforcing discrimination. Anti-racism movements such as those emerging from Black Lives Matter as an organisation, does not promote unity, it goes into identity politics, which turns into a power struggle between different racial and ethnic communities. This causes conflict rather than acceptance and peace. It is suggested that some of the assertive language used by organisations such as Black Lives Matter does not give young minorities actual agency and power. To eradicate the structural racism that exists, it inevitably needs the support of the white majority. Rather than suggesting that they should feel guilty for their ancestral past, gaining unity with the white majority to eradicate structural racism is a more constructive way forward.[4]

Proponents

Premises

Rejecting the premises

References

  1. https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/
  2. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/sep/24/opal-tometi-co-founder-of-black-lives-matter-i-do-this-because-we-deserve-to-live
  3. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jun/09/donations-to-black-lives-matter-uk-and-other-groups-top-1m
  4. https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/09/16/black-lives-matter-does-not-own-ethnic-minorities/
This page was last edited on Sunday, 4 Oct 2020 at 21:03 UTC

Explore related arguments