**TL;DR – “All Lives Matter” is an [intentional](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/all-lives-matter-black-lives-matter/) distraction from the fact that some lives are valued less than others** Yes, all lives matter; no, All Lives do not Matter. “Lives Mattering” as a statement, as it has been popularized, does not exist in a vacuum. Black Lives Matter is not solely a statement of fact, it is (clearly), a movement, a response to the climate Black Americans (not to exclude other nationalities—[Black Lives Matter was started in America](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/19/blacklivesmatter-birth-civil-rights-movement) but has grown to an international scale, addressing a global problem) must face. The justification for Black Lives Matter and _not_ All Lives Matter is clear from a historical perspective (with the legacy of slavery, segregation, colonization, and other atrocities) as well as [statistically](https://towardsdatascience.com/do-black-lives-matter-do-white-lives-matter-e49948d0ffd3?gi=8ff39a760e45). To state making “All Lives Matter” as a political statement ignores the categorically, demonstrably true reality that _some_ lives (those of people of color) are treated as inferior—this occurs through police brutality, explicit bias, and implicit violence, for example, on a societal scale.

**TL;DR: All lives matter represents a racist dog whistle.** Words cannot exist without their contexts. Many phrases may appear agreeable on the surface but become offensive when used in particular contexts. All lives matter represent a prominent example of the importance of contexts. All lives matter come as a reaction to BLM. When taken alone, all lives matter sounds like a kind and egalitarian phrase. However, one must bear in mind that the phrase only came as a response to Black Lives Matter. In other words, All Lives Matter is not defined by its independent ideology but its rejection of Black Lives Matter. Hence, saying ‘all lives” in this context only serves as a way to muddle the focus on black lives, which are being killed at [three times the rate by police](https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/23/opinions/all-lives-matter-misses-the-big-picture-baker/index.html) than the lives of other people. This comparison does not call for an oppression Olympics. Instead, it stresses a need for black lives to come into public attention. The emergence of “all lives” in this context only intends to derail that necessary effort. In other words, all lives matter exists not to advocate for all lives but to distract the genuine issue of police brutality. The slogan all lives matter continues the long tradition of political dog-whistling. In other words, this phrase represents a harmless packaging of a racist idea. That nature means the harmless phrase has taken on an offensive substance. The phrase inner city did not become problematic until the context of white flight. The word globalist did not become problematic until its anti-semitism undertones. In the same way, all lives matter did not become problematic until it became a counter-movement against black lives matter. Hence, “don’t you think all lives matter” represents a misguided question when assessing the all lives matter movement. Of course, I believe that the lives of all people matter. However, that belief has nothing to do with the all lives matter movement, so I can support one without supporting the other. In the same way, I can hope America continues as a great country without putting on a MAGA hat. In politics, a phrase often has meaning beyond its surface. Do I think the lives of all people matter? Yes. Does that mean I support the all lives matter movement? For the reasons stated above, no.

While it is important that every human be treated with respect and dignity, the saying "All Lives Matter" does not entirely represent that. It is a saying that was created to go against the Black Lives Matter movement and it is not encouraging for real change. Yes, all lives matter but throughout history Black people have been discriminated against, mistreated, and seen as less important than others so, for that reason we are focusing in on them specifically with the Black Lives Matter movement. When people say "all lives matter" it usually because they are offended that we are only saying Black lives matter but we are saying it for good reason. All lives aren't in danger every day. All lives aren't constantly put in a box of stereotypes. All lives don't have to live in constant fear of police brutality. However, all of this applies for Black Americans and that is why the Black Lives Matter movement is an essential and urgent part of history that we all as a society are experiencing right now.

All lives do matter. "Black lives matter" is not in opposition to this idea, really at all. Though I have always argued they need better PR, and often have to describe their name as meaning "Black lives matter, too." (But then again, I believe the left in general is horrible at their own PR, and seems to think "I shouldn't have to worry about it". It is THE most frustrating part of being on the left.) The issue with "all lives matter" is not that "only some lives matter". Rather saying "all lives matter" is generally used as "dismissal by broadening." A quick example of dismissal-by-broadening: "Man, I'm starving today." "Well people all over the WORLD are starving."

Obviously all sentient life forms continued existence matters. Which is not to be confused with the fact that obviously the All Lives Matter movement was a horrific response to Black Lives Matter that acted as a ridiculous distraction. The exact phrasing of this, "All Lives do Matter" instead of "All Lives Matter" is deliberately designed to be ambiguous. We're literally arguing over nothing in here.

Literally 2 questions ago most people argued it was okay to kill certain people. In that sense their lives don't matter.