Black Lives Matter Is A “Peaceful Movement” That Wants Race War Now
In football, they say that the best offense is a good defense. Since you can’t control what the other team will do, your first priority should be to protect your own. Strangle the opposition. Minimize damage on your side. Keep all scoring windows shut. Punish any aggressive plays from the other side. Even on offense, defense is key: it doesn’t matter how good your quarterback is if the offensive line doesn’t protect him.
Keep this football analogy in mind as we look at the latest events in the never-ending Black Lives Matter saga. “The best offense is a good defense.” Or, in other words, the best way to achieve your goals, is by holding fast and protecting your deepest priorities.
When the Black Lives Matter movement (which I’ll refer to as “the BM”) began in 2013, after the acquittal of George “Zim Zam” Zimmermann, it was not nearly as controversial as it is now. In fact, at the time, it seemed like a fairly straightforward and legitimate cause. Yes, of course, black lives matter. Only the most radical racist would say they don’t.
Remember the football analogy: first defense, then offense.
When the BM began, it did not offend most Americans. Why not? Because, on some common-sense level, Americans, who by and large love football, understood that it was a defensive movement. By raising awareness about black deaths in American inner cities and elsewhere, the BM initially sought to look out for its own–to protect its quarterback, if you will.
But that was 2013, and this is 2016. The BM debate has evolved with the BM’s strategy itself. And unfortunately, it has been a very ugly evolution. Why? Because unfortunately the BM and its leaders, like DeRay McKesson, Marissa Johnson, Shaun King and others, have decided to switch from playing defense to playing offense. They are no longer content to promote safety in black communities. Now they are gunning to sack the opponent’s quarterback.
This new offense-first mindset driving the BM became painfully clear during the horrific Dallas shooting in July 2016, which left five officers dead and seven others seriously wounded.
— Robert Wilonsky (@RobertWilonsky) July 8, 2016
What the BM done to disavow and prevent violence like this from happening again?
Defenders of the BM argue that violence like this is unrelated to the Black Lives Matter agenda, that is an unfortunate exception to a peaceful movement. Unfortunately, the supposed neutrality of the BM is becoming harder and harder to defend.
The problem is not this or that isolated incident of aggressive, anti-white, anti-police behavior. No, the problem is much bigger, and it shows no signs of reversing. Literally from coast to coast, the BM is not merely defending black lives; it is actively encouraging anti-white, anti-police behavior in more and more everyday citizens.
For example, on the east coast, in Tampa, FL on Tuesday, September 27:
Deputies found graffiti in Hillsborough County at two different locations.
One wall was hit along Gornto Lake Road in Brandon, with the phrase “kill white people” spray painted. Other tags read “black lives matter” and “BLM.”
A crew painted over the phrases.
“It’s uncalled for, there’s a way to protest, there’s a way not to, this is just, it hurts everybody,” Cat D’Alessandro said. …
Less than a 10 minute drive away, a trailer was hit with similar messages. The Trump sign in their front yard was painted over.
In football, this would be an off-sides penalty. What happened to defending black lives? That was 2013, silly! Now, in 2016, the BM’s playbook calls for threatening and punishing non-black lives just for offending black lives. Just look at the different reactions in this recent video (language warning):
Is it “Black Lives Matter” or “Black Lives Matter Most”?
A day later, all the way over on the west coast, in San Diego, the stakes got much higher:
Police in suburban San Diego have shot and killed an unarmed black man who they say pulled an object from his pocket, pointed it at officers and assumed a “shooting stance”. …
Family members and protesters have identified the man to local media as 30-year-old Alfred Olango, a refugee from Uganda.
Agnes Hassan, originally from Sudan, described Olango as well-educated but mentally ill.
If it’s true that this man was “mentally ill,” it’s even more tragic, because the BM is influencing vulnerable citizens like this to switch from a common-sense defensive posture to, literally, an aggressive, offensive stance. Interactions between blacks and police are, in other words, literally following the path the BM has taken: from legitimate defense to criminal offense.
If this is what “Black Lives Matter” means, what about American peace?
Unfortunately, guns and fists are not the only weapons in the BM’s arsenal. Their most powerful weapon is an old one, and they are helping it make a comeback: political correctness. As WFTV News reports:
A part-time police officer in McKeesport, Pennsylvania, was terminated Tuesday after an apparent racist social media post involving the officer began circulating online, the mayor of McKeesport said. …
“As the picture alone does not constitute misconduct, it is symbolic speech and protected under the First Amendment. However, it is the content of the text in the picture which is unacceptable,” the [Pitcairn] Police Department’s Facebook post read….
The officer in question should have been more careful, of course, but once again, free speech has taken a life-altering hit from political correctness.
In Obama’s America, a dead gorilla is the latest outrage against political correctness.
Unfortunately, the madness does not end there. Again, my point in this article is to point out how Black Lives Matter is strengthening political correctness and anti-cop/anti-white violence on a national level, not just in individual cases. For instance, Clemson University decreed this week that:
“Harambe should not be displayed in a public place or a place that is viewed by the public,” the email said.
[Graduate Community Director Brooks Artis,] who claimed that Harambe memes have been used to “add to rape culture” and can be a “form of racism,” said that the announcement was spawned after a Harambe meme was used maliciously toward a student, though he did not get into further detail about that incident.
Artis also threatened that anyone who violated the new rules would “get in some trouble” and may be reported to the Office of Community and Ethical Standards or Title IX for the use of biased language.
“While we are not banning the word, I want to encourage you to think about what you are saying and how someone who may be a different gender, race, culture, or sexuality than you may take the comment,” Artis wrote.
The one exception to the Harambe meme display ban, Artis clarified, is in dorm rooms, “where people would have to be invited into the space to see said decoration.”
Folks, this is how it begins.
This is the first phase of the BM. At first, the problem is defending people from being offended. Then the offenders must be kept out of public sight, their freedom of speech and expression confined to the privacy of their rooms and homes. Finally, the offenders must be sacked by a militant, offense-first, anti-white BM mentality.
Now that the BM has switched from defense to offense, the question we as Americans must answer is: How can we have a “good defense” against this anti-American offense?
Our position at CDP is clear: we need to elect Donald Trump if we want to resist the tyranny of political correctness and restore law and order in America’s cities.