The swift boating of Bernie Sanders?
Ugh, I was reading about this earlier. Depressing and disgusting. If only half of those uneducated BLM idiots actually bothered to learn anything about Sanders and what he's done for civil rights.
And that protestor is a racist jerk herself. Look at this assclown:
I think their expectation is that Bernie, as a far-left dem candidate, should be addressing more than economic issues, which I believe as well.
That said, disrupting a rally in which thousands came to see Bernie isn't productive and may well work against their issue.
There is, however, some justifiable desperation here. Who can justify, except for overt and conditioned racism, the spate of killings by cops. They're supposed to know better, be more composed, face danger, and not assume every young black man is armed and out for blood, even criminals.
The Black Lives Matter movement should and will (they're pretty sharp) use whatever means available to put themselves and their message in front of cameras. I think it's brilliant. Believing that Bernie Sanders should be recognized for marching that he did 48- some years ago is ridiculous. These organizers can see the results of that hard work. They can see that those advances are only temporary. These young adults are alive right now- at this moment and every other week they see another Black, brown or poor person die, many of them their contemporaries. They do not accept the old guard- they don't want to hear it. This is a youth movement populated by Black, brown, red, yellow and white and that's how it should be. They make their own rules and learn what works and what doesn't as they go along.
Bernie Sanders' days with CORE and the CR movement is ancient history to these organizers and they're doing exactly what they should be doing- acknowledging and engaging the strugglepresented to them today in 2015 and using whatever weapons they have at their disposal. If Bernie Sanders wants to be seen as the left wing progressive in tune with the issues of the day, then he'd better step up his game and address the issues of the day. Put up or get shut up. They should do the same with Hillary- hold her feet to the fire wherever she appears and push her to commit to more than early election platitudes. That is what this participatory democracy is supposed to be about right?
Absolutely, though anyone could argue the effectiveness of the methods and the presentation. But OTOH I'm not sure that BLM putting the candidate arguably most likely to do anything about today's struggles in the crosshairs is the most brilliant approach, either. If they feel that Hillary better represents them and the best chance of meaningful progress in the next presidency, have at it I guess.
Maybe someone should ask the BLM why they seem to have targeted Sanders rather than other candidates. I would rather hear their explanation than try to guess or speculate.
The particular shut-down of Bernie's Seattle appearance was orchestrated by a sweetheart who wants a big part in the G.O.P. Her facebook page included, "The GOP should have groomed me for bigger things."
This was posted in Democratic Underground.
This is not to indicate that the GOP had responsibility for the fiasco in Seattle.
flimbro said:
This is a youth movement populated by Black, brown, red, yellow and white and that's how it should be. They make their own rules and learn what works and what doesn't as they go along.
Whatever happened to Occupy Wall Street, anyway?
Meanwhile, from that lady's website:
https://outsideagitators206.org/blog/seattle-says-bowdownbernie/
"You are either fighting continuously and measurably to protect Black life in America, or you are a part of the white supremacist system that we will tear down in the liberation of our people."
This group is borne out of frustration with inertia related to our increasingly militarized police forces and an industrial prison system that disproportionately incarcerates black people. There's a lot of talk, but no action. On these points I agree.
What I don't agree with is disrupting political rallies and making enemies of the people most likely to support your cause. It wasn't effective in the 60's and it won't be effective now.
The Sanders campaign reacted to the interruption and posted a policy statement on the official website on Sunday. Some of the points and solutions suggested are generic and some are forward thinking. The bottom line is that he's learned from and reacted to the criticism and has at least started to expand his platform.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/racial-justice/
The Black Lives Matter movement is aware that many liberals would prefer peace and quiet and patience to agitation, activism and justice. They know that this tactic only guarantees more of the same while we "wait for the right time". They're right to be disruptive, it is after all their lives at stake.
Hahaha said:
This group is borne out of frustration with inertia related to our increasingly militarized police forces and an industrial prison system that disproportionately incarcerates black people. There's a lot of talk, but no action. On these points I agree.
What I don't agree with is disrupting political rallies and making enemies of the people most likely to support your cause. It wasn't effective in the 60's and it won't be effective now.
Agreed. If they think Hillary Clinton is their champion, they may want to look at her donor list. Candidates do not stray too far from the interests of those who bankroll them and according to Mother Jones: "The bulk of Clinton's campaign funds came from an elite, wealthy class of donors—those who can afford to give the maximum donation. In 2014, roughly 0.04 percent of Americans made the maximum donation for a primary campaign of $2,600 (adjusted to $2,700 in this election cycle). Bush's campaign raised more than 80 percent of its cash from this upper-crust of donors, and Clinton raised 64 percent." [From: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/hillary-clinton-fundraising-bundlers-lobbyists]
No doubt, some may see the actions of the BLM protesters at Sanders' events as noble. Others will consider them disruptive and rude. I suppose I straddle that fence. Certainly, I view "ticking off" the supporters of someone like Sanders, perhaps the most socially concerned candidate in the race, as misguided and with immense potential to backfire. Sanders' focus on the economy may be because he views economic oppression as an overarching mechanism for social oppression and views economic disparity as being inextricably intertwined with race and other matters of social justice. See Sanders platform at: https://berniesanders.com/issues/ If BLM truly is interested in effecting change, why not partner with someone like Sanders whom, I believe, is amenable to the message instead of the hostile takeover of his events? Get in his vehicle, don't push it off the track.
Even more appropriate would be to engage and shut down the events of those who are ignoring or resistant to the message such as Trump, Cruz or Huckabee...or even Ben Carson who called the BLM movement "silly". [From: https://atlantablackstar.com/2015/08/03/historians-record-black-lives-matter-carson-describes-movement-silly/ ] Now that I would respect. It puzzles me why that isn't being done. Why were they not active at the Cleveland debate?
I am hesitant to enter the "paranoid zone" but I cannot help but speculate whether another campaign might be encouraging the anti-Sanders acts.
flimbro said:+1. Well said.
Bernie Sanders' days with CORE and the CR movement is ancient history to these organizers and they're doing exactly what they should be doing- acknowledging and engaging the struggle presented to them today in 2015 and using whatever weapons they have at their disposal. If Bernie Sanders wants to be seen as the left wing progressive in tune with the issues of the day, then he'd better step up his game and address the issues of the day. Put up or get shut up. They should do the same with Hillary- hold her feet to the fire wherever she appears and push her to commit to more than early election platitudes. That is what this participatory democracy is supposed to be about right?
Here’s a take on Tim Wise FB page which took on a great conversation and outlook on the disruption.
Tim Wise on BLM/Bernie Sanders, plus something from a Sanders supporter who was at the event
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251505825
Also, Bernie is lagging way behind when it comes to the Black vote or voters of color. Sanders comes from the second most whitest state in the US and he needs to reach beyond the kind of post-racial political message he preaches in his home state.
“I haven’t seen him engaging the black community. Nor am I hearing any chatter about him,” said Rick Wade, Obama for America’s African-American vote director. “Black voters don’t know him.”
A June CNN/ORC poll showed just 2% of black Democrats supporting Sanders, a figure that has remained unchanged since February. Among non-white voters overall, Sanders polls at 9% compared to Hillary Clinton’s 61%.
“I’m happy to know that he was rallying in the 1960s. That tells me he was on the path when I was a child, but not too many people are thinking about the 60s” said Mary Brown-Guillory, president of the Vermont chapter of the NAACP. “What is he doing today about police brutality and the right to vote and equality? He has to be more than just Vermont.”
I’ll say this, before Elizabeth Warren ran for the senate she doubled-down and introduced herself to the African American communities and even launched her campaign at the Reggie Lewis Center, which is located in the heart of the Roxbury. She talked about the issues facing AA’s and this wasn’t a one-stop show, Warren kept coming back to the AA communities. Bernie could use some lessons from Warren on how to address the issues of BLM.
Watch and learn, progressives: Donna Edwards and Elizabeth Warren show how to talk about Black Lives Matter
http://www.salon.com/2015/07/24/watch_and_learn_progressives_donna_edwards_and_elizabeth_warren_show_how_to_talk_about_black_lives_matter/
It’s got to be more than what you did 50 years ago in marching for Civil Rights. To BLM and AA’s, its about NOW. They are frustrated. After the disruption, Bernie retreated and cancelled an appearance with Elon White, a host of a show about black issues. He later made a speaking appearance at a Latino rally which he seemed humbled and ask the crowd this…
“I want some help on this. I’m being very honest. I want some ideas, as somebody who was arrested 50 years ago fighting for Civil Rights trying to desegregate schools in Chicago, who spent his whole life fighting against racism, I want your ideas. What do you think we can do? What can we do?”
Unfortunately, Bernie is silent or has said very little on immigration, police brutality, racial inequality, and criminal justice reform during his speaking engagements. All issues which deals with the heart of the African-American community and BLM movement. He needs to to cease on the opportunity now and connect more with African-Americans and people of color. Just don’t take folks for granted. Action speaks louder than words.
It’s not too late for Bernie to readjust and start what matters now, not 50 years ago.
Sander came out with a detailed plan to address discrimination and police brutality issues
https://berniesanders.com/issues/racial-justice/
Is disrupting someone else's speech a good way to get attention? Perhaps. Is it the best way to get action? I tend to think not. Isn't it possible to go through normal channels, meeting with Sanders directly?
They disrupted his appearances- twice. They got national media attention both times and Sanders revised his platform and posted his positions on Sunday. I'd say their strategy worked.
I guess I just don't understand why they would target him as opposed to others. Is it precisely because he's the one most likely to respond? I can only imagine what Chris Christie would do. Or any of the other non-bully candidates!
flimbro said:
They disrupted his appearances- twice. They got national media attention both times and Sanders revised his platform and posted his positions on Sunday. I'd say their strategy worked.
Did they try to discuss it with him first and get rebuffed?
Or it could show him to be weak and easily swayed by a small group, such as the one that interrupted him.
https://outsideagitators206.org/who-we-are/
TarheelsInNj said:
I guess I just don't understand why they would target him as opposed to others. Is it precisely because he's the one most likely to respond? I can only imagine what Chris Christie would do. Or any of the other non-bully candidates!
I think it makes a lot of sense to target the Democratic party candidates. There's nothing much to be gained by trying to move the Republican candidates; they need real ideas and real policy prescriptions (not platitudes) addressed in the Democratic platform.
Bernie has been sort of targeted more than Hillary because Hillary has done a better job of talking about these issues. Bernie is on a learning curve - to his credit, he seems to be trying to respond substantively.
To be fair, this is not really swift-boating. They are just protesting. Swift-boating is when you turn a positive feature against the person. Like what happened to Kerry with his military service. And what Trump did to McCain.
So after years of listening to the Right-Wing noise machine and years of those supposedly "on the Left" being defensive hear comes a candidate who, without hesitation or embarrassment, calls himself a Socialist or Social Democrat, says that the biggest problem facing America is economic inequality and who attacks him? A supposedly "Progressive" movement.
Unbelievable. It's like a Tea Party group attacking Ted Cruz.
ParticleMan said:
flimbro said:Did they try to discuss it with him first and get rebuffed?
They disrupted his appearances- twice. They got national media attention both times and Sanders revised his platform and posted his positions on Sunday. I'd say their strategy worked.
I have no idea. I do know that he listened and that's what matters. Obviously the Black Lives Matter members are savvy enough to know that stepping up onto a podium in front of the speaker and saying exactly what you want to say to that speaker and his audience is a much more efficient way of getting your message across.
It's also important to note that this movement is not like the CR movement. It isn't characterized by high level summits and back room bargaining by spokesman and politicians. This approach is direct and forceful and in my opinion matches the severity of the times.
Sanders is/was the perfect target. He touted his activist background yet had nothing to say about the epidemic of state sanctioned violence that now comes like clockwork. Tim Wise, in the link that @phenixrising provided, writes that you cannot have a conversation about economic inequities without addressing the catalyst behind those inequities. Sanders wanted to rest on his laurels and discuss the gap between rich and poor all the while keeping issues of white supremacy at arm's length. It's understandable- he's an older white man in a leadership position accustomed to determining the course of conversation and being beholden only to his white liberal constituency. As such he wanted a pass on discussing racism and it simply wasn't going to work. It'll be interesting to see how he moves forward. I think he's sharp enough to use this to his advantage.
he's already responded: http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/08/10/3689728/after-repeated-protests-bernie-sanders-releases-racial-justice-platform/
Pretty impressive that instead of getting defensive and/or trying to marginalize or minimize his critics, he's trying to understand their POV and include their concerns in his campaign.
In the context of a Presidential campaign where the GOP pack includes at least three blatant racists and the Dem frontrunner's husband did more to help the Prison Industrial Complex than any other Democrat in history, can anyone explain to me the the motivation behind the BLM crusade against Sanders? Is this just some sort of HRC astroturf or is there really a story behind all this?