Is BLM a trojan horse?

I think this thread is great. It is an actual debate with people thrashing out ideas and disagreeing with each other. No wonder wokescolds hate it.

It also shows a couple of other things:

a) some people's politics really don't go any further than their feminism (see also various threads where everything else is trumped by opinions about Israel, Jeremy Corbyn or Scottish independence);

b) the idea of supporting a movement without checking your brain in at the door is a novelty to some. I support Black Lives Matter, I support the demonstrations, I support the movement. But it's a movement, not a fan club. I don't have to pledge allegiance to its leaders or take responsibility for their theories or statements.

The incessant tone policing of the liberal left is toxic. People who are afraid to say what they think are never going to liberate themselves or anyone else.

I'm talking about the numerous Trans threads on MN which take one stance. Where no one is allowed a different one

STANCE, eh. Take a stance then insult.

Generally civilised discussion makes more headway. There are posters who identify as trans who do engage. There are others who rarely disclose their background but turn up and accuse. Presumably the best imitation of debate they can manage.

So glad someone has started this thread. I am black and spent a long time yesterday trying to explain to a friend why I have never supported BLM. Their leadership, funding, strong-arm tactics, demands, and policies have never sat well with me.

Hello forsucksfake, would you be able to expand a bit further on your viewpoint please? It would be interesting to hear your perspective.

I agree with Thingybob's definition of what BLM stands for. If you are a communist intersectional identity politics anarchist great support BLM but if you're not then why would you support a black anarchist organisation if you wouldn't support any other anarchist organisation just because you like the slogan?

Goosefoot.

Intelligent thoughtful and educated women are not supposed to exchange views.

Black lives do matter. I am not sure that the twitter mod are interested in discussing root causes and practical ways to improve things. Its far simpler to call 'hate'.

Nope originally we were talking about Colston...do keep up and read my comment about Churchill

But that's not what happened.

Someone mentioned destroying UK culture.

You brought up Colston

Someone replied with 'you wouldn't persuade people to destroy Churchill's statue' (which has been desecrated)

You then claimed that people were supporting statues of slave traders (which nobody had mentioned except you) over statues of trans right activists (which nobody had mentioned except you either)

You are not engaging in good faith

You are showing your cause no favours.

I assume the "you" that is referred to is the MN hive mind.

This thread is all over Twitter as a shining example of Mumsnet being everything-phobic, just so people are aware....

Good. I'm glad people will know where they can go for a decent discussion, where they don't have to censor themselves constantly for fear of a public shaming.

This thread is all over Twitter as a shining example of Mumsnet being everything-phobic, just so people are aware....

But what are we supposed to do with this? I don't mean that as dismissive, I am really at a loss as to what the solution is?

Not discuss things? Many people already feel they can't say anything or even ask questions in real life about these issues.

I think almost 100% of people here have said they don't agree with the Trojan Horse idea, but they have some other concerns.

Is it really better if we're quiet?

You explain what you think my view on 'trans is

I'm not creating anything. But again think about your views on Trans and re read your post

I'm not stupid, you know...so try not to talk to me as if I am, if you want a useful dialogue, that is.You explain what it is about what you think my view on " Trans" is - and explain what you think is hypocritical about it. If you can.

I'm pretty sure that these threads would be outraged to see a statue of a fighter for Trans rights being put up

I don't think there's any such objection, providing they are not fulfilling some quota of supposed statues of women

But slave traders statues ...nah let them stay

We were talking about Churchill, the man who defeated Hitler and the the Nazis. Do keep up.

So this belief system means you can turn your back on black rights and racism? Really?

What are you talking about? Which belief system is it that you think i posses or hold, that doesn't recognise that oppression exists?
Lots of people are oppressed: by different circumstances in their life; some of which they cannot change - such as skin colour or sex.

But not all women are automatically 'oppressed', nor do all women automatically feel oppressed. It is not all about oppressor and oppressed in my view. Life is far more nuanced and variant for such rigidity and simplicity.

Most people probably will agree that Churchill was "racist" when you apply modern day ethics to the past.

Exactly. And Muhammad had a child bride and slaves, but the EU has decided you have to be all mealy-mouthed about that.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.S._v.Austria(2018)

And that's an understandable position. A couple of billion people think Muhammad was a great guy. And quite a lot of them believe you should kill or be killed to protect his name. So perhaps inflammatory statements should be stopped. Perhaps.

But if you have a war leader who held objectionable views typical of his time but who defeated one of the most evil regimes in history, then it's absolutely ok to just graffiti 'Churchill was a racist'.

Every country on earth reveres the people who made it what it was today. It's unlikely any of these people are entirely saintly. But they are revered because of what they did for their countries and because without those things the very concept of the nation would not exist.

I don't think any particular country's concept of nationhood and common ideals are necessarily universal or inherent to humanity. But they create a sense of belonging which is important to us as humanity, and for that reason alone they are very important. Clearly they are important to Muslims, and they are important to Britons as well.

I think it's fine to say 'outright racist opinions were commonplace, and racist attitudes still linger'. But it's not clear that that means we should judge everyone by attitudes of this very instant and demolish everything that doesn't fit in. That seems more like the sort of thing the Khmer Rouge would do than a modern enlightened country.

It actually feels this is a bit of a RW cult. Probably why I never joined it. Why are you so frightened of the others you other

Oh, so it's a "right wing cult" when someone does not agree with you.
Good luck with that. When you polarise to such an extent as you seem to want to , you will inevitably meet opposition. It is inevitable. That is the dynamic you are creating.

And not and example of a discussion, some sane voices, some moderate and some a bit odd. Being moderated, so anything nasty zapped.

They probably can’t quite compute that.

This thread is all over Twitter as a shining example of Mumsnet being everything-phobic, just so people are aware....