OT Ice Cube's Contract With Black America

Sly, my intention wan't to find stuff from Sputnik. It simply came up on top of Google from a news search. I was wondering if there was less approval of BLM these days.

BTW, while Tim Korso writes for Sputnik, he also writes for others, as well..

https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Ordinary_inspector_or_nasty_foe_999.html

 

ABM. WhT would be a satisfactory timeline for you? It seems like you are advocating that since its on their website and they have pushed for new laws, just because they havent been successfully implemented, its pointless?


Things take time.
Nothing on paper comes to fruition until it is followed by the masses.

Its called a movement. Not an instant. Instant change will bot happen. However it will happen quicker when its is more widely accepted as the best thing moving forward.
But as long as they have counter protestors such as yourself. It stifles the movement and furthers the separation of the sides.

exert some patience and understanding aNd give them time to figure it all out.
I for one Dont want a hasty movement. Hastiness usually leads to having to back track Nd fix things done wrong out of haste.

And before you say BLM has been around a long time, they have only recent gained national attention from the masses. So its still very mew overall.

lastly, if you see nothing from BLM what would you have them do instead Of what they are doing?

its like politics. Dems and reps have proven to not have all the right answers and neither will BLM. But the movement is just and the foundation of their wants is needed for America to come out of this on top. So with that i say to BLM. Take your time. Get the details right and find a good long term solution agreeable by all for each topical issue at hand.
But you have to give them time for this all to happen. They don't have the inside political strength to fast track. Nor should they fast track anything.
If we dont do this right we will have to do it again 50-100 years from now.
I say take all the time needed to get this right.
And i dont agree with everything BLM has done/stands for.
You andci share many conservative political views but this is something we really need to just sot back and let happen. Not criticize. The fight for equality is just, even if the fight doesnt always make sense in all aspects.
In most fights, they dont make sense in all aspects, but get behind what is foundationally right.
Equality and economic justice for all.

It wont be easy and i wouldn't expect it to be.

 

So, you noticed my ideas? Me thinks they could be implemented.....now.

I mean, why not?

 

so when you say now. What does that timeline of implementation mean? Do you think that once a law is made its instant change for society? And all know, abide and change instantly?

do tou see the counter protests to BLM that are actively trying to thwart their progress?

Im sorry i may not have read your ideas if you posted them. But from what i think i read, yours are not much different than the BLM goals, which will take time.

Legislation takes time. Or we wont get it right.
Change in peoples hearts and minds take time. We arent robots able to have an instant recalibration.

 

My ideas were about two or three posts up from here. I posted them earlier this morning.

 

ha! Me thinks i was writing my post while you were posting yours. Lol. Ill read and get back to ya.

 

"ive been saying that instant change on multiple levels would bring chaos and that in order to continue to progress, change needs to come in increments."
I've wondered about this many times. JFK espoused this when referring to Civil Rights but LBJ took the rapid approach which I think worked better. So, which approach works better most of the time? I've always leaned toward the small increments paradigm but I've seen success with the rapid approach so I'm still not sure.

 

its somewhat uncharted territory so i understand reasoning on both sides.

 

I personally don't really trust google much... I mean I use it because who doesn't, but they know what you want to see... I use a few different news aggregation sites, but it's basically impossible to find good sources for news these days.

 

I'm not being critical of you here just so that's clear. Google though has done it's fair share of 'censoring' stuff they don't like. Their algorithm also does a lot of trying to guess what you want to see which leads to some things get buried. I think it's an ok place to start but it can definitely be slanted (just like any other place). Drudge, I've seen here and there. For all the information we have in this age, it is increasingly difficult to get trustworthy information.

 

I will say, I have no idea about this sputnik news website, but while looking at the source is important, I think it's also a form of ad hominem, the sources questionability does not mean the information given is inaccurate.

 

Yeah, US statesponsored, or China Statesponsored so much better.

 

Google can do whatever they want to do, that doesn't mean I need to like it.
That said almost all news sources find their way back to being sponsored by billionaires, political parties, or various 'state' entities. They choose what to print based on an agenda more often than not. Which all that really means is that it's easy enough for someone to dismiss almost any of it based on their feelings of the source. Our feelings on the sources does not mean the content is true or not though.

Edit:
That's what Ad Hominem is, and like I said it's fine to, to some degree attack a source as being inept, one-sided, bias, untrustworthy, but it is also a fallacy for a reason. Doesn't matter if you think a source isn't worth you or I's time, it doesn't prove or disprove the content.

 

Actually, I did. My pic this morning didn't reflect that.

Hey, what did you think of my BLM ideas??