By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
TK-Karma on 24 July 2020
Edit Thread
KLAMarine said:
Alara317 said:

Oh cut it out, you and I both know that's not at all what you were trying to say. Once again, it's just a way to take the wind out of the sails of a movement you fundamentally misunderstand or can't be bothered to learn. It's not about the power of the slogan, it's about your unwillingness to learn. 

No, that IS what I was trying to say.

Believe me: I happen to be the ultimate authority on what I was trying to say after all. No one knows me better than me.

SpokenTruth said:

Except here you are saying, "All Lives Matter."  You already know the purpose behind the slogan and you still have no interest in "discussing the more important matter of reform" because here you are literally, "wasting time and energy discussing semantics."

And it's definitely about you. Because instead of directly addressing the message and "discussing the more important matter of reform" you want to make this about a phrase that's more palatable for you to swallow.

And you didn't even answer my question so I'll post it again. And do you honestly think that it would have made a damn bit of difference if the movement was called 'black lives matter also'?

I have plenty interest in getting to the reform part but BLM is still named BLM, not BLaM. As a result, more people in general waste time discussing the semantics rather than focusing on the reform part.

"And do you honestly think that it would have made a damn bit of difference if the movement was called 'black lives matter also'?"

A good question but I'm afraid we have no concrete answer. It's not like we can run a simulation of real life, rewind the clock, and rename the movement BLaM to observe changes. We can certainly speculate and I think a renaming would help cut down on discussion of the name.

When it comes to the concept of simulations, they are never seen as "the truth". They are simply tools, built on many assumptions themselves, which inform decision-makers on what may happen in a given scenario. No simulation is a perfect reflection of reality (maybe quantum simulations, but let's not open that can of worms). Why not classify imagination as a simulation/tool, in which you can play around with and assess ideas? Realistically, it is the only (i.e. best) tool we have to explore these types of decision spaces, otherwise we have nothing at all and we can't move beyond square one.

Further to SpokenTruth's point, I feel like this idea has been raised in discussions before ...

For simplicity I'll just copy/paste the contents from that previous post, here:

Your demonstrated strategy for political discourse on this forum lacks imagination in your pursuit to learn, in that you choose to not exercise your imagination. You seem too scared to think/talk about situations that's not got some perfectly framed and uncut video-footage associated with it, which limits your ability to be aware of what can/cannot be likely. Unfortunately we dont have that luxury in the real-world and without using your imagination, it's gonna be hard to properly exercise empathy and connect with those on the other side to work on a solution that gets collective buy-in ... some might also call this a functioning democracy ;)