So Black Lives Matter has put out an agenda as of this morning. More accurately, a list of demands entitled “A Vision for Black Lives: Policy Demands for Black Power, Freedom and Justice.” Meeting these demands will presumably rid the thuroughfares of psuedo-sapient morons yelling “Pigs in a blanket. Fry ’em up.” Temporarily. Until DeRay McKesson and his fellow atavistic thugs come up broke-dick, bored and have itchy @$$holes once again.
There are six main planks on the list surrender terms. While the actual document still remains behind a password-protected WordPress Blog, we have some details courtesy of Errin Haines Whack of The Associated Press.
To address criminal justice reform, for example, movement organizers are calling for an end to the type of militarized police presence seen at protests in cities like Ferguson, and the retroactive decriminalization and immediate release of all people convicted of drug offenses, sex work related offense and youth offenses. The group also is calling for the passage of a bill that would create a commission to study reparations for descendants of slaves.
The six points are probably activist poli-sci boiler plate. If I were one of the real racists that Robert Tracinski wrote about in The Federalist, I’d totally invent a caricature of a Black Power Movement that defined African-American dignity via legalized hookers-n-blow. Next, I’d have them go straight for Honkey-Man’s wallet and demand slavery reparations. For now they want a commission to study reparations. This is only because they can’t think of a way to demand money from others without getting told to go indulge in auto-erotic asphyxiation.
This list of gimme-dats leaves us with a fundamental question. Outside of opportunities to wave their egos around in public and get paid money to vandalize and bedevil people they pretty much hate anyway, what does Black Lives Matter really want? Not the Mouth of Sauron flunkies and Grima Wormtongue press flacks; but real, honest-to-goodness activist demonstrators. What do these people actually want other than the visceral thrill of beating people and dodging tear-gas canisters? Fred Reed, bless his confused soul, undertakes the Sisyphean task of eliciting truth and reason from funded minions of George Soros via a proposed Socratic dialectic.
(1) Do you want white policemen excluded from black neighborhoods?
(2) Do you want any policemen in your neighborhoods?
(3) Do blacks want to recruit, train, and discipline police forces of blacks only in their neighborhoods?
(4) What laws do you want cops to enforce in your neighborhoods?
(5) What should cops do when a criminal resists arrest?
(6) What does BLM want black cops to do?
At the end of the day, there will be no serious or reasoned dialogue from Black Lives Matter. Movements thrive on action, opacity, violence, obfuscation and terror. As long as terrorism works like hell and gets them everything they need at minimal risk and expense, Black Lives Matter would be stupid if they degraded themselves by negotiating with cucks.
The only thing that will end conflict between lawless urban youth and pissed-off suburbanite cops is sepaeration. Separation would kill the monetary angle of Black Lives Matter. Ending (((Diversity))) ends the conflicts that #BLM successfully makes their market in. The sheep cannot be sheered if they graze outside the range of the sheers. So nothing short of a casualty event that specifically effects Black Lives Matter members will change their essential calculus and thereby make them consider negotiations rather than targeted, anti-police violence. War only sucks when your side starts dying.