By Elmer
Whittaker
Recently,
former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani called “Black Lives Matter” inherently racist,
anti-American and divisive amongst other things in an interview.
I am afraid,
but not surprised that I cannot agree with much of Rudy Giuliani’s comments in
regards to “Black Lives Matter” other than a few points. Rudy Giuliani is
clearly part of the problem.
I too think however
that the name of the “Black Lives Matter” movement is inherently racist and
divisive, which ultimately reflects on the movement itself, whether factual,
intended or not.
I am not
stating this here for the first time, but those who have actually named their
movement “Black Lives Matter” were either government or police infiltrators,
were influenced and misled by such infiltrators, were indeed racists or were
just plain and simple stupid.
Very few other
names for a movement against police and judicial abuse and corruption could
have possibly generated such inherent and foreseeable division amongst the
oppressed and violated citizenry. But, as so often, the founders of “Black
Lives Matter” do not admit to their mistake, if it was one, and simple change
the name of their movement to one that is much more inclusive and with that
allow the millions of victims of police and judicial corruption and abuse to
identify and participate in their movement, but instead have their followers
defend the choice of their inappropriate name with all kinds of nonsensical
analogies and even cartoons.
Tired of
listening to all kinds of stupid and nonsensical analogies trying to justify
the name of “Black Lives Matter” and showing how bad a name like “All Lives
Matter” or “Black Lives Matter Too” would have been, I came up with my own
little analogy. Coming from me, it naturally requires a little brain power and
the ability to make and understand logical conclusions.
The name “Black
Lives Matter” does not inherently and automatically include or even just
insinuate that “white”, “brown”, “Hispanic”, “Asian” or “blue” lives matter as
well. Admittedly, it does not inherently or automatically exclude it either,
but to me this clearly makes it a racist name for an organization.
A name like
“All Lives Matter” or “Black Lives Matter Too” does however inherently and
automatically include all other races as well and does not exclude anyone. That
is the simple difference between a racist name and an all-inclusive name. There are of course thousands of other names
or combination of names that would have been fitting for a movement like this
and which could have been supported by virtually everyone.
There is
nothing our government fears more than a united people. That can easily be seen
by everyone with an open mind and basic analytical skills. Left vs Right.
Occupy vs Tea Party. Pro Life vs Pro Choice. Pro Gun vs Anti Gun. Black vs.
White. Etc.
Just today
Hillary Clinton in what was supposed to be a “presidential” speech, propagated
the support for “Black Lives Matter”. What more prove do you people need?
Now, the
government wins again.
United we
(might) stand. Divided we (will) fall further.
