Jump to content

Talk:Black Lives Matter

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cutterx2202 (talk | contribs) at 15:19, 13 November 2021 (→‎Why is there no mention of rioting?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articleBlack Lives Matter has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 17, 2016Good article nomineeListed
October 20, 2020Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article

Template:Vital article

Cuba

Fox and other right-wing sources say that BLM [I don't exactly know what this means, since the Wikipedia article calls it de-centralized, though "it" does have an executive committee etc.] issued a statement supporting the Cuban government in the wake of the summer 2021 protests in Cuba and that the statement drew strong negative responses: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/black-lives-matter-blames-us-praises-cuban-regime-social-media-erupts; Also https://www.nationalreview.com/news/black-lives-matter-blames-cuba-crisis-on-cruel-u-s-embargo/amp/, https://www.newsweek.com/why-black-lives-matter-defending-authoritarian-cuban-regime-opinion-1610283 (this last opinion piece has an image of what purports to be a text from BLM.) 79.134.37.73 (talk) 03:03, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't BLM, which is de-centralized, but the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation that put out that statement. And they did not claim support for the Cuban government, they called for the end of the Cuban embargo. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:52, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The origin of the hashtag, along with most of the leaders of the movement are associated or members of the BLMGNF. While not complete there is enough overlap between the two to treat criticism of the BLMGNF with BLM. In general more specifically a criticism of BLM supporters voicing support for far-left dictators, terror groups, etc. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Including a section about this as opposed to just one on Cuba seems fair. 3Kingdoms (talk) 22:07, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If it were true that BLM is affiliated with Cuba's government, it would probably be because Cuba is also facing colonial/racial oppression. When Cuba was a protectorate of the US, black and brown cubans were enslaved on plantations and now that they're free, the US has decided to implement a criminal embargo that's killing the Cuban people and turning them against their own government. Not because it's a "far-left dictator". ButterSlipper (talk) 23:50, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't support a section based on those sources, most of which are unreliable for claims about BLM. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 01:56, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Huffpost, Fox are both considered generally reliable. JP has not been debated. 3Kingdoms (talk) 04:40, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"No consensus" on Fox News when it's about politics. HuffPo's fine but that article doesn't discuss the views of BLM at all and just briefly mentions Opal Tometi. The remaining opinion pieces would not be appropriate as the foundations of a new section. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 04:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that. The main point for me was not really making a new section, but more that I believe treating criticism of the BLMGNF as being completely separate from BLM simply because BLM is decentralized does not make much sense given how important the GNF was and is to the movement. However I do believe that if a section were added because of the Cuba remark it should be wider as I suggested, so it will talk about more than just the GNF. Hope that clears it up, have a good day. 3Kingdoms (talk) 19:57, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Black Lives Matter, Co-Founder, connection to Communism and Communist China

If one puts in the Internet Search, "Black Lives Matter Communism," one will find a Huge amount of articles and discussion about the connection of Black lives Matter with Communism, and Communist China. The huge amount of articles, and the fact that Wikipedia does not have this in the "Criticism" section of this Black Lives Matter article would really leave one with the conclusion that Wikipedia represents a Left-Wing Bias.Easeltine (talk) 15:12, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Easeltine, it seems that you are confusing Black Lives Matter with the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:25, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that there is a matter of opinion on the Internet if both groups are linked together politically. Marxism/Left-Wing media separates groups for their purposes of misinformation. It is a common practice.Easeltine (talk) 15:43, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And you're confusing the mainstream media as having Marxist leanings. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:06, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Easeltine the BLM movement has no political affiliations except for a stance against the brutalisation of black people instituted by the police. ButterSlipper (talk) 23:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article specifically talks about victims of police brutality in the United States. Which is why I think it would be best that the article linked was "Police Brutality in the United States" instead of of the broader article "Police Brutality." Zen916 (talk) 20:07, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2021

The date of the New Zealand protest was 14 June 2020. The Wiki article has a typo and says 1 June 2020. Please correct this.

It was widely publicised as being organised 14 June, after New Zealand reached COVID-19 Alert Level 1 on 9 June. Protesters respected the lockdown protection order and delayed their mass gathering event until after Alert Level restrictions permitted it.

Here is a reference to some media articles that covered the events on 14 June 2020:

1. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/418971/thousands-of-nzers-march-for-black-lives-matter

2. https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/06/livestream-auckland-black-lives-matter-march-sunday-june-14.amp.html 2406:E003:831:4201:7D8C:404D:D70F:967E (talk) 22:26, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The sources in the article for the 1 June protests clearly state that the protests happened on 1 June. If the 14 June protests should be mentioned, they should be added to what is already present. —C.Fred (talk) 00:22, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no mention of rioting?

The word "riot" is mentioned only once in the article, in relation to riot gear. Why is there no mention of the many riots the movement is responsible for, causing more than $1 billion in damage? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:38A0:8540:40A8:399A:CFF9:5CF (talk) 23:07, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide references to reliable sources supporting your claims for the movement's responsibility in riots and the monetary evaluation of damages, with a more specific figure than "many". The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 01:25, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-property-damage-276c9bcc-a455-4067-b06a-66f9db4cea9c.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top cutterx2202 (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Did you bother to read the article? Quote:

A company called Property Claim Services (PCS) has tracked insurance claims related to civil disorder since 1950.

PCS, a unit of Verisk Analytics, won't reveal an exact dollar figure from this year's violence because it wants to sell that data to clients.

So these are insurance claims, not awards. And people can lodge claims for damn near anything, it doesn't mean they're getting paid. Plus, the author of this article didn't actually have the actual dollar figure because PCS won't give that out without getting paid.
Which all boils down to this source not having actual details, because the insurance company A) only has claims, not payouts, to report; B) won't actually release details without getting paid; and C) does not detail that these damages are due to BLM, just "protests" in general. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 14:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Making a false insurance claim is a crime. The numbers are safely assumed accurate. It'd be on you to prove the riots enumerated are NOT BLM, as they line up precisely with known BLM riot dates. cutterx2202 (talk) 15:19, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]