Bad Boys II

[Dill]

(05-31-2020, 11:30 AM)hollodero Wrote: I still think the black-owned store comment was totally unnecessary. The message could have well done without that addendum. And "we shall not destroy each other" quite reads as an affirmation to rather destroy some non-black stores. I know, I know, he probably did not mean it that way. But it was a thoughtless comment and you did not quite change my mind on that. It was not wise to bring that up, imho.

I think we can be 100% sure he did not mean it that way if his statement was preceded by this:

"people will exploit that and change the focus into demonizing those that conduct themselves in a violent way rather than those saying, as the Floyd family is saying, we want justice."

Saying that riot violence in the name of "justice for blacks" ends up perpetrating injustice against blacks seems rather a useful--and forceful--point to make alongside warnings that such violence also diverts a public demand for accountability for police to accountability for protestors.

Sharpton likely (and rightly) assumed that among his addressees were people who would consider the burning of white-owned businesses just righteous blowback, but might pause to reconsider if reminded that black owned businesses were destroyed too. So I'm seeing precision address where you see thoughtless and unnecessary "tribalism."

To get to an "affirmation to rather destroy some non-black stores," I would need to see something altogether different preceding Sharpton's statement, like "white-owned stores have more valuable goods" or "Think about whom you are REALLY angry at when you want to burn a store." But Sharpton says nothing like that. All pretense of 'payback' or blowback or interest in justice is gone if burning white-owned stores leads to the burning of black-owned as well--that's the point added by the "totally unnecessary" comment on black-owned stores, not "aim better."