Destroying the 'BLM the Organization and the Grassroots Movement are Unrelated' Myth
During the riots and protests that happened after the release of the George Floyd video in May, I decided to look into what exactly “Black Lives Matter” is. Is it an on-the-ground, decentralized movement? Is it a .org? After I was made aware of audio in which BLM founder Patrisse Cullors admitted she was a trained Marxist, and I podcasted about it, I was assured by their supporters, even those in the Libertarian Party, that it was both and that the people on the street had nothing to do with the organization. Well, that was a lie.
Apparently the “chapters” of BLM aren’t too happy with the organization they are associated with. A website popped up with the title, “STATEMENT FROM THE FRONTLINES OF BLM,” in which the “grassroots” that allegedly had nothing to do with the organization lay out their list of grievances. I compared the statements made on this website to verified Facebook pages of BLM chapters and it is posted on them.
The first paragraph destroys the motte-and-bailey fallacy I have been subjected to since June:
It was recently declared that Patrisse Cullors was appointed the Executive Director to the Black Lives Matter Global Network (BLMGN) Foundation. Since then, two new Black Lives Matter formations have been announced to the public: a Black Lives Matter Political Action Committee, and BLM Grassroots. BLM Grassroots was allegedly created to support the organizational needs of chapters, separate from the financial functions of BLMGN. We, the undersigned chapters, believe that all of these events occurred without democracy, and assert that it was without the knowledge of the majority of Black Lives Matters chapters across the country and world.
I was told they have nothing to do with BLM the organization run by the “trained Marxist,” Patrisse Cullors. In this statement it is not only clear they are affiliated, but that they have a democratic say in the organization’s affairs. And they are upset.
The statement continues:
Since the establishment of BLMGN, our chapters have consistently raised concerns about financial transparency, decision making, and accountability. Despite years of effort, no acceptable internal process of accountability has ever been produced by BLMGN and these recent events have undermined the efforts of chapters seeking to democratize its processes and resources.
Oh yes, I will beat that horse even though it ceases to live. I will.
They then make a list of grievances, starting with the trained Marxist the people “on-the-ground” aren’t supposed to know exists:
Patrisse Cullors, as the sole board member of BLMGN, became Executive Director against the will of most chapters and without their knowledge.
They continue:
The newly announced formation, BLM Grassroots, does not have the support of and was created without consultation with the vast majority of chapters.
So, not only are the grassroots supported by BLM the organization, but they have a say in their affairs. This is not what I was told about 500 times this year.
Onward:
The formation of BLM Grassroots effectively separated the majority of chapters from BLMGN without their consent and interrupted the active process of accountability that was being established by those chapters.
BLMGN, the organization, was part of the “grassroot” chapters. This ends any discussion and decimates the motte-and-bailey fallacy I’ve spent a good part of this year calling BS on.
This here is just icing on the cake:
For years there has been inquiry regarding the financial operations of BLMGN and no acceptable process of either public or internal transparency about the unknown millions of dollars donated to BLMGN, which has certainly increased during this time of pandemic and rebellion.
To the best of our knowledge, most chapters have received little to no financial support from BLMGN since the launch in 2013. It was only in the last few months that selected chapters appear to have been invited to apply for a $500,000 grant created with resources generated because of the organizing labor of chapters. This is not the equity and financial accountability we deserve.
Does anyone out there still want to play games and say that BLM on the ground is separate from BLM the organization?
The last sentence in the statement:
As we collectively determine next steps, we encourage our supporters to donate directly to chapters, who represent the frontline of Black Lives Matter.
Why donate directly? Because the organization we have been associated with this whole time failed us.
The moral of this whole story? In this corrupt system what would lead you to believe there was purity to be found? This is the same old story; money and power. And in this case the money is needed to push forth an on-the-ground agenda of “democracy” (Marxism/socialism) and they will use whatever event they can (the death of George Floyd) to further it. Skepticism is not a character flaw.
I have said they are different, I went to a protest, since that I have been actively anti BLM. This just puts it in perspective, thanks Mr. meme man
While I take all of this and agree, I will quibble in one place. When people I know who went to protests say "on the ground" or "grass roots" they literally mean "me and people like me" who aren't part of the organization. In that sense, they are different. These folks aren't part of the org. That is, I think they aren't engaging in a Motte and Bailey, so much as engaged in self-focused ignorant wishful thinking.
For instance, I didn't present it the way you did, but I just presented the gist of the new grievances from the chapters, in summary, to my quasi-ancom (latino, if it matters) housemate, and (a) he didn't know chapters existed, (b) knew the org existed but scrunched his face up in an "oof" when he found out there were and the central org hasn't opened it's coffers, and (c) didn't know about the executive director shenanigans, and (d) said "damn, that's a real problem" and indicated he was going to go back and check what he did with his donations to see where they went.
So, this article is important context, and valuable, but also, many are going to make the claim that the grass roots isn't the org, because they are like my housemate - grass roots supporters who barely knew there was an org, or how "org" it really was.
This may change. If anything these scandals may separate the org from the intention. That would be healthy. Very. But I think most of the differentiation by well intended people has been in this sense, not playing a Motte and Bailey trick. (That said, my experience is driven mostly outside of social media, and I only speak or my own experience here, I can't generalize it)
To reach those, this is why I communicated this article differently, without the "see, I told you it was garbage" flavor. :). That said, give the shit Pete took online, the tone of this article, in response to that experience, does seem quite warranted.