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.
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.
Overall you ignored the context of Pete’s article. People said they were different to separate the “protesters” from Marxism or communism. The person you used as an example you described as “quasi-ancom”.
Being an useful idiot does not negate connections or actions. Let’s say NORML was a Marxist org. I support legalization but not Marxism. If I show up to a “protest“ organized by NORML, or donate to them, it is actually worse that I don't know it’s their “protest”, they have chapters, or how they are ran. I can’t say that I’m separate from them. I could argue (foolishly) that it’s worth supporting Marxism to legalize weed, but I can’t honestly say I’m not supporting Marxism. Being a useful idiot is not a good quality, nor an excuse.
I think Patrisse Cullors being a Marxist is to miss the point. She is a FBI informant. My reasonings for is first, the goals of the website do not state investigate the murder of the Ferguson Protestors. She literally helped organized the Ferguson protests. If I were serious about making changes my first move would be protecting my organization from retaliation. Second, she is married to the founder of BLM Toronto, an organization so useless it can have POC murder by the police and can't get the names to recognized. In addition, BLM Toronto's biggest claim to fame was freezing a gay pride parade (this accomplished nothing other than dividing natural allies).
It doesn’t matter if I hated Bill Weld. if I donated to his campaign, I supported his bid to become VP. Not all libertarians or Libertarians supported Weld or his campaign. False equivalency. The whole point of the argument was that people were supporting Marxism and (honest or not) claiming they weren’t supporting Marxism.
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
YW
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.
Overall you ignored the context of Pete’s article. People said they were different to separate the “protesters” from Marxism or communism. The person you used as an example you described as “quasi-ancom”.
Being an useful idiot does not negate connections or actions. Let’s say NORML was a Marxist org. I support legalization but not Marxism. If I show up to a “protest“ organized by NORML, or donate to them, it is actually worse that I don't know it’s their “protest”, they have chapters, or how they are ran. I can’t say that I’m separate from them. I could argue (foolishly) that it’s worth supporting Marxism to legalize weed, but I can’t honestly say I’m not supporting Marxism. Being a useful idiot is not a good quality, nor an excuse.
I think Patrisse Cullors being a Marxist is to miss the point. She is a FBI informant. My reasonings for is first, the goals of the website do not state investigate the murder of the Ferguson Protestors. She literally helped organized the Ferguson protests. If I were serious about making changes my first move would be protecting my organization from retaliation. Second, she is married to the founder of BLM Toronto, an organization so useless it can have POC murder by the police and can't get the names to recognized. In addition, BLM Toronto's biggest claim to fame was freezing a gay pride parade (this accomplished nothing other than dividing natural allies).
It doesn’t matter if I hated Bill Weld. if I donated to his campaign, I supported his bid to become VP. Not all libertarians or Libertarians supported Weld or his campaign. False equivalency. The whole point of the argument was that people were supporting Marxism and (honest or not) claiming they weren’t supporting Marxism.