On the first part. People, especially comfortable people, have grown used to the idea that politics are separated out of their leisure activities. They want to forget politics for a while. They don't want their entertainment to be mixed with their politics. Now, this is a very privileged position, to be able to separate your politics, to compartmentalize your life in such a way. But many people grew accustomed to it.
Now, they cannot escape politics in many areas they used to. Turn on any sports program and there are politics. Try watching ESPN, and it's politics, politics, politics. There is a lot of resentment about that.
After the George Floyd murder, corporations got in on the act. Back in early June, any store that sent out emails to me seemingly had a comment about Floyd and BLM. Now, I never mind these things. I support BLM. But it was getting a bitch much even for me. Do I really need political statements accompanying my coupons and special deals?
Now imagine someone who doesn't support the movement or who really doesn't want politics in their face from all quarters? They grow fatigued. And then they grow resentful. Then they get angry. Again, this is operative privilege. I'm explaining, not excusing.
Prong Two: The Media. 95% of the protests have been peaceful. It's the 5% that make the social media rounds. It's what people see. It becomes the face of the movement. It really doesn't help when radicals make crazy ass statements like looting is a form of reparations. That shit made headlines. A lot of people saw that one. Is it indicative of the movement? No. When BLM activists decided to go into suburbs and make a ruckus to dislodge white suburbanites of their comfort and distance, guess what was all over social media? And suddenly you have the, "They will come into your neighborhood and create chaos and problems," narrative all over the place. A narrative Trump seized upon.
Stupid makes more headlines than intelligent.
Another problem is that social media have made everything much more fragmented. When you go back and read about the Civil Rights era of the 50s and 60s, you had a bunch recognizable leaders, figures invested with authority that people listened to. We don't really have that nowadays. Not just with BLM, but look at how the Occupy movement utterly collapsed. Too many factions, too many people with FB groups and Twitter accounts. Too many disparate interests. Who is a leader in the BLM? You and I could give a few names perhaps, but they definitely don't have the authority, gravitas, or wide exposure that figures of the past once had.
It creates a lot of problems. A movement can be hijacked by the most radical. It can lose focus and become scattershot. Living in the Bay Area, I have experience with groups like Antifa, Black Bloc, By Any Means Necessary, etc. They're all on the Left. They're all seeking justice or to change the system or to lift oppression. Their methods are not the same. Their penchant for violence are different.
I don't have any solutions, to be honest. But we did see an uptick in white support for police reform and BLM in June. But once the media went All Riots All the Time, the support started sinking. Once the radicals started getting all the coverage, impressions and support changed.
I wish I knew the answers on how to turn that around. I really do.
= new reply since forum marked as read
