Helping to understand what it is like to be black


i think we're splitting hairs here. I'm not going to put words into fatcat's mouth, but that was probably a poorly worded post if we're being honest. I think the point is that some of what we see shows more than a tiny handful of trouble makers, but I genuinely don't think anyone is suggesting, or has said, that it's the majority who are looking to cause trouble

as I have just posted on another thread, some are seeking equality, a very small minority are seeking revenge and are using violence as a means to vent their anger
 
Last edited:
i think we're splitting hairs here. I'm not going to put words into fatcat's mouth, but that was probably a poorly worded post if we're being honest.

I don't know if it was a poorly worded post, or whether he was expressing his thoughts but that's up to FatCat, and I'm not about to second guess him. What I will say is this. The BLM protests are extremely emotionally charged and you only have to listen to the many black commentators on TV and radio to realise this. People have been fighting an uphill battle against racial prejudice for generations and when protests against institutional racism and police brutality are met with more of the same it doesn't take much for this fear and sheer frustration to boil over and turn into violence and vandalism, not tempered by those opportunists who are there for just that, whatever the cause.

And remember, the TV reports show us the sharp end of the protest because this is the news, and footage of tens of thousands of people behaving themselves isn't good TV. So when FatCat says "I’m saying it wasn’t a small minority as is being reported" what does he mean, reported by who? Is he disagreeing with the media or the people who were there? He doesn't say, and without clarification it sounds like a guess but he asks evidence of others.

Whilst I'm talking about clarity can you explain from your last post how you are differentiating between I think the point is that some of what we see shows more than a tiny handful of trouble makers in your first paragraph, and a very small minority are seeking revenge and are using violence as a means to vent their anger in your second?
 
I don't know if it was a poorly worded post, or whether he was expressing his thoughts but that's up to FatCat, and I'm not about to second guess him. What I will say is this. The BLM protests are extremely emotionally charged and you only have to listen to the many black commentators on TV and radio to realise this. People have been fighting an uphill battle against racial prejudice for generations and when protests against institutional racism and police brutality are met with more of the same it doesn't take much for this fear and sheer frustration to boil over and turn into violence and vandalism, not tempered by those opportunists who are there for just that, whatever the cause.

And remember, the TV reports show us the sharp end of the protest because this is the news, and footage of tens of thousands of people behaving themselves isn't good TV. So when FatCat says "I’m saying it wasn’t a small minority as is being reported" what does he mean, reported by who? Is he disagreeing with the media or the people who were there? He doesn't say, and without clarification it sounds like a guess but he asks evidence of others.

Whilst I'm talking about clarity can you explain from your last post how you are differentiating between I think the point is that some of what we see shows more than a tiny handful of trouble makers in your first paragraph, and a very small minority are seeking revenge and are using violence as a means to vent their anger in your second?

I'm saying that some of the media, be it mainstream news or SM, are focusing on the violence and thus perhaps suggesting it is more prevalent (i.e. What we see) than my own view that I believe it is actually a small minority who have resorted to violence.

Does that make it a bit clearer? I appreciate my post was perhaps a bit clunky
 
Back
Top