We’re knee-deep in slogans lately; Stop The Steal, Trans Rights Are Human Rights, Abolish The Police, and, of course, Black Lives Matter. The power of slogans is that, if they’re well chosen, they defy criticism. The slogan Black Lives Matter is so simple, so unambiguous, so
I remember when George Floyd was killed or murdered, whichever is your preference, that the people I know were fed up, and agreed there needed to be police reform.
Then BLM or the left got hold of it and turned it all into, either you agree with them a hundred percent or you are a racist. No chance for discussion or debate with hate flying everywhere. Similar to what the Trans movement is doing now. It's all very sad, because it's a wasted opportunity that is now gone.
For those who defend Black Lives Matter: Most of what you are describing as its accomplishments are really the accomplishments of the slogan, and of the spontaneous arising of demonstrations that gave rise to that slogan. The BLM organization did nothing but co-op that slogan and collect money on it's alleged behalf. A court ruled many years ago, when someone tried to sue BLM, that there was no such organization, and therefore couldn't be sued. It was only much later that (a couple of )organizations claimed to be BLM and started collecting money in its name. There was even a lawsuit over who had the right to use the name.
BLM unfortunately exemplifies what happens so often with non-profits, getting seduced by all the $$$ pouring in. It's what happened to so many televangelists and so many charities and do-good orgs over the years. My ex-partner, who was a journalist, said he did a story once on charities and found 50% of them misused funds. (that was a very long time ago, so not sure what the number is now).
All I know is that when the money rolls in, the temptation becomes almost irrestible.
My issue with their name is that it suggests *all* Black Lives Matter when clearly they didn't; they focused only on black lives taken by white cops. "Law enforcement has to be better than this," my liberal friends told me. "They're entrusted with protecting our neighbourhoods. The police are *brutal* to the black community." Well, that last part was true and I went along with it for awhile; this was back when it was commonly believed that white cops were regularly murdering hundreds, if not thousands of black people every year; black hotheads (don't know if BLM was associated with this or not) spoke apocalyptically about 'genocide' and the 'war on black people'. Later it came out that the number of black lives killed by white cops every year was 20-30, with a similar number of white victims slightly higher. None of them unimportant, but a far cry from a genocidal war on black people.
Now that it's crystal-clear the majority of black lives are still mostly threatened by other black people, BLM needs to change their name to ALL Black Lives Matter and start doing something to *really* put a dent into black deaths.
"My issue with their name is that it suggests *all* Black Lives Matter when clearly they didn't; they focused only on black lives taken by white cops"
100% my issue with the name too. There are so many cases of black parents grieving their sons or daughters lost to gun violence saying, "I thought black lives were supposed to matter," and asking why nothing had been done to help their communities or draw attention to their problems.
I think you're right. The money and attention very quickly became more important than the cause. I'm not even sure they'd thought about what the cause was.
I'm surprised you see that name "Black Lives Matter" as defying criticism. It would have taken just one numeral to clarify it to the point of defying all criticism. BML2. There is, unfortunately, a lot of dogma from those, quite often millennials, who think they understand the issues and the history perfectly, that readily telegraphs ONLY Black Lives Matter.
And then there's that undertow that has been there the last fifty years I've lived as the white in-law who married into the family and community (black) and lived there a lifetime. Currently the matriarch of a family of color. I was there because I was from a recently genocided-into-extinction-persecuted-minority who wanted to be around my own kind to the greatest extent possible under the circumstances. But there are reflexes baked into the American psyche that morphs any commonality on that subject into a competition. (I believe it's at the very heart and soul of the racist divide, as in conquer, that glues this mess in perpetuity.)
Consequently, the reflex is to take any statement I make about a shared experience and equality and dish out a dismissal. A competition. It's quite a cracked part of the American psyche, but there it is.
People want to compete with your end-stage racism experience and outdo it. No, you really don't want people using baby's head for a football, and that's going on in every football game, backyard, local, semi-pro to pro, in the country, everywhere, all at once, till you've got no babies left. But that reflex is common as dirt. (I know that sounds unbelievable, but that's the quandary we're in. We were persecuted so sadistically that if we try talking about it, it sounds like WE'RE deranged.)
The end result is an incessant snubbing of my existential dilemna as less than, not as important, not to be considered. Only black lives matter. It's there. It's not just me. I've often heard assorted white or light grumblings to that effect. It's the need persecuted people like us have for the Moral Superiority of the Oppressed. My people have actually been considerably worse about it, part of the reason we got no support when we needed it most. But we needed it all those centuries to survive, however many drawbacks there are to it, and I think I've seen them all. It's a stumbling block that is maintaining the status quo. The stumbling block POC are polishing and reverencing and protecting with all their might.
And yes, like you said, if you balk at that term, there's a knee jerk reflex that you're just being racist. So, of course, likely no one will get to the end of this statement. They will have already instinctively reacted that none of it matters. My people don't matter.
Probably not, I mean, once they've gotten to that Final Solution and the only true accounts about you are buried somewhere on Archive.org, you really DON'T matter at all. Which brings us to that thing I can never walk away from, no matter how much of a pain in the ass people can be. What I see in them. Us, alive and well. I will be in love with that sight for as long as I draw breath. Longer.
If you look at the Amazon reviews for the book just linked, you'll find the very woke one-star review from the punk I'm absolutely sure did not read it, lambasting me that I had the nerve to think that what my family, my people have been through could possibly compare to the racism black America faces. Like I said, who are we to think WE matter? And he says it with the certainty of a religious zealot.
"It would have taken just one numeral to clarify it to the point of defying all criticism. BML2."
Wow, yeah. I think this would actually have been far more powerful than BLM. Still based on a slightly faulty premise, but wipes away the opportunity for divisiveness pretty much instantly.
RE: the idea that ONLY Black Lives Matter in general, we've talked about this before, and I don't want to rehash it, but I'll repeat the point I've made previously, which is I think the trouble you're running into is demanding that people see two different things as the same just because you insist that they're the same.
Racism against black people in America is its own beast that can't be compared easily to other forms of bigotry elsewhere. That doesn't necessarily mean it's *worse*, or that no other groups of people have suffered. But your resistance to acknowledging that it's different will always get people's backs up. Because it makes them feel that you're talking down to them about something you don't understand the details of.
You can recognise that, and find a better way to express yourself and what happened to your people, or you can keep having needless arguments.
Agree that the organization BLM is corrupt and irrelevant while the slogan has made the issue more visible, but is still not leading to measurable reductions in police brutality generally or against blacks specifically.that I am aware.
The United States leads the developed world in the number of police caused.homicides. It also leads by far in the number of privately owned guns in circulation--about 400 million for a country of 330 million.
Coincidence? I don’t think so. Yes there are bad cops. Yes there are racist cops. But even the good cops are terrified that everyone is carrying a hot piece. Cops react by becoming militarized and paranoid and in many cases gangsterfied. Not so in most other parts of the world.
So I blame the sick gun culture here and the worm politicians who enable it.
"but is still not leading to measurable reductions in police brutality generally or against blacks specifically.that I am aware."
It's worse than that. It's led to measurable *increases*. Or let's be fair and say that while BLM has been active there's been a measurable increase. I don't know if there's a causal relationship there. Guns are definitely a huge part of the equation. But as we saw in the case of Tyre Nichols or George Floyd or Tony Timpa, they aren't the only factor.
Yes you are right. It’s not the whole picture. There is just this brutality that some cops exhibit with clearly unarmed people. Among both black and white and Asian and Latino cops towards people of all races.
I wonder what other members of law enforcement have to say when they hear about such things. Sure, there will be the cohort that just blindly defends them—the thin blue line and all that. But not all. I happen to know a couple of retired cops who are awesome people. Clearly other cops would have an inside perspective on how the dehumanization starts. Anyone know of explanations from other cops?
Not for you, not for me, but most of the country is participating in social media, where attention is the whole raison d’être for nearly everyone on there.
Got no problem with ‘end police brutality’ as a replacement for the BLM slogan. But let’s realize what it means also.
I sat with the officers at a local station who described that they can no longer shoot first to protect and defend human life. They need to wait to take fire to return fire. So...they are more at risk and so is the nearby public. What exactly do you want the police to do?
If the priority is protecting the criminals from possible fire from police, who are you putting at risk with that policy?
It’s always been a problem for me - who’s rights are more important? A person wildly firing a gun who damages the lives of all around - or the innocent caught in the cross fire? When will we stop making excuses for behavior that threatens lives?
"I sat with the officers at a local station who described that they can no longer shoot first to protect and defend human life."
I get this, but for the vast majority of people, I don't think there's a huge problem in recognising the difference between shooting somebody to save a life and shooting somebody who obviously poses no threat.
Ma'Khia Bryant springs to mind. The cop who shot her obviously saved the life of another black girl by doing so. And though a few grifters tried to spin this into a racist shooting, I think most people were clear that the cop did the right thing.
The issue comes when the victim isn't firing a gun or even breaking any laws. I've seen so many videos over the years of police officers firing blindly at people or vehicles where there was clearly no threat. That's the kind of police brutality that people are worried about.
And I of course agree with you on police action where there was clearly no threat.
But you and I both know a camera is an eye and that eye is directed. We can’t be in the moment and see it from all perspectives and so it’s difficult to make a viable judgment.
As added nuance, officer training protocols (at least in this progressive city) were changed and it was a blanket change. They don’t get to choose. They have to take a shot first, or they have violated the rules. That creates greater risk in an already fraught job.
All that said, I, like many, react in apprehension and fear when I see an armed uniformed person. They have all the power. They are the enforcement arm of the government.
Controlling the use of deadly force is incredibly important and I would like to see more training and education for law enforcement, not less…as well as psychological testing before anyone is issued a weapon. It’s simply too crucial a role to take lightly.
Bane thinks that "at least we are talking about it now", but the key question is whether the influence of BLM the organization has been to foster productive or counter-productive discussion (or yelling at each other).
Should we praise Trump because we are talking more about election integrity after his allegations about fraud? Yes, it's in the news more, but the content and flavor of the attention may have polluted that discussion rather than illuminated it.
It's not true that all publicity is good publicity. BLM's framing of the issue can both raise the profile and poison the well.
"the key question is whether the influence of BLM the organization has been to foster productive or counter-productive discussion (or yelling at each other)."
It's endlessly infuriating that so many people seem incapable of telling the difference nowadays.
Haha, I'll keep that point about Trump in my back pocket next time I find myself in one of those conversations. Excellent comparison.
And I find you stubborn and unreasonable. You don't seem to be able to hear much of anything I say. I have a rare perspective that has merit and should be considered. You aren't anyone to do it. I thought that before, and I think it still.
You interpret what I say very strangely. Quite a bias there.
I have tried endless approaches. We're not talking about rationality. We're not talking about semantics. We're not talking about definitions. We're talking about brick walls. There's a significant emotional reservoir that snarls up an appropriate response. I cannot resolve those emotional needs for anyone else, and as long as it remains unresolved for them, they will continue to fail me with a fairly relentless consistency.
Fortunately, I am surrounded by people of color who adore me. Some of them cry when I go home. To get out there in the world and try to meet frozen needs so that my own frozen needs can be met is a fool's errand. Where would that energy be coming from? There again, it's presuming I have more and should share my largesse. It's simply not the reality, just the illusions of this form of racism. I will never get the emotional response and support that would benefit me on my own issues. Won't happen in my lifetime. I've been asked all that while to give other people what I need, with no reciprocation following. I'll leave as much input on the issue as I'm capable of and perhaps in the future there will be a generation who can assume it's responsibilities to the rest of the persecuted minorities in the world who are looking to them, the most successful and influential ever.
When your family entails both populations and that's who you know intimately, you are very aware of how easily we can draw analogies between the two. You'll sit with one group in the morning, and the other in that same evening and hear the SAME conversation. It's just the events referenced will be taking place on different sides of the planet. You don't want to see this. I've seen that in earlier conversations. I can't make you see or feel anything you don't want to see or feel. There will always be an inequity between us, in that I care far more about what happens to the people you are a part of, than you will ever care about mine. I have resigned myself to that. Though I wont' stop talking about it. You can be sure of that. You're not being logical. You're being hard-hearted.
I can only speak about my experience of your approach, but it's consistently been accusatory and stubborn.
I'm not sure why you're telling me that lots of people of colour love you. Ido t doubt it or think it's anything unusual. You seem to think of people of colour (or "the people I'm a part of) as some kind of club.
I'm trying to explain to you, for your own happiness and understanding, that you'll annoy and eventually alienate many people of colour for doing this. This isn't about brick walls. At least in my case. It's about your absolute refusal to actually listen.
Again, you do you. I'm just offering an explanation for why you might be getting the reaction you're getting.
Success leaves clues and Steve QJ leaves them in the results of his writing. It is generally wise to take things to heart that people like him have to say. Sometimes that means we must look inward.
I remember when George Floyd was killed or murdered, whichever is your preference, that the people I know were fed up, and agreed there needed to be police reform.
Then BLM or the left got hold of it and turned it all into, either you agree with them a hundred percent or you are a racist. No chance for discussion or debate with hate flying everywhere. Similar to what the Trans movement is doing now. It's all very sad, because it's a wasted opportunity that is now gone.
So much activism today works directly against interests of the people it's supposed to be helping. It's so frustrating.
For those who defend Black Lives Matter: Most of what you are describing as its accomplishments are really the accomplishments of the slogan, and of the spontaneous arising of demonstrations that gave rise to that slogan. The BLM organization did nothing but co-op that slogan and collect money on it's alleged behalf. A court ruled many years ago, when someone tried to sue BLM, that there was no such organization, and therefore couldn't be sued. It was only much later that (a couple of )organizations claimed to be BLM and started collecting money in its name. There was even a lawsuit over who had the right to use the name.
BLM unfortunately exemplifies what happens so often with non-profits, getting seduced by all the $$$ pouring in. It's what happened to so many televangelists and so many charities and do-good orgs over the years. My ex-partner, who was a journalist, said he did a story once on charities and found 50% of them misused funds. (that was a very long time ago, so not sure what the number is now).
All I know is that when the money rolls in, the temptation becomes almost irrestible.
My issue with their name is that it suggests *all* Black Lives Matter when clearly they didn't; they focused only on black lives taken by white cops. "Law enforcement has to be better than this," my liberal friends told me. "They're entrusted with protecting our neighbourhoods. The police are *brutal* to the black community." Well, that last part was true and I went along with it for awhile; this was back when it was commonly believed that white cops were regularly murdering hundreds, if not thousands of black people every year; black hotheads (don't know if BLM was associated with this or not) spoke apocalyptically about 'genocide' and the 'war on black people'. Later it came out that the number of black lives killed by white cops every year was 20-30, with a similar number of white victims slightly higher. None of them unimportant, but a far cry from a genocidal war on black people.
Now that it's crystal-clear the majority of black lives are still mostly threatened by other black people, BLM needs to change their name to ALL Black Lives Matter and start doing something to *really* put a dent into black deaths.
But as you note, Steve, that's not their point.
"My issue with their name is that it suggests *all* Black Lives Matter when clearly they didn't; they focused only on black lives taken by white cops"
100% my issue with the name too. There are so many cases of black parents grieving their sons or daughters lost to gun violence saying, "I thought black lives were supposed to matter," and asking why nothing had been done to help their communities or draw attention to their problems.
I think you're right. The money and attention very quickly became more important than the cause. I'm not even sure they'd thought about what the cause was.
I'm surprised you see that name "Black Lives Matter" as defying criticism. It would have taken just one numeral to clarify it to the point of defying all criticism. BML2. There is, unfortunately, a lot of dogma from those, quite often millennials, who think they understand the issues and the history perfectly, that readily telegraphs ONLY Black Lives Matter.
And then there's that undertow that has been there the last fifty years I've lived as the white in-law who married into the family and community (black) and lived there a lifetime. Currently the matriarch of a family of color. I was there because I was from a recently genocided-into-extinction-persecuted-minority who wanted to be around my own kind to the greatest extent possible under the circumstances. But there are reflexes baked into the American psyche that morphs any commonality on that subject into a competition. (I believe it's at the very heart and soul of the racist divide, as in conquer, that glues this mess in perpetuity.)
Consequently, the reflex is to take any statement I make about a shared experience and equality and dish out a dismissal. A competition. It's quite a cracked part of the American psyche, but there it is.
People want to compete with your end-stage racism experience and outdo it. No, you really don't want people using baby's head for a football, and that's going on in every football game, backyard, local, semi-pro to pro, in the country, everywhere, all at once, till you've got no babies left. But that reflex is common as dirt. (I know that sounds unbelievable, but that's the quandary we're in. We were persecuted so sadistically that if we try talking about it, it sounds like WE'RE deranged.)
The end result is an incessant snubbing of my existential dilemna as less than, not as important, not to be considered. Only black lives matter. It's there. It's not just me. I've often heard assorted white or light grumblings to that effect. It's the need persecuted people like us have for the Moral Superiority of the Oppressed. My people have actually been considerably worse about it, part of the reason we got no support when we needed it most. But we needed it all those centuries to survive, however many drawbacks there are to it, and I think I've seen them all. It's a stumbling block that is maintaining the status quo. The stumbling block POC are polishing and reverencing and protecting with all their might.
And yes, like you said, if you balk at that term, there's a knee jerk reflex that you're just being racist. So, of course, likely no one will get to the end of this statement. They will have already instinctively reacted that none of it matters. My people don't matter.
Probably not, I mean, once they've gotten to that Final Solution and the only true accounts about you are buried somewhere on Archive.org, you really DON'T matter at all. Which brings us to that thing I can never walk away from, no matter how much of a pain in the ass people can be. What I see in them. Us, alive and well. I will be in love with that sight for as long as I draw breath. Longer.
https://lindakerescarter.works/as-bad-as-it-gets/
If you look at the Amazon reviews for the book just linked, you'll find the very woke one-star review from the punk I'm absolutely sure did not read it, lambasting me that I had the nerve to think that what my family, my people have been through could possibly compare to the racism black America faces. Like I said, who are we to think WE matter? And he says it with the certainty of a religious zealot.
"It would have taken just one numeral to clarify it to the point of defying all criticism. BML2."
Wow, yeah. I think this would actually have been far more powerful than BLM. Still based on a slightly faulty premise, but wipes away the opportunity for divisiveness pretty much instantly.
RE: the idea that ONLY Black Lives Matter in general, we've talked about this before, and I don't want to rehash it, but I'll repeat the point I've made previously, which is I think the trouble you're running into is demanding that people see two different things as the same just because you insist that they're the same.
Racism against black people in America is its own beast that can't be compared easily to other forms of bigotry elsewhere. That doesn't necessarily mean it's *worse*, or that no other groups of people have suffered. But your resistance to acknowledging that it's different will always get people's backs up. Because it makes them feel that you're talking down to them about something you don't understand the details of.
You can recognise that, and find a better way to express yourself and what happened to your people, or you can keep having needless arguments.
I wrote a response to this this morning. Did it disappear, or is it in moderation? I hope re-commenting doesn't erase it.
No, it didn't disappear, it's below. Looks like you posted it as a reply to the post instead of to my comment.
Agree that the organization BLM is corrupt and irrelevant while the slogan has made the issue more visible, but is still not leading to measurable reductions in police brutality generally or against blacks specifically.that I am aware.
The United States leads the developed world in the number of police caused.homicides. It also leads by far in the number of privately owned guns in circulation--about 400 million for a country of 330 million.
Coincidence? I don’t think so. Yes there are bad cops. Yes there are racist cops. But even the good cops are terrified that everyone is carrying a hot piece. Cops react by becoming militarized and paranoid and in many cases gangsterfied. Not so in most other parts of the world.
So I blame the sick gun culture here and the worm politicians who enable it.
"but is still not leading to measurable reductions in police brutality generally or against blacks specifically.that I am aware."
It's worse than that. It's led to measurable *increases*. Or let's be fair and say that while BLM has been active there's been a measurable increase. I don't know if there's a causal relationship there. Guns are definitely a huge part of the equation. But as we saw in the case of Tyre Nichols or George Floyd or Tony Timpa, they aren't the only factor.
Yes you are right. It’s not the whole picture. There is just this brutality that some cops exhibit with clearly unarmed people. Among both black and white and Asian and Latino cops towards people of all races.
I wonder what other members of law enforcement have to say when they hear about such things. Sure, there will be the cohort that just blindly defends them—the thin blue line and all that. But not all. I happen to know a couple of retired cops who are awesome people. Clearly other cops would have an inside perspective on how the dehumanization starts. Anyone know of explanations from other cops?
“I don’t think attention is an end in itself. “
Not for you, not for me, but most of the country is participating in social media, where attention is the whole raison d’être for nearly everyone on there.
And for the SJWs who comprise BLM, most of all.
Yep, social media has warped people's minds in so many ways beyond selfie addictions and even susceptibility to misinformation.
This idea that "sparking a conversation" regardless of whether that conversation is intelligent or meaningful or leads to action is one of them.
Got no problem with ‘end police brutality’ as a replacement for the BLM slogan. But let’s realize what it means also.
I sat with the officers at a local station who described that they can no longer shoot first to protect and defend human life. They need to wait to take fire to return fire. So...they are more at risk and so is the nearby public. What exactly do you want the police to do?
If the priority is protecting the criminals from possible fire from police, who are you putting at risk with that policy?
It’s always been a problem for me - who’s rights are more important? A person wildly firing a gun who damages the lives of all around - or the innocent caught in the cross fire? When will we stop making excuses for behavior that threatens lives?
"I sat with the officers at a local station who described that they can no longer shoot first to protect and defend human life."
I get this, but for the vast majority of people, I don't think there's a huge problem in recognising the difference between shooting somebody to save a life and shooting somebody who obviously poses no threat.
Ma'Khia Bryant springs to mind. The cop who shot her obviously saved the life of another black girl by doing so. And though a few grifters tried to spin this into a racist shooting, I think most people were clear that the cop did the right thing.
The issue comes when the victim isn't firing a gun or even breaking any laws. I've seen so many videos over the years of police officers firing blindly at people or vehicles where there was clearly no threat. That's the kind of police brutality that people are worried about.
And I of course agree with you on police action where there was clearly no threat.
But you and I both know a camera is an eye and that eye is directed. We can’t be in the moment and see it from all perspectives and so it’s difficult to make a viable judgment.
As added nuance, officer training protocols (at least in this progressive city) were changed and it was a blanket change. They don’t get to choose. They have to take a shot first, or they have violated the rules. That creates greater risk in an already fraught job.
All that said, I, like many, react in apprehension and fear when I see an armed uniformed person. They have all the power. They are the enforcement arm of the government.
Controlling the use of deadly force is incredibly important and I would like to see more training and education for law enforcement, not less…as well as psychological testing before anyone is issued a weapon. It’s simply too crucial a role to take lightly.
You keep hitting them out of the park, Steve.
Bane thinks that "at least we are talking about it now", but the key question is whether the influence of BLM the organization has been to foster productive or counter-productive discussion (or yelling at each other).
Should we praise Trump because we are talking more about election integrity after his allegations about fraud? Yes, it's in the news more, but the content and flavor of the attention may have polluted that discussion rather than illuminated it.
It's not true that all publicity is good publicity. BLM's framing of the issue can both raise the profile and poison the well.
"the key question is whether the influence of BLM the organization has been to foster productive or counter-productive discussion (or yelling at each other)."
It's endlessly infuriating that so many people seem incapable of telling the difference nowadays.
Haha, I'll keep that point about Trump in my back pocket next time I find myself in one of those conversations. Excellent comparison.
Great article. Thanks for sharing it.
And I find you stubborn and unreasonable. You don't seem to be able to hear much of anything I say. I have a rare perspective that has merit and should be considered. You aren't anyone to do it. I thought that before, and I think it still.
You interpret what I say very strangely. Quite a bias there.
"And I find you stubborn and unreasonable."
Okay. Sorry you feel that way.
I have tried endless approaches. We're not talking about rationality. We're not talking about semantics. We're not talking about definitions. We're talking about brick walls. There's a significant emotional reservoir that snarls up an appropriate response. I cannot resolve those emotional needs for anyone else, and as long as it remains unresolved for them, they will continue to fail me with a fairly relentless consistency.
Fortunately, I am surrounded by people of color who adore me. Some of them cry when I go home. To get out there in the world and try to meet frozen needs so that my own frozen needs can be met is a fool's errand. Where would that energy be coming from? There again, it's presuming I have more and should share my largesse. It's simply not the reality, just the illusions of this form of racism. I will never get the emotional response and support that would benefit me on my own issues. Won't happen in my lifetime. I've been asked all that while to give other people what I need, with no reciprocation following. I'll leave as much input on the issue as I'm capable of and perhaps in the future there will be a generation who can assume it's responsibilities to the rest of the persecuted minorities in the world who are looking to them, the most successful and influential ever.
When your family entails both populations and that's who you know intimately, you are very aware of how easily we can draw analogies between the two. You'll sit with one group in the morning, and the other in that same evening and hear the SAME conversation. It's just the events referenced will be taking place on different sides of the planet. You don't want to see this. I've seen that in earlier conversations. I can't make you see or feel anything you don't want to see or feel. There will always be an inequity between us, in that I care far more about what happens to the people you are a part of, than you will ever care about mine. I have resigned myself to that. Though I wont' stop talking about it. You can be sure of that. You're not being logical. You're being hard-hearted.
"I have tried endless approaches"
I can only speak about my experience of your approach, but it's consistently been accusatory and stubborn.
I'm not sure why you're telling me that lots of people of colour love you. Ido t doubt it or think it's anything unusual. You seem to think of people of colour (or "the people I'm a part of) as some kind of club.
I'm trying to explain to you, for your own happiness and understanding, that you'll annoy and eventually alienate many people of colour for doing this. This isn't about brick walls. At least in my case. It's about your absolute refusal to actually listen.
Again, you do you. I'm just offering an explanation for why you might be getting the reaction you're getting.
Success leaves clues and Steve QJ leaves them in the results of his writing. It is generally wise to take things to heart that people like him have to say. Sometimes that means we must look inward.