If you ever follow Petter Eide's nominations and philosophy this wouldn't surprise you.  The concept of bring about "a consciousness" that is long-term beneficial even at the cost of short term negatives is acceptable in his ideology from what I gather.

 I am ok with the general philosophy but there's no way I would consider BLM a candidate for a NPP.

 I am wondering how many cities we would need to burn in order to bring this much attention to child-abuse or domestic violence.

Eegore wrote on 02/04/21 at 18:35:21:


By and large, the vast majority of Black Lives Matter protests were peaceful- the topic has been explored ad nauseam; the characterization of “burning cities” is apocryphal.   The Black Lives Matter social justice movement was elevated to prominence and nomination by the on-camera murder of George Floyd and public response to it- not protestor violence; with the vast number of participants, had more than the usual number of miscreants present in any crowd been bent on destruction, the damage might approach what you suggest- but it just wasn’t so.   The vulnerable and abused members of our community are not in contest for our care.

Mavigogun wrote on 02/04/21 at 20:31:48:


Yes, you did. Quote:


You just neglected to mention that BLM accomplished the above by arson,, vandalism, terrorizing citizens uninterested in their cause, physical assault, and in at least one case I'm aware of murder.

Speaking to the essence of the suggestion, I’m reminded of the Suffrage Movement, when disruption of domestic social order loomed and demonstrators were killed in the streets, and Civil Rights legislation passed following the assassination of King and ensuing riots; at these times, it seems the consequences of inaction would be felt beyond the victims, motivating corrective action.   Both examples confronted the public social compact of our entire society.

Contrast then the chronic child molestation within the Catholic Church, prominently uncovered in Boston but an institution-wide affliction, and the long, not-so-successful campaign to disrupt enabling policies.  Here, social remedies advance reform less than the consequences of financial liabilities realized in court, and the challenged identity of the community.   Were it not for the diligent work of the Fourth Estate to illuminate both victims and perpetrators, communities would have continued to look away for their own comfort, as many tried to do, reacting with more anger to the public airing of allegations than the harm done to their most vulnerable.    This reflexive denial of the lived reality of victims is a common affliction not limited to children.

Remarkable then the seemingly rapid acceleration of the #MeToo movement; social and electronic media enabled a dam-breaking moment of society-wide reckoning only after decades of advocacy inched expectations forward.   Again, financial liabilities have been, perhaps, the most enduring change maker- possible only due to the bravery of vocal victims forming an unavoidable chorus.

These impasses are opportunities for revision, the machine paused or broken down, enabling or demanding repair.  While the greater community’s discordant miss alignment of gears is an existential threat ignored at our peril, for some these problems are akin to a tapping valve on a rental bike- not my problem after I get where I want to go.  For these later folk, generations of egregious, systemic, ongoing harm has been tolerable, their interest only elicited by the public imposition on their comfort.

Where does that leave the victims of crimes committed behind the front door of homes across our country?   Who will take to the streets, stop traffic for the molested children and battered spouses suffering in anonymity?  Do our social technologies give us reason to hope for better?  Presently, we struggle with the consequences of connectivity, disparate locals suddenly stitched together into something seemingly lost to our urban schemes and rural distances: a village.  Though adjustment of expectations and conflicting interests and needs has imposed trauma, this new intimacy has enabled victims of abuse to be recognized as never before, and left no place for perpetrators to hide.   It’s up to us, then, to decide if the likes of Steve King will be rewarded for White Supremacy, Jim Jones for complicity with child molestation, that realtor we know for attacking the Capitol, or our baker for abusing their spouse.

Eegore wrote on 02/05/21 at 05:02:17:


By my accounting, a false equivalency.  While all Trump supporters are not violent insurrectionists, a demonstrably problematic number empowered the man to foment division, unrest, and sedition by accepting his call to hate and invitation to accept an endless torrent of obvious lies.   Both the division in the Republican Caucus and constituent polling demonstrates a very large number support the crimes committed by the former President, manifesting and personified by the attack.

oldNslow wrote on 02/05/21 at 03:20:04:


Without speaking to all the problems with that attribution, the nomination was certainly not due to the elements you cite- nor, by any reading possible, did I suggest any such thing.   This is your synthesis.   If you care to have a better understanding, I’ll help where able- just ask.