Good on the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department for releasing the video. I wish I could say it matters but it doesn’t. The ochlocrats* and the useful idiots** in the media that fuel their fantasies made up their minds the second a black guy was shot by a police officer. (In this case, the police officer was black but you won’t find that in the vast majority of media reporting).
Just like the faulty “hands up don’t shoot” nonsense – no, Michael Brown never had his hands up and he never begged for his life but Ferguson burned anyway – in the case of Keith Lamont Scott it was and remains important for liberals to pretend that Scott was minding his own business when rabid cops rolled up and gunned him down, even though police didn’t do that.
The left requires these narratives not only so that CNN can run a tag-line that says “Policing the Police”, as if CNN’s exclusive duty is to oversee law enforcement from sea to shining sea. Liberals need to keep their masses – the ochlocrats – perpetually enraged and hostile. Then, through useful idiots in the media and elsewhere they preach a message of chip-on-shoulder victimhood, and tension between haves and have nots. From time to time they turn up the heat so the masses can riot, loot, commit acts of violence and destruction, while the useful idiots claim protesters are “peaceful demonstrators”. It’s all done in the name of “change”.
What does that change look like? According to the #BlackLivesMatter website:
#BlackLivesMatter is working for a world where Black lives are no longer systematically and intentionally targeted for demise. We affirm our contributions to this society, our humanity, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression. We have put our sweat equity and love for Black people into creating a political project – taking the hashtag off of social media and into the streets. The call for Black lives to matter is a rallying cry for ALL Black lives striving for liberation.
In other words, the masses who read the Black Lives Matter mission statement don’t really know what that change would look like. Sure, the mission statement contains lots of hysterical allegations about systematic and intentional deadly oppression, which is designed to inflame that sense of rage. That way the masses will turn out to riot in the streets and destroy urban America. All in the name of something called “liberation”. The useful idiots won’t discuss liberation but I will.
Liberation is an interesting word. It means lots of things to lots of different people. For the founders of Black Lives Matter it’s defined in terms that ought to be familiar:
Patrisse Cullors famously organized a chant, “burn everything down”, at a recent Netroots Convention as she promised to do everything in her power to “shut down” the Republican National Convention.
Liberation according to Cullors would involve dramatic reduction of “the law enforcement budget” while “disbanding or abolishing” some police departments. She’d take the money spent on policing and create programs to give black people “jobs, housing, and healthy food”.
Hmmm, black people generationally dependent upon the government for their employment, the roof over their head, and the food they consume. That’s liberation?
Opal Tometi is about as bad as Cullors. According to her, police kill as many black people today as were lynched during the Jim Crow-era. If that’s not a slap in the face of every black person that suffered during Jim Crow I don’t know what is. I know it isn’t liberation.
Alicia Garza founded Black Lives Matter. She admires an interesting cast of characters: Assata Shakur (a Marxist who was convicted of murdering a police officer in 1979 and then fled to Fidel Castro’s Cuba with help by the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army), Angela Davis (Marxist and long-time racial aggravator affiliated with the Black Panthers), Ella Baker (self-described socialist with ties to the Communist Party USA and the Weather Underground), and Audre Lorde (a black Marxist lesbian feminist). For someone interested in liberation, there aren’t any liberators in her ideological inspiration list.
So in addition to jobs, housing, healthy food, and dissolution of police departments, Black Lives Matter wants “an immediate end to police brutality”, “full living wage employment for our people”, “freedom from mass incarceration”, “a public education system that teaches the rich history of black people”, and “the release of all US political prisoners”. All these things of course only apply to black people.
There simply isn’t any liberation in any of this. Not in the elimination of police departments and presumably the volunteer thug mobs that would assume their role in black communities. Nor in government provisioned food, housing, “living wages”. The easiest way to end “mass incarceration” is to avoid lifestyles that result in incarceration. How liberating would it be for communities of color to be inundated with mass releases of prisoners into their neighborhoods? As for “releasing all US political prisoners” and “teaching the rich history of black people”? Liberating Mumia and/or praising him in public school curricula doesn’t do a single thing to free black people from generational poverty in places like Baltimore, Chicago, Oakland, Detroit, and Charlotte.
Speaking of poverty neither Cullors, Tometi, or Garza is hurting for a paycheck. Big box activism apparently pays very, very well these days.
It doesn’t matter – and it never did – what’s in the Charlotte police video. Scott could have been straddling a nuclear warhead with eleven seconds to go before detonation and the video wouldn’t have mattered. Nor will it matter when the useful idiots dutifully push the next police involved shooting into the “breaking news” rotation so the masses can riot in the streets while Cullors, Tometi, and Garza press for liberation.
There’s a reason rioters in Charlotte targeted the city’s more affluent Uptown area. It has everything to do with an extreme agenda, so extreme that it requires force and not a ballot to make political headway, and little to do with black people killed by cops. The latter are merely stage props for a cadre of especially disgusting activists hell-bent on imposing the former upon us all.
* Ochlocracy: mob rule. In this case it refers to the idiots that turn out into the streets whenever asked to do so by leading liberals.
** Useful idiots: just like during the early Leninists, today’s left depends upon people in media and elsewhere that will portray any topic in a manner favorable to the liberal agenda.
photo credit: Fibonacci Blue Protest in response to the Philando Castile shooting via photopin (license)