David Greene wrote:
Again, one does not have to have a plan for absolutely everything before being outraged by racism. BLM is grassroots. They focus on what they want to focus on.
Why aren't you going after the Sierra Club for not caring about golf courses?
And it's a bit more than, "a tasteless placement."
I mean COME ON.
I can't believe some people.
Of course it's just a tasteless placemat. The company removed it, apologized profusely. It was stupid and now it's gone. Saying that Joe's Crab Shack is trying to "uphold white supremacy" just dilutes the term and makes people wary of the cause altogether.
This seeming inability to set priorities is doing REAL DAMAGE to the cause of civil rights by diminishing the credibility of civil right advocates. When the top headline on the Strib day in and day out is "Civil rights advocates protest random incident, declare Joe's Crab Shack a vestige of white supremacy," it turns off people who might otherwise be enthusiastic allies for social change. And when those people come out and express increasing skepticism over the tactics being used, you guys turn around and declare THEM the enemy rather than dare question the strategic decisionmaking at play. It's ridiculous.
EDIT: look, and to clarify, I don't think BLM or anyone else needs to advocate on every single issue. But there's a pattern here, which is chasing after individual wrong-doers, frequently of dubious culpability (I mean, that STP teacher MARCHED WITH BLM, for god's sake), demanding extreme measures and otherwise generating a lot heat, but not really addressing major systemic issues or otherwise adopting a process that's likely to get anything done in the long term. For people who have adopted social justice as social accessory this approach works as well as any, but if you actually want to see real policy change, it's hard not to be frustrated.