When someone's own website, own video interviews and own words tell me "We believe in the following.......", I believe them. You apparently think differently. I have no problem with that at all, only when you dismiss BLM's stated facts and replace what they actually said with your own interpretation of what those facts mean and give them as fact.
Except they don’t say what mmj originally said they say. So I can only assume you are projecting your own interpretation on to what they have said.
So my world view is that when someone tells me that they "are a trained Marxist" I think that they are are a Marxist. Your world view seems to be that when someone tells you that they "are a trained Marxist" that they don't mean it really, it's just means they might have studied a bit, it's not real Marxism, not really, and even if they are Marxists it doesn't mean ALL of them believe it. My world view of BLM is believing their statements to be facts. Your world view of BLM seems to believe that their statements are not facts but soft opinions to be interpreted however you like and don't really mean anything anyway i.e.
You appear to be missing key bits of context/understanding in your interpretation of the above:
Fact - "Trained Marxist" - Interpretation "well she could mean anything by saying that and even if she is it doesn't mean all of them are".
She says she’s ‘super-versed in ideology’ so no doubt she has been taught Marxism. She could equally have said she’s ‘trained in Critical Theory’.
In fact, I would argue the language used on the ‘what we believe’ page has far more grounding in Critical Theory (Post-colonialism, Critical Race Theory, Critical-Gender Theory etc) than it does with Marxism.
Fact - "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure." - Interpretation "well they don't really mean that, they must mean something completely different to those words".
Again, you haven’t quoted the whole section. It’s “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure
requirement…”
As I said earlier, and as Caracus’s statistics highlight, the nuclear family structure is already disrupted for the majority of African-Americans. Given the rest of the paragraph, it’s clear that they are trying to use community support to make up for the high numbers of absentee fathers. They aren’t saying the nuclear family has to be abolished.
Fact - "supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another." - Interpretation "Well they don't really mean that, they must mean something completely different to those words".
Firstly, how does that equate to being hostile towards the individual?
Secondly, ‘a village that collectively cares for one another’ does not equal ‘a collectivist system’, certainly not in the Communist sense. It used to just mean ‘a village’…
The problem is, you hear ‘Marxist’ and your mind automatically goes to the gulag. So you hear ‘collectively care for one another’ and assume that means a communist-style ‘collectivist system’.
That’s why I suggest you’re the one projecting.
You asked "pray tell, is this obvious world view that I hold?" and I'll take a good guess for you however no-one but you can truly know with 100% accuracy which kind of makes it pointless, however - I think that you don't like that the ideals that BLM "really" stands for, written in their own words, are radically different to what you "believed" BLM actually stood for in the beginning, and that difference between what BLM state as "fact" and what you think they stood for doesn't make any sense to you. That is why you're making up excuses as to why the words the BLM specifically use MUST mean something completely different to the actual words BLM specifically used, and all because what they have actually stated as their principles are genuinely quite shocking once you get past the completely understandable & worthy "end racism, end Police violence" message that the vast majority of people think is the ONLY message BLM have, when in reality it only makes up about 20% of BLM's stated principles.
Of course that's just a guess, I could be completely wrong and you could be a White supremacist, racist bigot instead for all know, but I think I'm probably closer with my first guess than the latter.
I honesty have little interest in BLM. The statistics appear to show that the movement is based on a false premise and I believe their approach is counterproductive to their stated aims.
What I am interested in is accuracy of speech and accuracy of thought.
‘Marxist’ gets thrown around in the same way as ‘Nazi’ when it comes to shutting down debate, so when I hear that BLM are “a Marxist group aiming to overthrow Capitalism, destroy the family unit and usher in a collectivist system that's hostile towards the individual…” my spidey-senses start to tingle and, as expected, the accusations appear to be spurious.*
*Edit — with the caveat that the BLMUK link that Caracus shared was the only thing that actually mentions capitalism.
