Some significant illogic within the ideology of “Black lives matter”

One of the movement’s founders, speak­ing as “we” for all of them, has pub­licly stat­ed that “they” are “trained marxists”:

Along the same lines:

“I went through a year-long organ­is­ing pro­gramme at the National School for Strategic Organising (NSSO), and it was led by the Labour Community Strategy Centre. We spent the year read­ing, any­thing from Marx, to Lenin, to Mao, learn­ing all types of glob­al crit­i­cal the­o­ry and about dif­fer­ent cam­paigns across the world, and most impor­tant­ly every day, five days a week we were out on the ground active­ly recruit­ing peo­ple into the organ­i­sa­tion we were in, as a way to learn how to bring peo­ple in, how to keep them in an organ­i­sa­tion. There’s an entire skillset to this.”1

The irony could be that Marx him­self does not seem to eas­i­ly lend him­self to a god­fa­ther of “anti-racism”, evi­denced, among oth­er quotes, by what he wrote about Ferdinand Lassalle, founder of the German work­ers’ movement:

“It is now per­fect­ly clear to me that he is descend­ed, as evi­denced by his head for­ma­tion and hair growth, – from the negroes who joined Moses’ pro­ces­sion out of Egypt (unless his moth­er or grand­moth­er on his father’s side crossed paths with a nig­ger). Well, this com­bi­na­tion of Judaism and Germanicity with the negro basic sub­stance must pro­duce a strange prod­uct. The pushi­ness of the fel­low is also nig­ger­ly.”2

And about his own son in law, in a let­ter to Friedrich Engels: “Lafargue has the foul scar of the Negro tribe: no sense of shame.”3 Engels him­self wrote: “I can only think that the 1/8 or 1/16 of Negro blood, which is in Laf[argue] and which from time to time gets the upper hand with him, has led him to this quite inex­plic­a­ble mad­ness.”4

Promoting the as such impec­ca­ble idea that “lives mat­ter” on the basis of the most dead­ly ide­ol­o­gy in human his­to­ry that has cost tens of mil­lions of peo­ple around the world their lives, which on top of it was whole­sale anti-black, and – appar­ent­ly on the same basis – advo­cat­ing for the top­pling of stat­ues of his­tor­i­cal fig­ures while at the same time advo­cat­ing for the erec­tion of addi­tion­al stat­ues of Karl Marx5 seems like a lot of illogic.

The same kind of illog­ic that indis­crim­i­nate­ly accus­es police of racial­ly moti­vat­ed mur­der­ous bru­tal­i­ty when actu­al sci­en­tif­ic research has repeat­ed­ly shown that any bias, as far as it exists, has rather the oppo­site effect.6 To quote from a promi­nent study:

“We found that, despite clear evi­dence of implic­it bias against Black sus­pects, offi­cers were slow­er to shoot armed Black sus­pects than armed White sus­pects, and they were less like­ly to shoot unarmed Black sus­pects than unarmed White sus­pects. These find­ings chal­lenge the assump­tion that implic­it racial bias affects police behav­ior in dead­ly encoun­ters with Black sus­pects.”7

The time may have come to con­sid­er the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the wide­spread riot­ing and loot­ing of recent weeks in the wake of police bru­tal­i­ty that hap­pened to hit a black per­son may be – just that. And to con­ceive of some log­i­cal con­se­quences. After all, marx­ist ide­ol­o­gy express­ly strives to estab­lish total­i­tar­i­an oppres­sion, name­ly the “dic­ta­tor­ship of the pro­le­tari­at”,8 as an “inter­me­di­ate” stage on the path towards com­mu­nism, which in turn aims to elim­i­nate the very con­cept of indi­vid­u­al­i­ty – and thus human­i­ty as such – , by means of “rev­o­lu­tion­ary ter­ror”.9

Not log­ic-based persuasion.


  2. Karl Marx in a let­ter to Friedrich Engels of July 30, 1862. In: Karl Marx in seinen Briefen. Ausgewählt und kom­men­tiert von Saul K. Padover, München 1981, p. 518, quot­ed after, trans­la­tion by[]
  3. Karl Marx in a let­ter to Friedrich Engels of November 11, 1882, in: MEW 35, p. 109, quot­ed after, trans­la­tion by[]
  4. Friedrich Engels, let­ter to August Bebel of November 15, 1891, in: MEW 38, p. 220, quot­ed after, trans­la­tion by[]
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on whatsapp
Share on pinterest
Share on vk
Share on linkedin
Share on xing
Share on google
Share on email
Share on print

This Post Has 4 Comments

  1. anon

    Thanks for this info. The BLM move­ment was found­ed in response to Zimmerman’s acquit­tal, although he was indeed inno­cent of Trayvon Martin’s mur­der. There was mas­sive fraud in the case, basi­cal­ly fram­ing Zimmerman, which Joel Gilbert details in his bril­liant doc­u­men­tary that is avail­able free for a lim­it­ed time on youtube:

    1. loico

      If Mr. Zimmerman was indeed “inno­cent“, some­thing that the film you link to makes an admit­ted­ly strong case for, then, since it was Mr. Zimmerman who shot Trayvon Martin (appar­ent­ly in self-defense), it is not log­i­cal to speak of “mur­der“.

      Language, being a most imme­di­ate expres­sion of log­ic, the one “thing” that makes humans human, mat­ters (most of all).

      1. anon

        You’re absolute­ly right. “Innocent of the mur­der accu­sa­tion” would’ve been more accu­rate. I appre­ci­ate the clarification.

    2. loico

      Although all this does not exact­ly fall into our core inter­ests, it is inter­est­ing and impres­sive nonethe­less, and we found this response to the Gilbert film worth not­ing and link­ing to:
      If more peo­ple were to dis­cuss the issues at hand in a matter-of-fact(-and-logic) way as Gilbert and the two com­men­ta­tors “of col­or”, awk­ward as it feels being “prompt­ed” to use this mean­ing­less attribute for human beings, the world might even­tu­al­ly return to rea­son and normalcy.

Leave a comment / join the discussion