"Black lives matter" is a statement with the linguistic agent deleted, i. e., the question, "to whom" is not answered. Another way to express this idea whilst retaining the agent deletion is, "black lives are cared about".
BLM can be narrowed down to three statement types, positive, normative or metaphysical. If it's positive, it means that someone or more than one person cares about blacks. I think we can rule this option out. While certainly true, it's obvious that such a banal statement about reality not what is being communicated.
It could be normative but such a statement should typically have a modal verb like "should" or "ought to". Restoring some possible agents and the modal verb would render the more complete normative statement, "black lives should matter to (everyone, white people or non-blacks).
The third possibility is that it's a metaphysical statement. Perhaps they want to remind us that blacks are God's children. This seems unlikely, as the movement and funding source behind the organisation is avowedly Communist and thus atheist.
What say ye, Zig Forums? Am I missing something here?
> Such a man has then a little world of his own – he discusses things with other men and can have the agreeable feeling that it is something which women do not understand. In this way he gets away from the feminine, but he loses and leaves his earthly masculinity in the mother’s grip. He saves his mental masculinity but sacrifices his phallus – his earthly masculinity and creativity. The vitality of action, that masculinity which molds the clay, which seizes and molds reality, he leaves behind, for that is too difficult; he escapes into the realm of philosophy. Such people prefer philosophy, pedagogy, metaphysics and theology, and it is a completely unvital bloodless business. There is no real question behind such philosophy. Such people have no genuine questions. For them it is a kind of play with words and concepts and is entirely lacking in any convincing quality web.archive.org/web/20160403091728/http://individunification.com/2.822 Peur Aeternus.html
You're thinking too much into this, you shouldn't expect sub 80 IQ niggers to comprehend basic English.
Nathaniel Gray
Analysing propaganda renders you more immune to it and yields useful principles and info to make more effective your own propaganda and black propaganda.
Kevin White
Soros is not sub 80 IQ
Hudson James
They see and use it more as a sort of trap. It's purposfully exclusive, in order to set the idea in your head that "only" is a possibility, while still leaving the plausibility that the missing word is "too".
This is basic feminine manipulation. Plausible deniability is rooted in everything they do. It lets them both tell you to your face that you dont matter, while still leaving an out when called on it. And if you call them on it, it marks you as being a faithless heretic to be excommunicated.
Brandon Ramirez
Old pol has my attention.
Evan Lopez
>Black lives matter to whom? It's a damn good question when they kill each other so frquently
They simply meant "matter" as in "has inherent value", you autist.
Luke Young
even a racist segregationist might not view blacks as inferior. or other groups. it's not a prerequisite. "black lives matter" is the forcing of a presumption, that you are an aggressor and they are victim. "black lives matter" is fundamentally a needy and subservient position to take and therefore they project and assert the implicit paradigm that blacks are lesser in the very statement itself. when that may not be how you view blacks. even segregationists might hold a "separate but equal" tenet. I.e. the individual races or ethnicities within a race pursuing their own destiny and own structuralizing of belief systems and values. the implicit subservience mentioned is needed in order to shift the power dynamics by way of revolutionary inversion. it is a subconscious priming tactic that allows for them to first create and then take the dominant position for themselves. I've said this in other threads too. reminds me of that Lincoln quote of how blacks and whites will always have one in charge and one subservient. and that he preferred for whites to be in charge. the name throws the "content of character" mlk trope out of the window and asserts a paradigm which they then might invert.
Ryder Wilson
quite a good point. I agree about the femininity and almost mentioned it in my own post too. the feminity comes with the unconscious identification of yourself with an external subject (binding you and someone else as operating in the same implicit framework of ideas) and the forcing of a paradigm on them. the opposite, the male behavioral pattern would be to stand independent and outside, even alien, to the system of ideas someone else is working under.
I think your third possibility is the only plausible reading, and that there is just a massive area of confusion and vagueness that is used to play off the emotions of blacks. Blacks are, after all, religious people. So there is at least some sense there as to how the phrase is meant to motivate them, but it surely isn't clear how any of those communist thugs interpret it or could interpret it.
Kevin Morgan
Inherent value is either a subjective judgement (requiring an agent) or a metaphysical thing.
Evan Stewart
see . youre either retarded or thinking to much into this.
Justin Thompson
the verb "to matter" can mean "to have value". so it means black lives have value.
Dominic Morgan
I like ml von franz. what op is getting at uproots the very fabric of implicit systems of ideas. it is casting off the yoke of an idea that is being spread like wildfire by mass hysteria. he isn't theologizing or circle jerking within a system of ideas. rather he is casting one off. the "black lives matter" paradigm. that is what this thread is unconsciously calling for. there is a legitimate question as to the implicit mind virus that has possessed people across the world. and reclaiming your individuality. that is the blood at stake and the used clay that is being tossed out entirely.
Daniel Murphy
His premise is that inherent value is either inherent in a subject-object relation, or inherent in an object. Saying "black lives have value" doesn't clarify which of these is the value in question.
Julian Scott
"to matter" can be an intransitive verb. it means "to have inherent value" then.
Andrew King
Actually OP, you have a pretty thoughtful post, but there's another possibility you missed.
It is possible that "black lives matter" is meant as an imperative. It fits closer to your normative reading, but it needn't be read as a purely normative claim about what we ought to do (but may not be doing); but instead as a command to do something. Of course it doesn't say it outright, but it's like saying "fat is beautiful" which is obvious false but actually seems to carry with it an urging or commanding to find it beautiful.
Again dude you are missing what "inherent" means. Inherent doesn't necessarily need to be the purely "in the object" kind of value. It could also be that it has a kind of inherent value not because it is arbitrarily valued by an agent, but because there is an objective subject-object relationship of valuing.
Cameron Sanchez
an imperative? so theyre saying that black lives dont matter inherently? its an intransitive verb, it doesnt need an object.
Benjamin Barnes
I don't think it positvely asserts that black lives don't matter inherently. I think it that might be completely orthogonal. What I'm suggesting is it might just be saying "care about black lives!" without supplying a why at all..
Justin Russell
okay well im going to say that it means "to be important". youre being pedantic and retarded if youre going to say that you dont understand what black lives matter is supposed to mean as it hasnt an object. it makes sense.
Joseph Hernandez
i presumed it meant black lives matter to the economy or something. either way it retarded when you think about it.
Isaac Gray
>"to matter" can be an intransitive verb To matter to x is intransitive as well.
Anthony Parker
Interesting thread, but I don’t think you can attribute logical language rules to this movement and its goals/intended meaning.
Kayden Evans
why bend over backwards to try and understand monkey screeches? if the know english, surely the can express what they truly mean instead clearly
no it isnt. intransitive means the the verb doesnt need an object. it reminds me of the "they" pronoun being used as a generic singular.
Christopher Russell
I agree it is retarded.
What is also interesting about its meaning is how absolutely butthurt BLM gets when people assert "all lives matter" in any related context. It hints about what "black lives matter" could possibly mean, since of course "all lives matter" implies "black lives matter" but yet they poo-poo the former and endorse the latter..
I think if you think about it in terms of the "command" interpretation I mentioned above, it makes sense. "Black lives matter" means "Care about black lives!" and so if taken in the same way, "All lives matter" would mean "Care about all lives!" and that obviously has a watering down of the caring that is left to go around.
Oliver Long
It's important to me = I care about it, to make the agent the subject. Importance requires an agent. Much of deceptive language doesn't state an agent that's nevertheless there (e. g., "governance").
Jason James
it is difficult to apply rationality to these people. they dont think with truth.
Lincoln Jackson
No it means it doesn't do anything with an object. You can't "matter" anything.
Jonathan Roberts
youre right with what youre saying there but i dont understand you point.
Kevin Green
It's the same psychology that works in naming your stereo store "The Good Guys". It comes loaded with an adversary. Right upon hearing Black Lives Matter, you know that either they matter to you, or you are one of those racists. You've been converted before you've even bother parsing it out as far as you have, racist.
Bentley Mitchell
yes it does take an object. it just requires the preposition to.
