The short answer is: they don't fight for individual rights. They fight for minority privilege, and that is immoral and racist.

No surprise that the Evil Hag is in close cahoots with Obstructionist O"s Deep State socialist termite pestilence.

You, DrZarkov99, are trying to confuse people with FACTS.

How dare you? ;-)

I am too old to demonstrate and engage in violence. So I stay out of it pretty much.

They are not fighting for civil rights. They are trying to destabilize the current administration and they come up with these "rights" meme's so they can recruit useful idiots to swell their ranks.

BLM fighting for civil rights? Check your premises.

Stay safe Term...

I don't believe these groups care about anyone's civil rights but their own. What they really care about is power. Feminists have no interest in helping women and children living under sharia. BLM are racist and advocate violence. Antifa are themselves fascists. These groups can't garner widespread support because few people respect their actions. So, they embrace each other and repeat their lies in the hope that it will undermine the current structure.

Who was this anomaly?

Oh, yes, his finger prints are all over this stuff.
I just read a piece this morning that says Hillary Clinton has funneled some $800,000 to her group called "Onward Together" that has funneled money to Antifa and other protesting groups. Should we be surprised?

I would be OK with unions if they DIDNT have a government backing forcing employers to deal with them. If a union gets out of hand, the employer should be able to just replace the workers that felt they needed to be represented by the union. That would at least be a fairer method of dealing with employer/employee issues.

They're not fighting for civil rights. They are trying to destroy the US. Ayn Rand called it "The hatred of the good for being good."

I don't support any of them. I divide them into two groups: bad and worse.

In today's world, I agree. Most of the unions originated in the major cities who had excesses of migrant labor and took advantage of them. It is neither in the employer nor the employee's interest to suffer injury or dismemberment (or especially death) on the job, yet many of these employers knew of the dangerous conditions yet did nothing (including offering remuneration in the case of accidents) because the supply of labor devalued human life itself. In this the unions at the time had (in my opinion) a legitimate complaint and the only effective method for forcing amelioration was communal banding and strikes. The workers themselves did not have the financial independence to move to other cities to seek employment and many struggled with language as well, so we should remember that it was not quite the free labor market advocated by Adam Smith.

That being said, however, that time is long since past. Now unions do more to impede both business and worker alike than can be tolerated in today's age. While I do not support the notion of outlawing unions because it violates the First Amendment right to Association, I do support the outlawing of public labor unions, meaning the unionization of any governmental worker. Such form a fundamental conflict of interest.

I don't think any of these movements ever had as their goal to make things fair (equal not being the same thing as fair). Their demand to be equal is to demand that the any particular group be represented by the same percentage in any business or profession and if they are not then someone needs to be fined or imprisoned is the same as the slavery or Jim Crow laws they protest. These movements are about convincing the government and the populace to behave in the same manner as what they supposedly hate. To ensure they can use the violence authorized by the state to plunder others and give to them in quest to make things 'equal'. I once worked for a grocery store chain that was fined $5000 every year for not having someone of African descent working there. I lived in a very small town and there were no African Americans who lived there so the people paid more for their necessities because of something that could not be helped. I was also told if an African American ever applied someone was going to be gone so they could save the money, not because the individual being hired might be better suited to the job.
As far as who should vote I say almost no one should have that right. It was once noted by a Roman Emperor that the more people he could give the vote to the more likely he could be emperor for life and do whatever he liked to the Romans, civil rights would be damned by the populace who would give up their rights to be entertained by the state, have their food and property stolen by the state and when some of it was returned to them they would celebrate and praise those who ruled them. I understand the original constitutional law that only those who had property could vote, in other words those who had something to lose if the wrong character become a lawmaker. However watching those who are worth billions get on board with the socialists I don't know that was a good qualifier either. The only vote that really counts is my ability to say no. When Obamacare is voted into being and I am approached if I can say no and have that respected then I don't care what is authorized by 'law'. If I can't say no then I am a dead man because the majority will always vote to steal my property, my authority over my own life and anything else they can get their hands on without killing me for a dead slave is not a productive slave and has nothing to steal.

These groups rub me the wrong way, because they treat people as "we" rather than "I", and make them herd animals. Secondly, they sell them on the fact they are all victims. They diminish the value of the individual and their personal abilities to make responsible decisions and act on them, Instead, the brain-dead members of these groups go around spouting talking points and seeking revenge for wrongs that either were long ago solved, or cannot be solved on a group basis. Long ago when college tried to sell me on feminist courses, I said no thanks, no way was i falling into that trap. I was already an individual, well aware of what I had to do as such to prove my ability, and it worked. I always felt it was up to me to do my job so as to gain the respect that work deserved, and I did not need a bunch of "sisters" telling me to be angry. The same goes for blacks, who long ago earned respect as talented real musicians, not rappers. Firtzergerald, Horne, Callaway, Armstrong, Eubie Blake, rose through personal talent, not group think or protests.

"ALL these groups show a blaring lack of accountability for their own actions, going so far as to make stuff up to keep the fight from smoldering out." YES!!! Well put. This needs to bought up more often.

Learned from The History Channel that Andrew Jackson hated paper money.
I can only imagine there was some spiteful snickering and giggling when poor Andrew's face was put on a $20 bill.
Whoa, new thought! Maybe Indians did it! Jackson was president during the Trail Of Tears.

I am not sure I even agree that the unions were good in the first place. An employee doesnt have a right to "dignity","work conditions". If the employer doesnt provide a good deal for an employee, the employee should be able to just NOT take the job and leave the employer looking for someone else.

For some reason the name, George Soros, just up and jumped into my dino head when my eyes reached "funded" in the second sentence.

There is an activist group in Canada called "Idle No More" that is concerned with native issues. When I first heard the name I thought, "Finally, the Natives are going to be productive and work to end the culture of dependency and despair that has existed in Canada due to the extreme socialist policies enacted by the government to provide cradle-to-grave handouts and the reserve system, which prohibits natives from purchasing their land and simply benefits the unelected Chiefs. I was quite disheartened to find what the activists meant by "Idle No More" was to demand more special treatment and handouts, instead of being more discrete i their demands. The entire system is doomed to failure but it is politically impossible to state otherwise in Canada. Very sad.

I should get a T-shirt that says "Black Lies Matter", but if I wore it I would be in mortal danger in these times.

No one has a right to be afforded "fair competition" when seeking a job. You put out your abilities and drive, and employers either see the benefit to them, or they dont. In my experience, women get the jobs they are best qualified for, and get paid what they are worth to the employer. Government shouldnt get in the middle of this.

Since MLK won the fight for civil rights way back during the 60s, there's that other thing.

Until this morning I would have said all those groups fight, not for true civil rights, but for civil privileges for themselves and their members.

But I now learn that yesterday the organizers of a rally in DC in support of President Trump took a chance on inviting the leader of a rag-tag group of BLM demonstrators to step up to the mike and speak!

What happened next, no one could have predicted. The BLM leader found common ground with Donald Trump's fans. On things like weeding out the bullies from among big-city police forces, to name one example.

It's enough to make me suspect someone has been egging these "civil rights" groups on behind the scenes, with a view to starting a civil war. Yesterday someone opened a steam-release valve. And against anyone's expectations, it worked.

See here for the details.

https://conservativetribune.com/blm-s...

What do you think? I think somebody circumvented the handlers of a would-be rioter.

No offense, but please read up on BLM. This lady is very informative (and entertaining) as a start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRz7V...