Awful false equivalence. BlackLivesMatter does not have a history of destroying the lives of innocent people through recklessness. These groups do. There is a reason why vigilante justice is not encouraged anywhere outside of comic books. They have no training, no ethical code, no oversight, and no accountability.
What the hell are the courts going to do? The internet never forgets, its out there and will remain out there.
So falsely accused people are just supposed to use the legal system to correct the situation? I assume you'll cover the cost of this then? Lol. Legal work isn't free and no matter how much money you spend, your reputation is tarnished.
Look, let's just separate the idea from this (horrid) execution.
Idea: Expose KKK members to the public so that the public is made aware of their morally objectionable activity. Places their practice on the same moral level as child sex offenders for example, and brings a new level of awareness and shame for an activity that deserves having others be aware of it (for the sake of protecting their families and loved ones) and shamed.
Execution: Seems like facets of the group are using the cause as a cover to smear the same types of people the KKK generally hates on anyhow. Might be possible the group is an arm of the KKK.
So it's very unfortunate that the execution of the idea seems to turn out to be a farce, and only acting as a cover for more objectionable activity, but the idea itself is solid (in its purer sense) and should be legalized. Members of hate groups are no different than child molesters or terrorists, and the latter two are made publicly known to others so they may be aware of who to look out for, why not with hate group members like the KKK?
And to the claims that the KKK are irrelevant, well yes, they are in the sense that they're not the same KKK that was around in the 1930s. But their presence, even as a dying parasite, still influences mindshare on the public, and one would have to be blind to deny that certain ideals held by the KKK did not eventually find themselves at the root of particular policies that were birthed in the U.S legislature that affected the same groups the KKK actively attacked back in the day. The roots of institutional racism can be traced back to hate groups like the KKK, and the influence they had on earlier politicians and, therefore, legislature. Which in turn had effects on successive legislature, diluted strands of which still exist today even if the root intention is vastly different or completely opposite to what the originating legislature intended.
So one way to deal with the problem of institutional racism is to acknowledge its roots and attack them, no matter how much of a zombie state certain parts may be right now. The gov't isn't going to literally arrest and dismantle the KKK and ban it from free speech overnight, but a first step in dealing with the problems the organization has given birth to, is to make people aware of the people who are actively keeping this zombie organization alive, b/c its mere existence makes institutional racism that much more effective. It's mere existence makes other stronger hate groups (like neo-Nazis) that much more relevant and capable.
How this is such an exotic concept is beyond me, as it shouldn't be. As I said, the
idea is sound and necessary, but the
execution/
implementation needs to be genuine and effective. This instance is neither of those, and therefore is flawed. But it shouldn't outright disqualify the idea from being considered in the future if people with more noble and honest intentions (and more effective ways of identifying who is or who isn't a member) were wanting to give it a try.
