Even more than the now moribund Occupy movement, Black Lives Matter appears to be a movement without goals.<\/p>\n
There is nothing approaching a statement of goals, just a vague statement of principles, which are unattainable because they are little more than a word salad of good sounding words.<\/p>\n
Over at Orchestrated Pulse<\/i>, R.L. Stephens II says that this serves a purpose, and that many of the “leaders” of the nominally leaderless Black Lives Matter movement have personal career goals at the core of their actions<\/a>: <\/p>\n The latest effort to storm Bernie Sanders\u2019 appearances is only making the problem more obvious. The two women that interrupted Sanders last weekend seemingly did so unilaterally<\/a>. You can\u2019t build real mass political power that way, but building effective power is not their point. Make no mistake, this Bernie Sanders hoopla is ultimately about campaign jobs<\/a> and foundation funding, not emancipation for the masses. These interruptions will create career opportunities for a few activists and political operatives\u2014the Black leadership <\/i>desired by [BLM activist]<\/span> Tia [Oso]<\/span> and others\u2014but, as with Ferguson, the masses of Black people will be unaffected. <\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n I have heard variants of this complaint for decades, that some elements of the Black political class are driven more by a desire for patronage positions than by a desire for substantive change.<\/p>\n Certainly, this would explain why BLM activists have not been as active, or as effective, at confronting Hillary Clinton.<\/p>\n If the name of the game is patronage, than it naturally makes sense to hitch your star to Hillary, who has been a creature of this sort of politics, for decades.<\/p>\n Read the rest.<\/p>\n