>Nobody gives a shit about those non-profit organizations that "represent" the decentralized groups.
Everybody that's donated to BLM does, as do the community organizers that leverage these groups, and the media and news they generate, etc.
>You've had plenty of time to learn this.
IMAX-level projection on not getting it. It's apparent you don't understand the basic concepts.
>I provided evidence
No you didn't. You provided nothing. I'll ask again: find me some official collateral which back up GP's "literally the only substantial voice" claim.
>Seems to me you have a bone to pick about the "official" blm non-profits and can't seem to approach this subject rationally.
You have this backwards. The only logical and rational way to back up this claim is to post proof of it. "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."
>it's not hard to understand that black lives matter is a decentralized movement that is not centrally represented.
There are official non-profit organizations that represent the decentralized groups, and you can't find anything from there, which proves my point.
>Second, both of those "opinion pieces" have references to high profile black lives matter activists (deray, shaun king
AHAHAHAHA I needed my lunchtime laugh. Talcum X, AHAHAHAHA!
>Third, that "facebook post" documents an actual event organized by the family of Daniel Shaver, thanking the local blm chapter for their support.
Can't see where it says any of that. Not that it matters, a FB post proves nothing of the GP's claim. This is Trump supporter-level reaching: "LOOK AT THIS FB PHOTO AS PROOF!"
>If you have a more substantial voice that has done more than blm in bringing attention to this issue in a productive way, feel free to bring that forward.
No, you make the claim, you supply evidence that supports that claim. Welcome to the Internet.
Opinion articles and FB posts, none of which back up GP's "literally the only substantial voice" claim... So you couldn't find anything, thanks for making my point for me.
Again, where is any official BlackLivesMatter material on Daniel Shaver?
True, but it's been weaponized extremely well by one side in recent years (2012~14 and onwards). Reminds me a lot of how it was weaponized by the other side in the late 80s and 90s.
Everybody that's donated to BLM does, as do the community organizers that leverage these groups, and the media and news they generate, etc.
>You've had plenty of time to learn this.
IMAX-level projection on not getting it. It's apparent you don't understand the basic concepts.
>I provided evidence
No you didn't. You provided nothing. I'll ask again: find me some official collateral which back up GP's "literally the only substantial voice" claim.
>Seems to me you have a bone to pick about the "official" blm non-profits and can't seem to approach this subject rationally.
You have this backwards. The only logical and rational way to back up this claim is to post proof of it. "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."