A Researcher’s Evaluation of the Logic of the Demands of Black Lives Matter

Executive Summary

  • Black Lives Matter’s background and what they stand for are not sufficiently researched by those that support the movement.
  • We cover the scam nature of BLM.


As I write this, Black Lives Matter is more popular than either political party in the US. However, while BLM has received an outpouring of support after the George Floyd murder, what BLM stands for is not well understood by most of those that support the organization or by corporations that write checks to BLM. BLM is a group that is is dedicated to agitation and presenting selective incidents (while ignoring others) to present a false story about police violence and to use known false information to gain power, raise money, and undermine not only the US but European based societies with false claims of institutional racism. This article will get into the details of who runs BLM and what their orientations and goals are.

Understanding the Background of Black Lives Matter

Video pulled down by YouTube. 

The video explains(ed) the extreme feminist anti-male background of the BLM founders.

This video described why BLM does not seem to care about black lives unless it can be placed within the context of black oppression. And that they actively look for police killings of black men to fundraise and raise their profile. It also explained Black Lives Matter’s complete lack of interest in the black population’s actual mortality causes and rates.

Are Corporations Doing Their Research on Black Lives Matter?

The fact that so many corporations have leaped to provide financial support to BLM without looking into BLM’s background says a lot about how little corporations care whether the BLM assertions are true. Corporations should also probably review what BLM calls for.

According to The Spectator, the following are some of the demands/goals of BLM. Let us evaluate each target to determine its feasibility.

BLM’s Demands

We have spent time analyzing the BLM website content, and found what extremely bizarre and poorly thought out proposals and demands. Let us review some of them.

BLM Demand #1: Abolish the Police

BLM wants to abolish the police

How is abolishing the police going to work?

Police indeed should be reformed. They have far too much power, and police unions protect officers rather than hold them accountable. However, there is really no place where police are not required.

One way or another, no matter what they are renamed to, there is going to be a policing force.

Abolished police typically end up being replaced by private security. 

Without police, individuals have to either settle their disputes — which means the individuals most effective with violence — or that have the most significant amount of support (such as gangs), have disputes determined in their favor.

The CHAZ experiment of trying to live without police and “policing themselves” failed. It led to untrained and unqualified individuals carrying around assault rifles and doling out justice as they saw fit. One man who was attacked stated he would sue the city because the police did not intervene, even though he was part of this experiment that denied police entry to the area. Other lawsuits are being filed against the city by businesses because the City of Seattle was derelict in its duty.

This video describes the classless environment that led to an extraordinary violent crime level in CHAZ. 

In Seattle, CHOP was a short-term experiment without police, as the police were told to vacate for politically correct purposes. It had the highest per capita level of violent crime in the US in the few weeks it existed. This man’s son was killed — and there were no protests. BLM does not care about black deaths unless they can leverage the death for political purposes. Why is this young boy so much less important than George Floyd? Because his killer was black — and so nothing politically can be gained from promoting injustice. Therefore, BLM stays silent. BLM’s concern for justice is when a black person is killed by a white person or a white police officer. Their outrage is entirely dependent upon how the event fits with their agenda. 

Life Without Police: What Happened to CHAZ?

Now that CHAZ has been disbanded, the City of Seattle has a lot of graffiti and property damage the taxpayers will have to pay to fix, they have many lawsuits that will take years to work their way through the courts — and we learned what we already knew. Police — like firefighters are an important component of neighborhoods.

What would have been interesting is if a major fire had broken out in CHAZ. Would the CHAZ protesters have brought their own fire truck also? How good is their firefighting training?

This is a scene from the movie the Gangs of New York. It shows fights between rival “fire departments.” Having privatized or “self-fire fighting” rather than a single taxpayer-funded fire department does not work out very well. Groups of thugs punching each other, and the leader negotiating with the homeowner for how much they will pay to put out the fire tend to get in the way of actually putting out the fire. 

The Problem with the Mismatch Between the Behavior in Black Neighborhood Versus the Expectation of Policing

Areas that are well balanced with a good culture that follows the rules can have low levels of policing. However, black neighborhoods are the exact opposite of this. Cities with a high proportion of whites in the US and Europe do not have the same fractious relationship between police and the population. Vermont, a very white state, has so little gun violence, the topic of gun control is barely discussed. In fact, in our analysis, the number one predictor of the violent crime level in a state is the percentage of blacks that live in that state. And having more blacks in the police department does not change the tactics that end up being used. And it has further been shown that black police use the same tactics against black criminals or suspects as white police.

Due to behavioral problems, black areas will require more police and more aggressive policing than white neighborhoods. This is accounting for poverty, often proposed as the source of all violent crime but is demonstrably not.

How Much are More Violent Black Areas?

This is filmed in a black area of Chicago — one of the murder hotspots in the US. BLM is cautious never about discussing black-on-black violence or anywhere else in the US. 

As we cover in the article What is the Most Predictive Variable for the US Murder Rate?, the highest correlative factor for the murder rate in US cities is the proportion of that city that is black.

Read the article. We tested for both income level and gun ownership, and they were almost immeasurable factors.

BLM Demand #2: Dismantle Capitalism

BLM wants to ‘dismantle capitalism’

It is difficult to argue that capitalism is not out of control. Corporations are not run for the benefit of “shareholders,” companies like Starbucks and Apple pay close to no tax, workers’ rights are continually being eroded, and Private Equity has run amock. The US also does not enforce its own antitrust laws that are on the books. One industry after another has been monopolized.

The list goes on and on.

However, what does “dismantling capitalism” mean?

Does that mean shared control over the means of production? There are so many ways to modify capitalism to make it work for more people. Companies can be made nonprofits, Wall Street excesses can be curbed, regulations enforced. A wholesale switch to an entirely different system is not in the cards and is highly risky. The US economy worked the best and for the most people in the 1950s and 1960s, which was still capitalist.

It isn’t easy to see how any of the BLM founders have the background to recommend an alternative economic system. It seems that BLM has lofty goals, but they do not know what is to replace what they seek to dismantle.

BLM Demand #3: Climate Change is Racist

BLM says climate change is ‘racist’

Less of a demand than a statement, but it translates to allowing non-whites to immigrate to white countries to escape environmental damage to their countries.

Indeed, blacks in Africa and other non-white people generally face more negative consequences from carbon emissions. And white societies indeed create a disproportionate quantity of emissions. However, this is not due to racism but because white and Asian societies are more developed than African or Latin American, or Arab societies because those societies have much higher degrees of technological accomplishment. When people in developed countries burn fossil fuels, they don’t do it because they are racist. The US is now only roughly 60% white, which means that is a large percentage of the population is burning fossil fuels. Are they racist also?

Using resources is not caused by racism, but by human demands, which appear unsatiable.

Indonesia’s Burning Season

Indonesian farmers burn forests, which also contributes to carbon in the atmosphere. Are they doing this because they are racist against blacks — or is it to obtain farmland? 

Reducing emissions and living more lightly on the land is critical to the continuation of the human species. There is no denying that.

But again, how are any of the BLM founders in a position of experience to propose what the adjustments to the management of the ecology should be? There is no one in the BLM organization who is in a position of knowledge to lead on this topic, and it’s just another knee-jerk statement about something being racist.

BLM Demand #4: Abolish All Prisons

BLM wants to abolish prisons

It should not be much of a leap to say that this is not going to be feasible. All countries have prisons. However, it is true that the US has far too many people in prison, as the following graphic shows.

The US’s incarceration rate is off the charts. 

The question should be asked as to why the US has so many people in prison.

I feel like a broken record, but what is the BLM founders’ experience in incarceration and prison reform? There are far more knowledgeable groups — like Prison Policy, that have the domain expertise and years of research into BLM’s topic.

Why are is anyone listening to a group that has no background studying or researching the topic?

BLM Demand #5: Abolish all Borders

BLM wants to get rid of borders

This will mean non-whites are essentially taking over white countries with immigration. No borders are precisely what most Latin Americans want to escape their countries that are run by Latin American culture and move to a white-run country. Indians from India want this, Africans want this, Arabs want this. This, however, would ruin those white countries for whites and for non-whites that already live in the US. In fact, it has already greatly degraded many European-based societies and dramatically increased polarization as large groups of people who have nothing in common now live together.

The world has a massive overpopulation problem, and a high percentage of people want to leave their present countries as those countries cannot produce the outcomes of white societies. The US and other European based cannot absorb all of these people. If we take just the US, it is already up against the wall in terms of ecology. The US population should be around 1/2 of what it is to be sustainable.

Also — how are borders enforced with “extreme violence” as stated by BLM?

If the immigration is primarily non-whites to white areas — and white areas are racist, why do so many non-whites want to immigrate to those areas?

BLM Demand #6: Unemployment is Violence

BLM says unemployment is ‘violence’

This is part of a long-term pattern to classify anything you do not like as violence.

It also changes the meaning of the term. To transgender people, being “misgendered” is violence. This is part of a trend larger than BLM by left-leaning groups to call anything they don’t like violence.

BLM Demand #7: White Silence is Violence

“White silence is violence”

Violence is a physical action, but many can constantly desire to move new things into the violence category. Now even being silent is violence. However, as you can see, this article disagrees with BLM. What if you aren’t silent, but oppose BLM? Is that not violence or violence? It is hard to take this one seriously.

BLM Demand #8: White Suffragettes Were Racist

“BLM condemned the suffragettes”

Suffragettes were white supremacists, according to BLM.

The argument is centered around the fact that black women were excluded from the US and the UK’s suffrage movement. However, the societies of the UK and the US were more segregated at that time. And black women received the right to vote through the efforts of white women and legally at the same time as white women — although there were still voting restrictions on black in general. BLM seems to leave that out of the equation, which demonstrates a pattern of selective presentation on the part of BLM on historical matters.

This is part of a pattern by BLM to try to categorize as many things as possible as racist. White men who were not in the upper strata of the US also could not vote until around 1856. Was that racism or elitism that prevented white men from voting?

BLM has a highly expanded definition of racism. Any area where blacks are not equivalent is categorized as racism. For example, scientific discovery must also be racist as whites have the most scientific accomplishments, while blacks and Hispanics, and Arabs, would have to have the least.

This video encapsulates many of the issues with the BLM organization in terms of what it chooses to focus on, and what it doesn’t. A better name for BLM would be Black Lives Matter But Only Black Lives Killed by Police.


BLM is a professional grievance organization with mentally unbalanced leaders who are also unconcerned with what is true that is most accurately described as an anti-white and anti-male organization. They do not have any domain expertise in any area, and their political statements extend out far beyond what they actually do. They use blacks’ police shootings by white police (unconcerned if the killings are justifiable or not) as a PR stunt to raise money and to organize protests and riots that automatically assume any black person shot by police was shot for no reason. This is the highly inaccurate story that BLM provides to its followers. Even when blacks pull weapons on police and are shot, which is the vast majority of cases of black police shootings, BLM still presents the black assailant as being murdered. If a white or other non-black is shot by the police, BLM says nothing — the organizational name should be something more like Only Black Lives Matter. And beyond this, BLM seems to support black criminality, which would explode if they obtained their wish and were able to eliminate the police. 

BLM essentially wants blacks to be able to engage in crime without being concerned with the police. The answer to black criminality according to BLM is to stop allowing policing. 

The Washington Post aired this segment, which has interviews with young black protesters. The protesters are going off the George Floyd incident — and are so young they have no ability to think critically or perform research. Their logic was that if black people are shot, then it means that there is systematic discrimination. They point to Trevon Martin, who was killed in 2012 in an alternation — but not by a police officer. Black Lives Matter encourages entirely non-statistical and non-rational thinking in its followers. You can see in the article How The Claims of Black Lives Matter And Police Shootings Are False.

However, BLM followers are so innumerate and so unable to read detailed analysis that it is unlikely they could get through the article which clearly shows that blacks are not shot out of proportion with their involvement in violent crime.

Black Lives Matter is led by adults, but they irresponsibly distribute false information to the young, who have no way of validating what is true. BLM does not have answers on any of the topics they claim to, and seem to be about fundraising and tearing down a society they don’t understand.