As I understand it, BLM started with the death of Travon Martin, and the acquittal of his killer, not with the Brown case. Check it yourself as I just did and let me know if I got it wrong.
Actually, at least according to the Black Lives Matter website, you are right:
Just a moment...
However it was still based on a lie. There is absolutely no evidence that Trayvon Martin was murdered. According to the only witness, Marton was seen pounding Zimmerman's head into the pavement. In my opinion, Zimmerman could have avoided confrontation with Martin however shooting Martin as he was getting his head pounded onto the pavement is justified self defense.
And cities voted democratic long before the great black migration from the south, when Irish and Jews dominated the population. (Italians had more republican voters, however.) And those populations were overrepresented in dealings with the police. There is a reason they are called “paddy wagons,” after all. The same urban problems existed then under democratic administrations as did under monarchy in London generations ago, or in Rome thousands of years ago.
Point is that they have virtually all been run by democrats and had police chiefs appointed by democrats.
Our democratic programs from the New Deal to the Great Society are still around (a few eliminated no doubt), changed or adapted. These went a long way towards eliminating hunger and elderly poverty. If republicans controlled the cities politically what would they do? Their attempts to cut or eliminate SS, Medicare, food stamps and the ACA have fallen flat. No one buys what Ayn Rand used to sell. The developed world, except for *part* of the GOP, accepts these sorts of programs as part of dealing with the inequities capitalism can produce. The debate is over how much, not whether.
First, republicans efforts to cut welfare entitlements are through programs such as "workfare" which have been very successful where they have been tried. As for SS, the Bush administration did propose allowing workers to voluntarily direct a small amount, roughly 2.5% of their SS taxes to a private retirement program which would have still been audited by the government. Had that been done, SS recipients would end up with more money available at retirement, not less. Ofcourse the democrats responded by making phony campaign commercials portraying republicans pushing granny in a wheel chair off a cliff. I know of no republican attempts to cut medicare. As for the ACA, that is a horrible piece of legislation that has resulted in the costs of healthcare rapidly going up, not down. In fact, speaking from personal experience, it caused me to lose my private healthcare policy. I have been on VA healthcare every since. And yes, welfare entitlements have kept people from starving, however not in a very healthy way. As for what the republicans might offer? How about getting able bodied adults out of the poverty cycle? Conservatives very much believe in offering a hand up....just not permanent handouts. Welfare entitlements should be temporary at least to those who can work.
