The BLM movement and the BLM organization are different. Much the same way that Americans will all claim to be democrats but less than half will claim to be Democrats.
They supported both, including the 'Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation'.
So they were supporting fraudsters all this time?
In general, there are no trademarks on social movements, and it's a tough problem.
It’s not missing, it's the money they reportedly had on hand at last account.
(And if anyone knew it had been spent on properties, it still wouldn't be missing.)
Exactly. Everyone knows that the 'missing' $60M didn't go to their own causes, but was spent on themselves (and everything else unrelated to BLM), just like what fraudsters would do. They were successful at manipulating the emotions of their supporters and executed a magnificent scam that even tricked the largest of companies.
So we are still defending fraudsters?
No, they don't, that's rather the basis of the (still inaccurate) characterization of it being missing.
It's more different than that between the BLM movement and the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation organization (which, despite the domain name, isn't the sole BLM organization); among the groups at odds with BLMGNF are either a substantial minority or perhaps even an actual majority of the former local chapters, BLMGNF has apparently been leaderless for most of a year after failing to reach a deal with the two people that were supposed to take over last May as coleads to replace the outgoing executive director.
Just as Republicans don't claim to be democrats, defund the police means removing all funding for police, etc.
The point though, is that most people who support ending police brutality know that BLM Global Network Foundation is mismanaged. There are many other groups doing work to fight against police brutality which have more support from people involved in that movement.
I'm not a democrat and I'm American.
I know, I know... some people cringe when someone points this out, but it's true.
I'm not inclined to participate in an argument about it here, but there are valid points of view other than the one you assert.
What are you referring to? Also, you can home-school your kids. Or just move someplace where nobody cares.
It's not perfect, but name something that gives you remotely as much freedom and power over your government.
Many millions have given their lives, physically or temporally, to making it better, to give you and I the historically unequalled freedom, security, and prosperity we were born into. If you see problems - and so do I - how about helping make it better rather than sitting around criticizing while others do the work?
> Voting doesn't scale well
It's scaled amazingly well, far beyond what the creators could have imagined. Billions vote around the world. In the US, without looking up the population in 1776, it's probably scaled 100x.
And it's been, by far, the most successful, free, prosperous, stable, functional form of government in human history. Name any that comes close - any country that has come close in history that isn't a democracy. Name a better form of government, or a country in any time and place that people would prefer to live in. Note the massive migration to democracies. It's like citing Apple Computer as a company that doesn't scale well (except there are other companies in Apple's league, and no other form of government competes with democracy).
The only question is, who is so anxious to tear it down and why?
Is there a reasonable solution to these problems? I feel like without the popularity contest element, that's only more delegating to those who don't necessarily vote the way people would want. Without the delegating, there is stronger requirements on a citizen to educate themselves.
Representative democracy seems to be at the rough point of compromise between these downsides.
edit:formatting
One idea is community level dictatorships where people can freely create, fork, join, and leave these communities.
As an example: M4A has strong bipartisan support among the public, but politicians discuss it using rhetoric and propaganda, demonstrating that it is fake.
Likewise, if I said I donated to BLM, odds are good I am talking about the fund by that name, not an abstract concept of a movement that random people ephemerally belong to.