Black Lives Mattering

IT SEEMS PRUDENT  "to explain a little why and wherefore" as Davy Crockett said concerning the inclusion of a preface in his autobiography, the phrase "black lives matter" is necessary and relevant, and the phrase "all lives matter" is not. The logic is as follows: Iin order to solve a problem, it is necessary to first identify the problem. Then begins discovery of facts, which leads to understanding, then strategy and plan formation, leading to the desired ultimate solution. The phrase "black lives matter" accomplished that, it identifies the problem, by using the word "black". The phrase "all lives matter" is obviously true, and it sounds wonderful, and I admit I once preferred it, for the same that those who still do, do. It is true, and it avoids any appearance of elitism, reverse racism, or exclusion. For that same reason I tend to prefer the phrase "black lives matter too". Adding the word "too", by referring to non black lives, digresses from the problem, however, reducing focus on it.The phrase "black lives matter" implies nothing about non black lives, human, animal, or vegetable, unless one chooses to invent the implication, and it focuses squarely on the problem, without distraction. The phrases "all lives matter" is a high minded, pleasant platitude which means...little or nothing. this, by virtue of its stating the obvious. One might as well nobly articulate that life is sacred, a miracle, or that the sky is blue, the ocean deep, the river wide. The phrase is hackneyed, cliched, hollow, rhetorical, and of no help when engaged in fighting social injustice. Also of no help is wrong reasoning. It has been said by many that it is inexplicable how a group of protesters can burn down their own neighborhood. The simple fact is, they are not burning down their own neighborhood - they own nothing, and are subject to eviction and removal and dislocation at the slightest landlordly provocation. Complaints have also been made about people like Colin Kaepernick and lebron James, asserting that these two men in particular did not suffer from deprived upbringings, and therefore have nothing to complain about. The obvious answer to this is they they are not protesting their own circumstances, but that of millions of other people. Perhaps it is difficult for critics of them, who are indeed privileged, to understand how anyone could possibly be concerned with the plight of millions of other people. Perhaps those who criticize fortunate people like James and kaepernick for protesting should do a little protesting themselves, just to get the feel of it, the feel of advocating, perhaps for the first time in their lives, for other people.