Rand Paul is falling into the Trump trap.
After expressing some relatively nuanced thoughts on Black Lives Matter—relative to the other GOP contenders, that is— Rand decided to slip back into completely and totally ignorant territory yesterday. During an appearance on Sean Hannity, Paul stated, "I think they should change their name maybe, if they were 'All Lives Matter' or 'Innocent Lives Matter.'"
Hard to unpack all that is wrong with this statement. The All Lives Matter is a familiar trope we've seen for months now, simultaneously infuriating and banal. It means nothing. It says nothing. It's a way for people who don't want to think critically to deflect.
At even more base level, though, here we see what we've seen all year from the right—the refusal to engage in a real discussion about how racism is real, widespread, and structural.
Black Lives Matter was born from a crisis of law enforcement brutality and over-policing in the black community. This is one that Rand Paul has actually acknowledged before.
Back in March, he talked to students at a historically black college in Maryland about racial inequality in policing and incarceration. "As I’ve learned more about criminal justice system, I've come to believe it's something that's going to keep the two Americas separate." Later, in a speech to the Baltimore County Republicans, he reinforced his point. "When I see people angry, I understand where some of the anger is coming from." He even discussed the death of Khalief Browder, a 16-year-old who was held without cause in Rikers for three years and who recently committed suicide. "Imagine how his classmates feel about American justice. Imagine how his parents feel."
Paul even wrote about police brutality in Time, as you can read below.
"There is a systemic problem with today’s law enforcement," he wrote. "Given the racial disparities in our criminal justice system, it is impossible for African-Americans not to feel like their government is particularly targeting them."
Surely, none of these statements are revolutionary or even sufficient. And he hasn't really engaged with the Black Lives Matter in any substantive or impressive way. But still—he was saying SOMETHING.
But in his most recent statements to Hannity, he played the other stuff down. "I am about justice, and frankly I think a lot of poor people in our country, and many African-Americans, are trapped in this war on drugs and I want to change it," he began. "But commandeering the microphone and bullying people and pushing people out of the way I think really isn’t a way to get their message across."
Can we talk about this microphone-grabbing thing for a second?
First of all, this is Trump. Trump was the first one who took the Black Lives Matter movement and reduced it to a microphone. "I would never give up my microphone," Trump said when asked about Black Lives Matter, referencing the incident with Bernie Sanders. The "I wouldn't relinquish my microphone" nonsense has featured in headlines. And now Rand Paul is also here, saying the same.
In other words, black communities are suffering from over incarceration, over-policing, below-standard education, a lower average lifespan, health issues stemming from environmental injustice, and a whole host of other structural and institutional disparities—but sure, lets make it about the microphone. Let's make it about how you think those protestors should have been more polite. That way you don't have to account for the facts about racism in this country.
Mark my words—this is going to become even more common when people ask GOP candidates about the movement. It'll all come back to who let who take the microphone. It's just another example of the right missing the point on purpose.