Support NeoGAF

[Van Owen]

You know what disgusts me more? The majority of the US knowing about and doing nothing about the police killing unarmed black people and more, then letting them walk.


And yet here we are.

How can you say nothing has happened when the officers have been suspended and the investigation by both the BPD and Dept of Justice is still ongoing?

 

[Two Words]

Clearly you only remember one part of it. It was multi-faceted, and there were plenty of proponents for self-defense.

And guess what? They had to defend themselves.

What was the biggest component of the civil rights act, rioting or the Million Man March on Washington DC?

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

What was the biggest component of the civil rights act, rioting or the Million Man March on Washington DC?

Both. One was the peaceful protest, the other was the looming threat if those peaceful protests failed.

Speak softly, and carry a big stick. It doesn't just apply to the government.

 

[Crosseyes]

What was the biggest component of the civil rights act, rioting or the Million Man March on Washington DC?

Either one could not have succeeded on their own.

 

[JB1981]

Seems to me as an observer of what's happening on TV, the rioting and looting just reinforces and confirms the bias or stereotypes people already hold regarding the people doing said looting and rioting. It will not help public perception at all.

 

[onadesertedisland]

Both. One was the peaceful protest, the other was the looming threat if those peaceful protests failed.

I think that those in power must recognize that should protests fail, the resulting event will harm them. That is the required leverage that forces those with overwhelming resources to negotiate.

 

[Two Words]

Both. One was the peaceful protest, the other was the looming threat if those peaceful protests failed.

Violent riots are easy to justify putting down with lethal force and hurt your cause from a legislative standpoint. If you want to think that peaceful protest is not effective, then be my guest. You'll just find out the hard way that rioting innocent people is just going to make things worse for yourself and others.

 

[Bizazedo]

Interesting OP, Amirox. I just have one question.

Do you have any examples where riots worked since we've entered the age of rapid and mass communication? The reason I ask is because I've watched a lot of FB and messageboards over the last few days and it's decidedly anti-Rioter. Which is sad, but it's too easy to point the camera at some dumbasses and paint a picture.

And I ask this as a pro-violence type dude. I just don't think undirected riots work anymore. It has to be....bigger.

 

[Two Words]

So how did all of these gay marriage laws start getting passed with only peaceful protests? How has marajuana legalization get more and more passed with only peaceful protest? How have women's rights and suffrage happened with only peaceful protest? You telling me that the government was worried about gay high women rioting and looting?

 

[onadesertedisland]

So how did all of these gay marriage laws start getting passed with only peaceful protests? How has marajuana legalization get more and more passed with only peaceful protest? How have women's rights and suffrage happened with only peaceful protest? You telling me that the government was worried about gay high women rioting and looting?

Although the event that sparked these events was singular, I think the underlying cause is decades of racism and class warfare. These riots are pressure valve events.

 

[TM94]

You can be appalled by institutionalized racism and murder of black people by cops and still disagree with the trashing of local businesses.

Nail on head here.

 

[Two Words]

Although the event that sparked these events was singular, I think the underlying cause is decades of racism and class warfare. These riots are pressure valve events.

That doesn't answer my question of how is peaceful protesting ineffective if it has clearly worked.

 

[cutmeamango]

So how did all of these gay marriage laws start getting passed with only peaceful protests? How has marajuana legalization get more and more passed with only peaceful protest? How have women's rights and suffrage happened with only peaceful protest? You telling me that the government was worried about gay high women rioting and looting?

It's a non-argument.
Saying "riots can change things" won't exclude him from arguing "peaceful protests can change things", just like when he was presented with studies showing low efficacy of riots, he just went "the study supports my topic that it does have some efficacy.".

 

[onadesertedisland]

That doesn't answer my question of how is peaceful protesting ineffective if it has clearly worked.

These riots aren't about rights, the rights that should prevent racism and police brutality are already in place. These riots are because those rights do not provide relief for this section of the population. If the groups you spoke of were continually denied their rights after being granted them, I imagine you would see similar riots.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

That doesn't answer my question of how is peaceful protesting ineffective if it has clearly worked.

Because of the thousands that have failed before this riot.

Or do you think this recent riot is happening in a vacuum. All of NYC's peaceful protesting has done nothing for the communities affected by the NYPD's misconduct for instance.

 

[Two Words]

These riots aren't about rights, the rights that should prevent racism and police brutality are already in place. These riots are because those rights do not provide relief for this section of the population. If the groups you spoke of were continually denied their rights after being granted them, I imagine you would see similar riots.

So peaceful protests only work on fighting for rights and not fighting injustice because reasons?

 

[Rabbi_Vole]

Culture of immediate gratification, long term ramifications be damned.

 

[Two Words]

I wonder how pro-rioters here would feel if their house/business/place of work was destroyed by random selection. All for the greater good, right?

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Culture of immediate gratification, long term ramifications be damned.

Centuries isn't immediate. Decades if I'm being lenient.

We want to be treated with equal agency, and have been getting killed and disenfranchised the whole way through. Pardon if a riot that was less damaging than most sports riots breaks your heart.

 

[Two Words]

Centuries isn't immediate. Decades if I'm being lenient.

The riot is the immediate part....

 

[Kinsei]

Culture of immediate gratification, long term ramifications be damned.

Immediate? It has been centuries.

What are your thoughts on the Stonewall Riots? Were the people rioting also from a culture of immediate gratification?

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

The riot is the immediate part....

The riot was the result of no gratification. Not the desire of instant.

 

[onadesertedisland]

So peaceful protests only work on fighting for rights and not fighting injustice because reasons?

The majority wants to return to their life as soon as possible, those in power will try do to this in any manner that does this. If it means that police brutality will cease, that will be the road. If it means violently shutting down any dissent, that will be the method.

I'm not saying peaceful protest works or does not, I'm saying it might not be because of the protest.

 

[WARCOCK]

Who is Maximilien de Robespierre? The fundamental principles that you are touching upon have been debated for ages and we are no closer to an answer.

I feel that Albert Camus's The Rebel is the most convincing treatise on the subject, that being said it was written in a somewhat more enlightened period than today and I wonder how 70 additional years of data would affect his conclusions.

 

[Two Words]

The riot was the result of no gratification. Not the desire of instant.

You're fooling yourself if you don't think a large part of these rioters are just looking to take advantage of the mob and have some quick fun in the looting for free stuff.

 

[Rabbi_Vole]

The riot was the result of no gratification. Not the desire of instant.

If we're being kind, the riots are largely out of revenge.

 

[Zuhzuhzombie!!]

One of the central arguments often pushed by news media, history classes and individuals viewing violent protests is that innocent people and businesses are getting hurt, and all it serves to do is to obfuscate any message they wish to convey to the general public. After all, nobody would argue that this is the result people want. This is fucked up stuff. I think it's sad, most people think it's sad.

But acknowledging it is sad does not change the reality that this is the natural evolution of the injustices perpetrated against specific peoples, and that contrary to the narrative this stuff has worked countless times. In significant and hugely long term ways.

I'll try to keep this topic relatively contained so that people actually read it, so I'll center my argument around a few key articles and then open for discussion.

First, because the number one thing people who view violent protests as a pointless exercise is futility that ruins messages do is to quote Martin Luther King Jr. or point to his nonviolent movement as proof of the "right way", I thought we'd shortly discuss his perspective. The truth is that the reality is that nonviolence was not the sole tool of the civil rights movement, violence and killing and looting were a regular occurrence during the 60s, just like in Ferguson, just like we see in Baltimore today:



Sound familiar? An injustice against an individual within a group of peoples spiraled into a hellstorm of violence and destruction. What is going on today is a joke compared to scale of the explosions of anger that went on in the 60s.

These often had huge impacts on changing local laws and eventually national ones. But what did Martin Luther King Jr. have to say on riots?

_____________________________

MLK Jr. On Riots
_____________________________


"I will agree that there is a group in the Negro community advocating violence now. I happen to feel that this group represents a numerical minority. Surveys have revealed this. The vast majority of Negroes still feel that the best way to deal with the dilemma that we face in this country is through non-violent resistance, and I don't think this vocal group will be able to make a real dent in the Negro community in terms of swaying 22 million Negroes to this particular point of view. And I contend that the cry of "black power" is, at bottom, a reaction to the reluctance of white power to make the kind of changes necessary to make justice a reality for the Negro. I think that we've got to see that a riot is the language of the unheard. And, what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the economic plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years."

"But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity."

Speech

_____________________________

Examples of Violent Riots that Changed History
_____________________________


Now the important thing to do is recognize the reality that even though this is a shitty outcome, that violence is inevitable when those in power refuse to listen to the pleas of those they're supposed to serve when huge injustices are perpetrated.

But if these riots didn't work, there'd be no point, right? I agree. The problem is that they do sometimes work. Often. And for a huge range of issues. Here is an overview of just some, using various sources for your viewing. I mostly focused on US riots because that is where the unrest is currently going on. But most countries can point to riots like this which have worked. (Source 1, Source 2, Source 3, Source 4, Source 5, Source 6)


The Stonewall Riots:



This was directly instrumental in galvanizing a community to forever change this country. It worked.

Student Revolt and Labor Strikes in France



These riots that included killing police officers led to massive changes for workers and students alike.

The 'Snow' Riot of 1835



I included this one for complexity's sake, because this was a riot by white racists which happened to change the face of America forever. We STILL face the repercussions of this riot today.

1921 Battle of Blair Mountain



The impact is self-explanatory. It was a pivotal moment in the labor movement.

_____________________________

Discussion
_____________________________

The point of all this is not to come here and endorse violent riots as the "way to go" when you want change. The point is to highlight the high level of complexity that is actually involved in these assessments. Violent riots DO work, and have worked many times throughout history and in many countries. They have worked to effect both short term and long term solutions, or to spark movements which critically changes the countries they were in.

This does not mean we have to like them. They are a sad result, but thinking they are sad does not change the root causes. And unless we accept the root causes and that these are the natural results of situations where those in power do not listen to the cries for help of those they are supposed to serve, we're never going to fix the problems that led to these violent revolts in the first place.

No war but class war.

Civil Rights Movement.

Civil Rights movement was more often violent than not. The main proponent of peaceful protest, who also sympathized with rioting, was murdered by the people he protested against.

 

[onadesertedisland]

Class war is the foundation of this injustice. Dr. King realized this. It's not only about race, it's about wealth and power. As LBJ said

"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Non-violence is a type of political performance designed to raise awareness and win over sympathy of those with privilege. When those on the outside of struggle—the white, the wealthy, the straight, the able-bodied, the masculine—have demonstrated repeatedly that they do not care, are not invested, are not going to step in the line of fire to defend the oppressed, this is a futile political strategy. It not only fails to meet the needs of the community, but actually puts oppressed people in further danger of violence.

Non-violent protest is a tactic. If it fails, others must be administered or you further endanger the community.

Rioting isn't a tactic in itself, though sabotaging the police's infrastructure (see taking out cars) is. But you know what is?


Self-defense. I really hope it doesn't reach that point, but if it does, it's not the community's fault.

 

[entremet]

You can be appalled by institutionalized racism and murder of black people by cops and still disagree with the trashing of local businesses.

Basically. This binary thinking in both threads is something I can't understand.

 

[Rabbi_Vole]

Basically. This binary thinking in both threads is something I can't understand.

It's driven by emotion. Maybe you're an android.

 

[Derwind]

Civil Rights Movement.

The headlines today can almost be seen word for word in the headlines during the civil rights era.

 

[entremet]

It's driven by emotion. Maybe you're an android.

Oh I understand it. But you can hate the terrible injustices that the Black community has had with the legal system and modern policing in the US. I saw it all the time growing up in black neighborhoods.

But I can't endorse the actions of the rioters. It's just depressing to see.

 

[IISANDERII]

You can be appalled by institutionalized racism and murder of black people by cops and still disagree with the trashing of local businesses.

Disagree all you want but you cannot deny cause and effect.

 

[Rabbi_Vole]

Disagree all you want but you cannot deny cause and effect.

Same for the effect this will have on commerce and ongoing police relations in the area. Perpetuating the spiral.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Same for the effect this will have on commerce and ongoing police relations in the area. Perpetuating the spiral.

You're not wrong, there is no benefit to what is going on now - or as Amir0x would say, there's a good 26% chance that it will be beneficial. But at the same time it's interesting that the dominant outrage these situations garner tends to focus on property damage, not the police violence and murder of innocent citizens that sparked it. Rioting is an act of violence, but it is a response to violence. Violence begets violence. But the violence the rioters are demonstrating isn't effective - either as a means of changing things or as a means of being truly violent. It's a half measure of violence.

 

[Dyno]

Looting during riots is sadly a sound strategy because it's add a long-term dynamic to the conflict. While civilian rioters are not likely to win a tactical victory over law enforcement they are well situated to win a war of attrition in the long run.

The same logic guides terrorism campaigns against occupying forces. An IED may cost $100 to assemble and it may take out $100,000+ worth of equipment and trained men. After a few bombs the army must then start buying $1,000,000 armoured vehicles, all to thwart a $100 explosive. This is the kind of drawn out campaign that the powerful fear.

Rocks are free but a store has to spend thousands of dollars on windows for repairs. After a few more rocks go through the new windows the store has to spend thousands more on security roll doors or cages. Now you have a neighbourhood that looks like a prision which in time will cause business to leave with no clients to take their place. The tax base goes down. Vacancy soars. Everybody with means and money doesn't want that to happen, so they start bugging elected officials and then suddenly 'community based policing' becomes a thing and the powers that be start working with people instead of lording over them. And things get better, for a while...

Looting hits the establishment where it hurts the most. It fucks with their ability to generate money. It is a more effective and safe-to-use tactic then attacking a police officer. Remember that all established society plays some part in the status quo.

 

[NimbusD]

Coates says it best

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/nonviolence-as-compliance/391640/

This is a great article, just quoting it to get more attention.

When nonviolence is preached as an attempt to evade the repercussions of political brutality, it betrays itself. When nonviolence begins halfway through the war with the aggressor calling time out, it exposes itself as a ruse. When nonviolence is preached by the representatives of the state, while the state doles out heaps of violence to its citizens, it reveals itself to be a con. And none of this can mean that rioting or violence is "correct" or "wise," any more than a forest fire can be "correct" or "wise." Wisdom isn't the point tonight. Disrespect is. In this case, disrespect for the hollow law and failed order that so regularly disrespects the community.

 

[soleil]

I don't have much of an opinion on whether the violence in the riots helps or hinders social progress, but what gets me mad is how a lot of people who spoke up to denounce property damage by rioters were silent when human lives were being killed by the police.

And it's not like the violent rioters are doing this every day of their lives. But they DO live in fear of police every day of their lives. Eventually it takes a toll on you and you act out, right or wrong. And as wrong as it is, the police brutality is worse. The people who didn't speak out against police brutality shouldn't be complaining about property damage from riots.

 

[commedieu]

Thank you Amirox.




You do not suck.

 

[IISANDERII]

I don't have much of an opinion on whether the violence in the riots helps or hinders social progress, but what gets me mad is how a lot of people who spoke up to denounce property damage by rioters were silent when human lives were being killed by the police.

And it's not like the violent rioters are doing this every day of their lives. But they DO live in fear of police every day of their lives. Eventually it takes a toll on you and you act out, right or wrong. And as wrong as it is, the police brutality is worse. The people who didn't speak out against police brutality shouldn't be complaining about property damage from riots.

Yep, this is what I was going to say, well said.

Where were these officials when all those citizens like Gray were being brutalized and killed by police? I blame the media too, whose biases are disgusting.

 

[poppabk]

Looting during riots is sadly a sound strategy because it's add a long-term dynamic to the conflict. While civilian rioters are not likely to win a tactical victory over law enforcement they are well situated to win a war of attrition in the long run.

The same logic guides terrorism campaigns against occupying forces. An IED may cost $100 to assemble and it may take out $100,000+ worth of equipment and trained men. After a few bombs the army must then start buying $1,000,000 armoured vehicles, all to thwart a $100 explosive. This is the kind of drawn out campaign that the powerful fear.

Rocks are free but a store has to spend thousands of dollars on windows for repairs. After a few more rocks go through the new windows the store has to spend thousands more on security roll doors or cages. Now you have a neighbourhood that looks like a prision which in time will cause business to leave with no clients to take their place. The tax base goes down. Vacancy soars. Everybody with means and money doesn't want that to happen, so they start bugging elected officials and then suddenly 'community based policing' becomes a thing and the powers that be start working with people instead of lording over them. And things get better, for a while...

Looting hits the establishment where it hurts the most. It fucks with their ability to generate money. It is a more effective and safe-to-use tactic then attacking a police officer. Remember that all established society plays some part in the status quo.

No you were good until the end there. Big businesses claim against insurance, write down the loss for tax purposes and bail. People with means move to a different part of town or a new town, the rundown part of town remains rundown. At best some property developer buys the land for pennies on the dollar, bulldozes it and builds high price condos or a mall.

 

[kirby_fox]

I think it's easier to see a broken window, than it is to see a broken establishment. You can fix a window really easy, complain about it really easily, talk about how unnecessary it is and move on with life and a brand new window.

But you can't fix a police force that can potentially ruin your life by throwing you in jail with a phone call. You complain about the police being racist and you get people shouting that they're just doing their jobs, and when you call them "privileged" or "passive racists" they get mad at you because they don't understand. Because they've never seen that reality and can only see as far as their own anecdotal evidence goes.

All they can see are broken windows, and everyone knows it hurts a business if they have a broken window.

 

[kiunchbb]

Will government really listen to riots? I am sure the demand is loud and clear.

If government respond to the rioters demand, wouldn't that just encourage even more riots in the future?

I guess this is why every time there's a riot, everyone is focus on property damage instead of the message itself.

It is easy to say all the property damage is "worth it" for progress, will you guys say the same if the damage happened to you? "My business got destroy and I won't be able to provide for my family for a few months, oh well at least we going to end police brutality."

Why don't people burn their own house or car as protest, I am sure that will get a lot of coverage.

 

[xblarcade]

Great OP!!

With Violent protests being successful 26% of the time, wouldn't you have to know what % of those violent protests hurt the cause before using the statistic as a guide of what should be done?

Given the damage to national mindset, clean up monies no longer being used to help better the socio-economic issues, and many other consequences of Violent protests, I would argue that the number is definitely not zero.

 

[redmetal86]

Interesting thread. This chain of outcomes have been happening for years. Hopefully before the end of my lifetime it will end, but I wouldn't hold my breath. How do we solve a problem that is so deeply rooted in our society? I guess there is no one solution, but something has to be done, because right now, it just feels like we're putting band aids on the same wound over and over.

 

[Bleepey]

I read the OP and I think rioting is generally bullshit. I find it weird that someone can argue that rioting will lead to necessary change, when all it does is will lead to people being less sympathetic to your cause when they see people looting electrical goods and from small businesses. These things are generally an excuse for opportunistic theft and IMO they show how their is a need for people in these communities to own the businesses in their communities. I recall Michael brown's father advocating violence and a part of me is like i am sorry for your loss but if you endorse such silliness, what will it lead to. Whose businesses will be ruined, who will have to pay for the rebuilding when the dust settles. Some may cite Ghandi and MLK for examples of how successful non-violent protest can work, others may cite Mandela, probably not the best example, but non violent things like divestment brought about huge change.

 

[Tinfoilhatsron]

You can be appalled by institutionalized racism and murder of black people by cops and still disagree with the trashing of local businesses.

Is this that hard to understand? Is there no middleground on debate? I think this rationale is pretty sensible. I agree with protesting in both ways. However. Innocent people getting hurt in physical, emotional, and economical ways, it really hurts man. What a werid paradoxical viewpoint eh?

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Is this that hard to understand?

It has nothing to do with understanding, and everything to do with how that idea is then executed by the people normally saying it.

Or not executed, because it tends to involve them doing nothing. And boom! That's why there's an argument.

 

[jakonovski]

people being less sympathetic to your cause

The cause is not getting brutalized and murdered by the state. If you're not sympathetic to that, you're literally a danger to their lives.