Posted on 05/28/2020 10:23:46 PM PDT by Trump20162020
The recent spate of protests against police brutality have changed the way the left thinks about rioting. The old liberal idea, which distinguished between peaceful protests (good) and rioting (bad), has given way to a more radical analysis. “Riots work,” insists George Ciccariello-Maher in Salon. “But despite the obviousness of the point, an entire chorus of media, police, and self-appointed community leaders continue to try to convince us otherwise, hammering into our heads a narrative of a nonviolence that has never worked on its own, based on a mythical understanding of the Civil Rights Movement.” Vox’s German Lopez, while acknowledging the downside of random violence, argues, “Riots can lead to real, substantial change.” In Rolling Stone, Jesse Myerson asserts, “the historical pedigree of property destruction as a tactic of resistance is long and frequently effective.” Darlena Cunha, writing in Time, asks, “Is rioting so wrong?” and proceeds to answer her own question in the negative.
But the question is not whether rioting ever yields a productive response, but whether it does so in general. Omar Wasow, an assistant professor at the department of politics at Princeton, has published a timely new paper studying this very question. And his answer is clear: Riots on the whole provoke a hostile right-wing response. They generate attention, all right, but the wrong kind.
(Excerpt) Read more at nymag.com ...
It worked in 1968
“It worked in 1968”
LA Riots in 1992?
Not enough of a national phenomenon. Miami riots also didn't have much of an effect. Maybe people already don't think of LA or Miami as part of the United States.
Firearms sales should go through the roof.
My AK will accompany me while driving over the road again now.
What’s good for goose...The leftists who believe that riots are a good way to force change should be careful what they wish for-the other “side” can riot too.
L.A. riots would have worked for GHWB in 1992, except for that little third party troublemaker Ross Perot who enabled Clinton to win with a 43% plurality after Dukakis had lost with 44% in 1988.
The little bastard later admitted he entered the race only to derail Bush.
Minneapolis riots, and now Louisville riots, will help PDJT to win the same way the ‘67-68 riots helped Richard Nixon.
Chief indicator: through the roof gun sales like in 1968. I bought a riot barrel for my Remington that same year. People are arming up and Biden can’t stop them. MAGA!
First thing I thought.
Well, I tried to read that paper, but I found myself trying to figure out whether it was opposing or favoring the Cloward and Piven “Rules For Radicals”.
I find my personal experience and the Wikipedia article below more informative.
Mid-morning on Sunday July 23, 1967, in Detroit, Michigan I was driving down Grand River Boulevard from my home to my office in Detroit to prepare for a management review the following day. About half way there I noticed huge clouds of smoke on my left, and numerous fire trucks, ambulances, and police cars headed that way. I was then alone in my office and getting radio reports of what was happening. I looked outside and saw a group of people carrying loot out of a closed store across the street and contacted police, who advised me to NOT try to get back home until the situation was resolved, and to make sure my office (on the third floor of a building deserted except for me) was secure.
Long story short: I spent the next two nights sleeping on the floor in my office, eating from vending machines in the building, and watching (from carefully darkened windows) vandals (white and black) smashing windows and looting stores in the street below, with NO police response. I finally got back home on Tuesday by joining a National Guard convoy back up Grand River Boulevard toward my home.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot
is informative as to how the “riot” started and progressed, reactions of the politicians as well as the people, and a summary of the deaths and damage.
It also includes a fair analysis of the root problems in Detroit leading up to this event and its aftermath.
I find the concluding paragraphs very helpful in understanding what is happening in Minneapolis and St. Paul today. I copy them here:
Start of copy from Wikipedia article:
Was it a “Rebellion”
Forty years later, the event remained a source of reflection for the community. The Detroit newspapers covered the 40th anniversary of the uprising in 2007. Coverage often labeled the event in terms of a “riot”; however, the focus of the coverage opened the door to a transition of framing. Several articles referred to the event as a rebellion and others specifically questioned the implications of thinking about the event in terms other than a riot.
Now, ten years later, the word is changing again. The word “rebellion,” according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, is defined as “an instance of open and armed defiance or resistance to an established government”.
The word “riot” is “a tumultuous disturbance of the public peace; unrestrained revelry.”
In light of that analysis, a new word that has become more popular and widely used is “uprising.” As defined by Miriam-Webster Dictionary, an uprising is “a usually localized act of popular violence in defiance of an established government.” As there was no formal leadership in ‘67, it could not have been a rebellion, and yet, this was far more than simply a riot. Calling these events an uprising hints at the depth and complexity of this time.
End of copy from Wikipedia article:
My conclusion:
The “riot” in Detroit started with a raid by white police on a black nightclub and the reaction by bystanders to that raid. It then quickly evolved into a full-fledged “rebellion” in defiance of an established government.
The “riot” in Minneapolis started with an apparent murder of a black man by a white police officer, with 3 other white police officers standing by.
It then quickly evolved into a full-fledged “rebellion” in defiance of an established government.
Subsequent to the rebellion in Detroit, I did NOT see a significant movement to “conservatism” in Detroit. I saw, instead the complete collapse of the Detroit economy over the next 30 years.
I hope Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer understands this and takes careful note.
“Riots work,” insists George Ciccariello-Maher in Salon.
Only if the police protect the rioters.
Minneapolis riots, Louisville riots, and now Columbus riots will get PDJT reelected.
“Understand the rage!” won’t work this time.
Don’t like our Deplorables’ attitude, Hillary? Molon labe!!
BS. Occupy Thugs ruled the day and Obama was still re-elected.
The threat of riots helped elect Obama in 2012 - not the sole decider, but everyone ‘doing their bit’ to advance The Glorious Cause.
Note from the Communist Goals from 1963:
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under
Communist attack.
Yes, it says ‘students’, but considering the Occutards, the Antifada, and the BLM chip-outs, the concept is still the same: it gives the herbivores the impression that the nation is rising up against The Orange Man.
Riots cause cities to become more leftist as swing voters run for the hills and beyond where they then tend to vote more conservatively. Nothing generates new Republicans faster than Democrats rioting and looting.
Cause and effect fallacy (sort of). Just because Obama was elected doesn’t mean that Occupy had a positive effect on voters.
No, no, no. Giving a haircut is a crime. Refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding is a crime.
Looting a target is “fighting historical oppression.”
Bump
If that meme isn’t all over Twitter, it should be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.