4 ms·

I don't know about you, but the riots have very much turned me off to activism lately. There were riots single-digit blocks away from my Oakland apartment where

• HarryHirsch 11y ago
  And that's your piece of first-hand experience why rampant inequality afflicts even the wealthy.
  • mindslight 11y ago
    It's not so much inequality as injustice. Belief in the system is what keeps the violent mob at bay. When that's destroyed, it's clear they're going to run into trouble sooner or later. So they might as well get something for it. The injustice of the broken court system is more widespread than the hashtags would lead you to believe. You just get more benefit of the doubt if you look like the judge/persecutor, and it's easier to avoid serious harm if you have better-paid representation.
  • Kalium 11y ago
    Somehow, I think this is not the response they were hoping for. Right now my main question is not if I can placate rioters by giving them what they want.
    • HarryHirsch 11y ago
      It's not about what they want, it's what you get, post-riot. You have roughly three choices: move avay and incur a longer commute, pay more for (private) security, or continue living where you are with an increased risk of violent crime. Things shouldn't have been allowed to escalate that much.
      • Kalium 11y ago
        OK. It's about what I get, post-riot. What I've got, post-riot, is an inclination to support Oakland PD - horrifying record and all - over possibly-well-meaning rioters. Reforming OPD seems much more tractable than addressing issues over which local politics hold little to no sway.
• retbull 11y ago
  I don't support the rioters. However they faced the exact same treatment from those who were supposed to protect them. They were fucked over and abused and had their lives smashed simply because they were poor or black or different. The message that they wanted expressed is being effectively expressed at the cost of innocents just like they were innocent and abused.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • Kalium 11y ago
    Obviously, I don't support the rioters. And the riots have put me in an awkward position. I can say I don't support the rioters while still supporting and pushing for what the rioters want. However, if I do this, any successes can and will be treated as successes by the rioters. The predictable result will be more riots, because people will conclude that riots get them what they want. Alternately, I can refuse to advocate for policies called for by rioters, because under no circumstances do I want to encourage riots. That's the bind I'm in. I'm erring on the side of personal safety, because I'm not real interested in having my face smashed in with a crowbar for the cause of today's riot.
    • retbull 11y ago
      People don't like rioting either it isn't going to happen forever. Also people aren't stupid though some of them might actually think that most won't and it will (hopefully) fall apart.
      • Kalium 11y ago
        It's a common article of faith in some of the politically leftist circles I move in that riots further the cause of justice (for the contexual value of justice).
        • tsotha 11y ago
          You move in a circle of fools. For every person cheering the rioters there are ten people turned off to anything with which the rioters are associated. If anything, the riots (along with the recent surge in violent crime) are going to end the nascent sentencing reform efforts that have been wending their way through Congress. We may have to wait another generation before we can try again.
• littletimmy 11y ago
  They don't give a shit that you don't care. From their perspective, you don't get to have a peaceful middle class life if they don't get to have any peace. Fair enough?
  • Kalium 11y ago
    Fair enough, but I think what they get from me isn't actually what they want. EDIT: To clarify, I cared about what they wanted right up to this point.
    • littletimmy 11y ago
      If "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" is not guaranteed for these rioters by the state, then there is no social contract. In the absence of a social contract, the rioters are justified in raping, pillaging, and murdering to their heart's content. How do you not see that the rioters are justified?
      • Karunamon 11y ago
        "Raping, pillaging, and murdering" is never "justified", period, end of story.
        • littletimmy 11y ago
          If and only if there exists a social contract. Without it, man exists in state of perpetual war where anything goes.
          • Karunamon 11y ago
            They very idea of a "social contract" is a model that implies a state with authority over its citizens. Somehow, I don't think people automatically regress to "perpetual war" without the existence of a state. And using words like "justified" to describe regressive, destructive behavior is utter nonsense.
      • 11y ago
• fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  >the riots Be careful as you judge the quality of the issues based upon what the news and local police call "riots" and "rioters". The media hasn't always been reliable or objective in applying those labels, and law enforcement officials have also been unable to resist editorializing or even telling outright lies. Police as well have been caught instigating disturbances and antagonizing protesters. >Anything those people want and advocate now makes me think "Fuck you, more $$$ for da popo". There are many more people who are opposed to injustice, and who deserve fair treatment than the group of opportunistic assholes who take advantage of these situations for criminal ends.
  • Kalium 11y ago
    The riots I am thinking of happened precisely when a peaceful demonstration got away from its police escort. To repeat, it was peaceful so long as the police were present. Can't blame the police for this one. And I'm talking about things that happened two blocks from my apartment here. I saw the wreckage. It was several months before all the damage was repaired. > There are many more people who are opposed to injustice, and who deserve fair treatment than the group of opportunistic assholes who take advantage of these situations for criminal ends. Yes. There are. I feel empathy for them, because my desire to not give rioters propaganda fodder comes at their expense. Come up with a way for me to support fighting injustice that cannot and will not be turned around to argue that riots fix injustice, and I'll be there with bells on. Otherwise, I'm put in the position of being asked to encourage riots and measurably sacrifice my personal safety and well-being. And that's... a difficult pitch.
    • fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
      >Come up with a way for me to support fighting injustice that cannot and will not be turned around to argue that riots fix injustice, One way to fix that is fair governance, or you know, work to stop injustice before anyone riots. One thing that's pretty clear now is that the government can treat groups of people pretty badly and for a long while before anyone will lift a finger. >I'll be there with bells on. No, sadly it was predictable that people would not tolerate endless systemic corruption and injustice, yet very few people were working to change it, or in most cases even aware of it before the "riots". It sounds almost like you want obvious injustice to be allowed to continue just to spite the relatively small number of violent protesters; lest people might be encouraged to use violence to gain attention for their political ends. The answer to injustice is when it becomes apparent to end it, full stop. It doesn't require you to endorse rioting, either.
• mazelife 11y ago
  So when a small group of individuals riots that somehow validates, for you, the injustices experienced by the larger majority? That suggests a pretty shallow commitment in the first place. Look, I'm a Baltimore resident and I hated to see the rioting that occurred here back in the summer. I understand why it happened and what motivated it, but it didn't really move the ball forward for anyone that cared about fighting for justice. However, in the days and weeks leading up to the riots, there were large scale, peaceful protests in the city involving many, many more people then rioted. (A fact the national media paid virtually no attention to.) Most people out there don't think activism = violence or necessarily leads to violence. It's quite possible to make a distinction between rioting (and I think most of our Baltimore rioters were just using the situation as a pretext to rob and loot anyway) and activism.
• marcusgarvey 11y ago
  About a week ago, tens of thousands of black people peacefully gathered at the Washington Mall. Their reasons for coming together were not too dissimilar from the rioters of past incidents. Nary a peep was heard out of the mainstream media about this peaceful march. Riots, on the other hand, seem to cause the media hordes to descend and at least draw attention to the cause. It's hard to argue the fact that they are at least useful for consciousness -raising.
  • Kalium 11y ago
    It sure raised my consciousness. Clear into what they didn't want. It should be noted that studies of the subject show that riots tend to make voters in areas that hosted riots more conservative.
    • marcusgarvey 11y ago
      It should be noted that, for millennia, violence and destruction are considered perfectly acceptable means for accomplishing political objectives. But only when performed by state actors, of course. IMO: the riots start out as protests. Then a minority of people choose to cause mayhem. Another minority are criminals and they do what criminals do, which is act opportunistically. And yes, agents provocateur do exist. But sure, I can understand why people who are directly affected would prefer to have no protests at all out of fear that a riot might happen. They love order more than justice, an attitude which, ironically, has helped to create the very same conditions that people are protesting.
      • Kalium 11y ago
        It's much easier for people to be principled when their self-interest is not at stake. I'm not opposed to peaceful protests. I've been in some myself. I am very much against riots and romanticizing riots as a form of productive protest. Agent provocateurs do exist, but I think it's unreasonable to pretend (as some do) that all riots are due to such.
        • 11y ago
• whoopdedo 11y ago
  Social unrest is supposed to make you feel uncomfortable. The same way chemotherapy drugs are supposed to make you feel sick. Government overreach and police abuse are comparable to cancer. In both cases you have a part of a system that when functioning normally will maintain stability. But the local components become confused about their instructions and act in a way that is counterproductive to the health of the larger structure. The malady will spread and convert nearby healthy cells into cancerous cells. Because the culprits are normal parts of the body it is difficult to isolate the good from bad and the cures that are good at removing the bad cells have the side effect of damaging or disrupting good cells. But a temporary manageable pain is better than allowing a destructive impulse to destroy the body from the inside-out.
  • happyscrappy 11y ago
    The police are the chemo and the cancer is crime.
    • g8oz 11y ago
      Unaccountable police give the same results as uncontrolled chemo.
    • whoopdedo 11y ago
      You missed the analogy so I'll summarize it again. Crime is infectious disease. The law is an immune system. Injustice is leukemia. Revolution is chemo.