4 ms·

To paraphrase MLK, riots are the voice of the unheard. When we, as a society, fail to listen to the plight of our neighbors, violence is the result. We can be

To paraphrase MLK, riots are the voice of the unheard. When we, as a society, fail to listen to the plight of our neighbors, violence is the result. We can beef up our policing and surveillance operations in a futile attempt to lessen the impact of violent riots. Or, we can spend that effort or listening and making changes to the systems that cause these riots in the first place. Yes, rioting is illegal and should remain so. But arresting rioters is treating a symptom, not the disease.

floor2 5y ago
If you re-read your own post, but this time think about the Jan 6th violence at the Capital or the 2014 Bundy standoff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff) do you feel the same? The "voice of the unheard" argument is a nice rationalization when we sympathize and agree with the violent actors, but, at least for me, it doesn't seem to resonate much when I don't. I can listen to the Jan 6 people say the election was fraudulent or I can listen to Bundy say he should be able to graze his cattle on public land for free... but after listening to their plight I still disagree and I still hold them responsible for their violent actions. Personally, I'd rather we accept that large groups shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of a few affiliated people, while holding individuals responsible for their own actions.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  I still disagree and I still hold them responsible for their violent actions. We're in agreement there. I didn't say we should drop all policing related to violent political protest. I said we need to realize increased policing isn't a solution to violent political protest. WRT Jan 6, the root cause is complicated (understatement of the year). But, stagnating wages, continued urbanization and globalization, and an out of touch political class all contribute. Those things (plus others) need fixed or we'll get a repeat of Jan 6 next election cycle.
- ear7h 5y ago
  I think you're proving [my interpretation of the] "unheard voice" argument. You're saying that that the rioting/violence is not what makes Jan 6/Bundy or their respective groups bad, it's their "unheard voice". I don't think MLK meant that violence is always okay, rather that we should think about the demands/motivation for the violence when assessing the groups that cause it.
  - alistairSH 5y ago
    Correct. Though I'm not convinced Bundy has an unheard voice. He's a rich white rancher. He doesn't want to pay for grazing rights on BLM land. The fact that he can be a giant gun-toting asshole, get media attention, and not get shot or tossed in jail shows me he has a voice. Or at least more of a voice than many other people. I consider him something wholly different than the Jan 6 mob.
    - meatsauce 5y ago
      Your statement couldn't be more racist.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  Those perps were handled with kid gloves. Had they been black people they would have been mowed down like vermin.
mbostleman 5y ago
Ok so let's say we take the best possible actions to fix "the systems" that are the cause of illegal and violent activity. What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Your proposal creates a model where there are now two problems. It sounds like you're saying only one should be allowed to be worked on.
- mulmen 5y ago
  > What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Yes. American policing has a long, clear, consistent, and violent history of racially and politically motivated abuses of power. “Predictive policing” is a license to continue those practices.
  - meatsauce 5y ago
- turndown 5y ago
  I think you're oversimplifying the argument a bit. Nobody is arguing with your second point, the other poster simply said that increasing police strength isn't a long term solution(or even much of a short term one.) I also don't think the person you're responding to is really casting arresting criminals in a negative light itself, just that it is trying to fix a problem by only solving the second order problem, criminals committing crimes, and not the first order problem, eg economic racism/inequality, gerrymandering in every state of this country, etc, that causes people that face the worst problems of any people in our country to not have any advocates in government because their voices are designed to be drowned out politically and economically.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Given police propensity to massively overreach, especially with preventative surveillance programs, I'd prefer we further regulate their ability to rollout and operate such programs. Not eliminate them completely. In this specific case, the program was nominally created to maintain peace during the Chauvin trial. That's over, the program should have died, or failing that, at least undergone external/public review to validate it was legal, fit-for-purpose, etc.
warning26 5y ago
ianbicking 5y ago
I literally watched these riots from my window. The MLK quote is silly. The protesters did break windows, painted a lot of graffiti, and took and burned police precinct(!) But it wasn't protesters starting fires and looting. The looting was entirely opportunistic. At first there were people in the neighborhood but it quickly turned into something else, with many looters literally driving into the neighborhood and parking so they could carry out their loot. During later events, like sentences being announced, people have probed to see if it's possible again. But it never reached critical mass. It's not a protest phenomena, and I think "voice of the unheard" is complete bullshit. It's just people who want to steal things. It IS revealing: it doesn't take that many people to decide to act with impunity before things break down. And in that sense I suppose the protesters did inspire the looting as they did the unbelievable. But it simply wasn't the same people. The arson, I just don't know... it doesn't take many people. What little we know from convictions mostly involve people outside the community with little clear purpose. Some people just like to burn things. Given the actual buildings burned down it is nearly the opposite of what protesters with any ideology or connection to the community would do. There are theories of outside agitators, but who knows...
meatsauce 5y ago

floor2 5y ago

If you re-read your own post, but this time think about the Jan 6th violence at the Capital or the 2014 Bundy standoff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff) do you feel the same? The "voice of the unheard" argument is a nice rationalization when we sympathize and agree with the violent actors, but, at least for me, it doesn't seem to resonate much when I don't. I can listen to the Jan 6 people say the election was fraudulent or I can listen to Bundy say he should be able to graze his cattle on public land for free... but after listening to their plight I still disagree and I still hold them responsible for their violent actions. Personally, I'd rather we accept that large groups shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of a few affiliated people, while holding individuals responsible for their own actions.

alistairSH 5y ago
I still disagree and I still hold them responsible for their violent actions. We're in agreement there. I didn't say we should drop all policing related to violent political protest. I said we need to realize increased policing isn't a solution to violent political protest. WRT Jan 6, the root cause is complicated (understatement of the year). But, stagnating wages, continued urbanization and globalization, and an out of touch political class all contribute. Those things (plus others) need fixed or we'll get a repeat of Jan 6 next election cycle.
ear7h 5y ago
I think you're proving [my interpretation of the] "unheard voice" argument. You're saying that that the rioting/violence is not what makes Jan 6/Bundy or their respective groups bad, it's their "unheard voice". I don't think MLK meant that violence is always okay, rather that we should think about the demands/motivation for the violence when assessing the groups that cause it.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  Correct. Though I'm not convinced Bundy has an unheard voice. He's a rich white rancher. He doesn't want to pay for grazing rights on BLM land. The fact that he can be a giant gun-toting asshole, get media attention, and not get shot or tossed in jail shows me he has a voice. Or at least more of a voice than many other people. I consider him something wholly different than the Jan 6 mob.
  - meatsauce 5y ago
    Your statement couldn't be more racist.
ncmncm 5y ago
Those perps were handled with kid gloves. Had they been black people they would have been mowed down like vermin.

mbostleman 5y ago

Ok so let's say we take the best possible actions to fix "the systems" that are the cause of illegal and violent activity. What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Your proposal creates a model where there are now two problems. It sounds like you're saying only one should be allowed to be worked on.

mulmen 5y ago
> What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Yes. American policing has a long, clear, consistent, and violent history of racially and politically motivated abuses of power. “Predictive policing” is a license to continue those practices.
- meatsauce 5y ago
turndown 5y ago
I think you're oversimplifying the argument a bit. Nobody is arguing with your second point, the other poster simply said that increasing police strength isn't a long term solution(or even much of a short term one.) I also don't think the person you're responding to is really casting arresting criminals in a negative light itself, just that it is trying to fix a problem by only solving the second order problem, criminals committing crimes, and not the first order problem, eg economic racism/inequality, gerrymandering in every state of this country, etc, that causes people that face the worst problems of any people in our country to not have any advocates in government because their voices are designed to be drowned out politically and economically.
alistairSH 5y ago
What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Given police propensity to massively overreach, especially with preventative surveillance programs, I'd prefer we further regulate their ability to rollout and operate such programs. Not eliminate them completely. In this specific case, the program was nominally created to maintain peace during the Chauvin trial. That's over, the program should have died, or failing that, at least undergone external/public review to validate it was legal, fit-for-purpose, etc.

warning26 5y ago

ianbicking 5y ago

I literally watched these riots from my window. The MLK quote is silly. The protesters did break windows, painted a lot of graffiti, and took and burned police precinct(!) But it wasn't protesters starting fires and looting. The looting was entirely opportunistic. At first there were people in the neighborhood but it quickly turned into something else, with many looters literally driving into the neighborhood and parking so they could carry out their loot. During later events, like sentences being announced, people have probed to see if it's possible again. But it never reached critical mass. It's not a protest phenomena, and I think "voice of the unheard" is complete bullshit. It's just people who want to steal things. It IS revealing: it doesn't take that many people to decide to act with impunity before things break down. And in that sense I suppose the protesters did inspire the looting as they did the unbelievable. But it simply wasn't the same people. The arson, I just don't know... it doesn't take many people. What little we know from convictions mostly involve people outside the community with little clear purpose. Some people just like to burn things. Given the actual buildings burned down it is nearly the opposite of what protesters with any ideology or connection to the community would do. There are theories of outside agitators, but who knows...

meatsauce 5y ago