Why are the riots different this time?

[fredtoast]

For many years we have had racially charged incidents that have led to rioting. 1980 in Miami, 1992 in Los Angeles (Rodney King), 2001 in Cincinnati, 2014 in Ferguson (nationwide) after the Michal Brown killing. But they have all died down after a while and things went back to "normal". So why have the current riots been going non-stop for months?

Lots of people want to blame the media, but the media has always been infatuated with rioting and gave them heavy coverage.

In my opinion the biggest difference is that we currently have a President who is the darling of white nationalist and white supremacists. His supporters will argue that he is not racists, but unfortunately minorities have seen a lot of evidence to the contrary. I don't know if Trump personally dislikes minorities, but he is clearly courting the racist vote.

-He welcomes the Confederate Battle Flag at his rallies.

-He originally lied about his relationship with KKK Grand Wizard David Duke. Duke is a huge Trump supporter.

-When talking about Mexican immigrants Trump claimed that they were all the bad people that Mexico wanted to get rid of. “When Mexico sends its people, They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

-He said that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel would not rule fairly because his parents were from Mexico.

-He called Colin Kaepernick a "son of a *****" and said he should lose his job for exercising his Constitutional rights to protest against racial injustice.

-He claimed there were "good people" in the Unite the Right crowd that marched through Charlottesville chanting "Blood and soil"

-White nationalists went wild when he told 3 women of color who were born and raised in the United States to go back to "the countries they came from". I am not aware of any sitting President who ever so clearly supported the main tenet of white nationalism. Their entire belief system is based on the belief that even people of color who are born and raised in the United States don't belong in "White America".

-He retweeted a video of a Trump supporter yelling "White power".

-He is doubling down on defending the legacy of the Confederate States who fought a war to defend the institution of slavery.


So i don't see any way these riots slack off any until Biden has been elected. Minorities are just too terrified of the prospect of having a President who is so beloved by white supremacists and white nationalist. And they have seen that he will use his power against peaceful protestors for even the smallest whim like a publicity photo in front of a church. Not to protect the country or carry on official business of the Presidency, but simply to do do something 100% self-serving to help him get re-elected.

[Dill]

(08-31-2020, 02:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So i don't see any way these riots slack off any until Biden has been elected.  Minorities are just too terrified of the prospect of having a President who is so beloved by white supremacists and white nationalist.  And they have seen that he will use his power against peaceful protestors for even the smallest whim like a publicity photo in front of a church.  Not to protect the country or carry on official business of the Presidency, but simply to do do something 100% self-serving to help him get re-elected.

The fact black citizens continue to appear in videos showing them victims of police violence also keeps it going.

The riots will continue even under Biden unless he explicitly addresses the problem of "police culture" and police unions, as happened under Obama's DOJ.

[fredtoast]

(08-31-2020, 03:59 PM)Dill Wrote: The riots will continue even under Biden unless he explicitly addresses the problem of "police culture" and police unions,

Correct.  I did not mean they would stop protesting just because we got a new president.  But if Biden makes some reasonable proposals I believe they will step back and give them some time to have an effect.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-31-2020, 03:59 PM)Dill Wrote: The fact black citizens continue to appear in videos showing them victims of police violence also keeps it going.

Nah.  Even when the person shot clearly deserved to be shot you get rioting, looting and arson.

Quote:The riots will continue even under Biden unless he explicitly addresses the problem of "police culture" and police unions, as happened under Obama's DOJ.

I don't need to ask what you think is wrong with "police culture".  I do need to ask what is wrong with police unions?  

[*bfine32*]

Saving folks for having to read all those words in the OP and providing Cliff Notes.

Why are these riots different? Cause Trump.

[Vas Deferens]

(08-31-2020, 11:57 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Nah.  Even when the person shot clearly deserved to be shot you get rioting, looting and arson.


I don't need to ask what you think is wrong with "police culture".  I do need to ask what is wrong with police unions?  

Who clearly deserved to be shot?

Police unions have shown themselves incapable of self-governance. But we know this.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-01-2020, 12:24 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Who clearly deserved to be shot?

This dude.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/8/9/21361035/police-shooting-englewood-suspect-custody

Quote:Police unions have shown themselves incapable of self-governance.  But we know this.

Unions exist to advocate for union members and give them a collective bargaining power.  What self governing have they not done?

[Dill]

(08-31-2020, 11:57 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Dill Wrote: The fact black citizens continue to appear in videos showing them victims of police violence also keeps it going.

Nah.  Even when the person shot clearly deserved to be shot you get rioting, looting and arson.
I don't need to ask what you think is wrong with "police culture".  I do need to ask what is wrong with police unions?  

??? I suppose that is why the country is divided millions disagree on who "deserves" to be shot.

And such shootings lead to protests by hundreds of thousands, upon which dozens or a few hundred rioters attach themselves.

Police unions help protect the kind of police behavior which sets off the protests, sometimes followed by riots.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/06/us/police-unions-minneapolis-kroll.html
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/08/03/how-police-unions-fight-reform
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-police-union-power-helped-increase-abuses
https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2020/08/police-unions-minneapolis/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/robert-krolls-rise-from-barroom-brawler-to-minneapolis-police-union-boss-11594159577

[Belsnickel]

(08-31-2020, 11:57 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Nah.  Even when the person shot clearly deserved to be shot you get rioting, looting and arson.

While I get what you're saying, here, the word choice is being latched onto. You may have been better served to say "Even when a shooting was completely justified." Saying someone deserved to be shot is a moral/subjective position while a justified shooting has a more objective tone.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-01-2020, 02:37 AM)Dill Wrote: ??? I suppose that is why the country is divided millions disagree on who "deserves" to be shot.

And such shootings lead to protests by hundreds of thousands, upon which dozens or a few hundred rioters attach themselves.

Sure.  Of course that argument doesn't seem to hold any water for you when we comment on the "many people" who support something you don't like.  This is why your positions often fall flat, they are inconsistent.

Quote:Police unions help protect the kind of police behavior which sets of the protests, sometimes followed by riots.

Quote:https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/06/us/police-unions-minneapolis-kroll.html
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/08/03/how-police-unions-fight-reform
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-police-union-power-helped-increase-abuses
https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2020/08/police-unions-minneapolis/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/robert-krolls-rise-from-barroom-brawler-to-minneapolis-police-union-boss-11594159577

The union's job is to defend its members.  They are no different in this regard than the public defenders office.  I suppose you have zero issue with the public defender giving a vigorous defense to a child rapist or a murderer.

(09-01-2020, 08:26 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: While I get what you're saying, here, the word choice is being latched onto. You may have been better served to say "Even when a shooting was completely justified." Saying someone deserved to be shot is a moral/subjective position while a justified shooting has a more objective tone.

Eh, that's a level of parsing hairs that's minute even for this board.  While I understand the point you are making if someone on here wants to argue that level of minutiae I say let them, they'll be doing it on their own. 

[BmorePat87]

It's an election year, there's a pandemic, there's more social media, more people have the capability of recording things, inept leadership


All factors.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-01-2020, 11:58 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It's an election year, there's a pandemic, there's more social media, more people have the capability of recording things, inept leadership


All factors.

I completely agree.  I'd add that the inept leadership part is pretty much at every level.

[Dill]

(09-01-2020, 11:30 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Sure.  Of course that argument doesn't seem to hold any water for you when we comment on the "many people" who support something you don't like.  This is why your positions often fall flat, they are inconsistent.

The union's job is to defend its members.  They are no different in this regard than the public defenders office.  I suppose you have zero issue with the public defender giving a vigorous defense to a child rapist or a murderer.

Eh, that's a level of parsing hairs that's minute even for this board.  While I understand the point you are making if someone on here wants to argue that level of minutiae I say let them, they'll be doing it on their own.

My point was that the country is divided over what counts as good and bad law enforcement--divided enough for "both sides" to take to the streets now.

That only fails to "hold water" if someone can show the country is not so divided.

It does not fail if someone claims my positions are "inconsistent" without ever indicating which positions and when--i.e., without showing that they are, rather than merely saying it, something you've never been able to do. Even if such could be shown, that would hardly invalidate my point, the truth or falsity of which is independent of any individual poster's "positions." 

As for the defense of police unions--no, the analogy does not hold. I don't think the public defenders job is to cover malfeasance, keep people on the job who should not be, to put its own interest before that of the public it is sworn to defend.

Also, Bels' point concerns the kind of legal "minutiae" that the law, policy and millions of votes turn on. If you were speaking for your union, you'd have just produced a viral soundbite.  If you publicly called the public response to your soundbite a complaint over "minutiae," there'd be another viral soundbite.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-01-2020, 01:06 PM)Dill Wrote: My point was that the country is divided over what counts as good and bad law enforcement--divided enough for "both sides" to take to the streets now.

That only fails to "hold water" if someone can show the country is not so divided.

Wait, so you make a claim and I have to prove it false?  You're absolutely precious.

Quote:It does not fail if someone claims my positions are "inconsistent" without ever indicating which positions and when--i.e., without showing that they are, rather than merely saying it, something you've never been able to do. Even if such could be shown, that would hardly invalidate my point, the truth or falsity of which is independent of any individual poster's "positions." 

You just told me I have to prove you false, so prove me false or risk being... inconsistent. 

Quote:As for the defense of police unions--no, the analogy does not hold. I don't think the public defenders job is to cover malfeasance, keep people on the job who should not be, to put its own interest before that of the public it is sworn to defend.

No, the PD's job is to get criminals free.  You clearly have zero idea how a union works therefore I'm going to have to treat your opinion on them as less than compelling.  A union is supposed to defend its members.  If the department can't prove "malfeasance" in a way that overcomes the union's defense then they didn't have enough evidence to support it.

Quote:Also, Bels' point concerns the kind of legal "minutiae" that the law, policy and millions of votes turn on. If you were speaking for your union, you'd have just produced a viral soundbite. 

Quote:If you publicly called the public response to your soundbite a complaint over "minutiae," there'd be another viral soundbite.

Oooohhhh.  Good thing I'm only speaking on an internet message board where we all know each other and wouldn't dare to nitpick a person's wording when their intent was clear. 

[fredtoast]

(09-01-2020, 12:27 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This dude.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/8/9/21361035/police-shooting-englewood-suspect-custody

Only if you believe the police.

Funny how they all supposed to have body cams but somehow none of them got this encounter on film.

This is Chicago.  I bet you also believed the police story about the Laquan McDonald shooting that happened there, right?  I am sure the citizens of Chicago have not forgotten that incident.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-01-2020, 02:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Only if you believe the police.

Quote:Funny how they all supposed to have body cams but somehow none of them got this encounter on film.

This is Chicago.  I bet you also believed the police story about the Laquan McDonald shooting that happened there, right?  I am sure the citizens of Chicago have not forgotten that incident.

You go Fred.  Whatever it takes to excuse the rioters I guess.  

[GMDino]

Are they different because they are all flying in? 

Trump last night: The Antifa Plane "was coming to the Republican National Convention."

Trump today: "First-hand account of a plane going from Washington to wherever."pic.twitter.com/nP8S4Te9HP

— The Recount (@therecount) September 1, 2020

 

[*PhilHos*]

(08-31-2020, 02:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: For many years we have had racially charged incidents that have led to rioting.  1980 in Miami, 1992 in Los Angeles (Rodney King), 2001 in Cincinnati, 2014 in Ferguson (nationwide) after the Michal Brown killing.  But they have all died down after a while and things went back to "normal".  So why have the current riots been going non-stop for months?

Lots of people want to blame the media, but the media has always been infatuated with rioting and gave them heavy coverage.

In my opinion the biggest difference is that we currently have a President who is the darling of white nationalist and white supremacists.  His supporters will argue that he is not racists, but unfortunately minorities have seen a lot of evidence to the contrary.  I don't know if Trump personally dislikes minorities, but he is clearly courting the racist vote.

-He welcomes the Confederate Battle Flag at his rallies.

-He originally lied about his relationship with KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.  Duke is a huge Trump supporter.

-When talking about Mexican immigrants Trump claimed that they were all the bad people that Mexico wanted to get rid of. “When Mexico sends its people, They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

-He said that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel would not rule fairly because his parents were from Mexico.

-He called Colin Kaepernick a "son of a *****" and said he should lose his job for exercising his Constitutional rights to protest against racial injustice.

-He claimed there were "good people" in the Unite the Right crowd that marched through Charlottesville chanting "Blood and soil"

-White nationalists went wild when he told 3 women of color who were born and raised in the United States to go back to "the countries they came from".  I am not aware of any sitting President who ever so clearly supported the main tenet of white nationalism. Their entire belief system is based on the belief that even people of color who are born and raised in the United States don't belong in "White America".

-He retweeted a video of a Trump supporter yelling "White power".

-He is doubling down on defending the legacy of the Confederate States who fought a war to defend the institution of slavery.


So i don't see any way these riots slack off any until Biden has been elected.  Minorities are just too terrified of the prospect of having a President who is so beloved by white supremacists and white nationalist.  And they have seen that he will use his power against peaceful protestors for even the smallest whim like a publicity photo in front of a church.  Not to protect the country or carry on official business of the Presidency, but simply to do do something 100% self-serving to help him get re-elected.

I'd say the #1 cause of the difference is the news media. Back int he day, there was really only the "main stream media" and, while they may have had a liberal bias, their journalistic standards and drive for the truth still came to the forefront of their reporting. Nowadays, you have major news networks not even hiding their biases with no journalistic standards of any kind; fake news completely inundating social networks not to mention even being reported by major networks; people believing news satire thinking the stories are real; etc. etc.

It's ridiculous that in order for the average citizen to discern the facts of a story, they need to research multiple news outlets and even then, they may not get the factual truth.

[fredtoast]

(09-01-2020, 02:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You go Fred.  Whatever it takes to excuse the rioters I guess.  

Actually I don't think this incident would usually deserve a protest.  

But one of the reasons there are protests is because too many people still claim everything the police say is true even after incidents like the  Laquan McDonald murder.  I am sure it did not help that that also happened in Chicago. 

[fredtoast]

(09-01-2020, 03:56 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I'd say the #1 cause of the difference is the news media. Back int he day, there was really only the "main stream media" and, while they may have had a liberal bias, their journalistic standards and drive for the truth still came to the forefront of their reporting. Nowadays, you have major news networks not even hiding their biases with no journalistic standards of any kind; fake news completely inundating social networks not to mention even being reported by major networks; people believing news satire thinking the stories are real; etc. etc.

It's ridiculous that in order for the average citizen to discern the facts of a story, they need to research multiple news outlets and even then, they may not get the factual truth.

The media divide and social networking was the same in 2014 when Michael Brown was shot.  But those protests did not go on all across the nation every night for months.

There has been a lot of fresh fuel poured on the fire the last few years.  Trump has just been way too supportive of the white nationalists and white supremacists.  And he has proven that he will use force for whatever purpose he wants.  Minorities are just a lot more scared than they have been in 50 years.