Differentiating between protesters and rioters is “good-protester versus bad-protester” bullshit. It is an extension of the “peaceful protester” myth and is a mechanism of self-policing. The state and capitalist elite want you to feverishly believe in the idea of peaceful protests because it erases the unrelenting violence of capitalism and the state. Their idea of “peace” is more accurately defined as the unabated continuation and invisiblization of their own violence. By sanctioning only state endorsed methods of resistance you help do the work of policing militancy FOR THE POLICE.
9 comments
While the state monopoly on force is indeed a thing, that doesn't mean the individual or collective should rectify that thing by using force against the society that also happens to be under the state. That's what rioting is: using force against other people that happen to be in the same mess you are. Sure, occasionally a state actor gets caught up in it, but that's rarely the point.
Steady, peaceful transition tends to lead to longer lasting change than swift violence. Violence does make for sudden change, sure, but play the long game for a change. Just because you want it now doesn't make the fastest method the most efficient in the long run. And often, the method in question leads to the inverse of the desired change as the state and the majority of society crack down.
Why do we keep having to explain this to people?
As someone who fought her own gov on the streets at times, there`s a lot of truth in this: Most of the time, unless the numbers are truly overwhelming it`s just playing into the hands of the people in control, HOWEVER it must be noted that this isn`t supposed to be some "perfect" way to protest your government, just a barely working compromise from the times when "protesting the gov" meant bloody revolution. It exist and is supported above the traditional molotov throwing because if it works, it saves tons of lives and those are what matters in the end.
Also at least in theory, peaceful protests should allow for two-way comunication between the estranged sides and a resolution to be found before any actual conflict takes places.
A riot is not a focused protest. It is a unhinged lashing out at thing you think you don't like. Riots don't represent communities, they only represent the rioters. Someone in society needs the ability to use violence, but it is not untrained civilians who don't know or care about the effects of said violence. Protesting how those qualified to use violence do so is entirely reasonable. Forcing those same people to use violence is counterproductive and stupid.
If all you want is to take out your rage on a target who you believe deserves it, sure, this'll give you your jollies. If what you want is societal change, though, all you'd succeed in doing is giving nasty ol' Mister State an excuse to crack down, especially when the guy in charge is someone like Trump.
It's not just the state that can dismiss you if you riot, it's a large enough proportion of the country to control all branches of government. Ask any Trump voter or supporter what they think of BLM, for instance: they will describe it as exclusively criminal, and use that starting point to claim that he police are in the right, that racism does not really exist, and so the whole movement must be motivated by greed or the Black peoples' "culture," which they see as pathological. They already wanted an excuse to believe this, and they got the excuse.
BLM has failed. It won't convince enough people of the need for change to accomplish anything, and on the contrary is being used as another bogeyman for white people so they will vote to take their country back. All because a guy in Dallas shot some cops, and a few people in Ferguson and Baltimore looted some stores.
This is going to happen all over again: a lot of people are not rational enough (generally by choice) to separate the messenger from the message. If you are protesting, e.g. Trump invalidating a future election because he believes the result to be fraudulent, and one car gets burned, every single person you might have convinced will decide you are all criminals and Trump must be right.
Gandhi didn't insist on non-violence because of his bleeding heart. His movement would have been lost without discipline.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.