Appropriate response to rioting

[Kron3007]

What's really different about January 6 and this past summer is January 6 was a true rebellion against the establishment. That doesn't automatically make it constructive or justified or intelligent. To me it wasn't much of any of those things. Whereas Black Lives Matter is not much of a rebellion. It's more a piece of the establishment itself, the victimist culture of the democratic party fortifying itself over years to the point of boiling over. As Shelby Steele explains it's an emulation of the 60's civil rights movement that falls short in substance. But being a big piece of the establishment, and also somewhat militant, it could become its own problem. Now it will be President Biden's job to either stop the property destruction and violence of demonstrations gone wild, or enable them, should they happen. Fault lines might appear. If Derek Chauvin is acquitted I expect riots.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-Dw8JRYkpI

It's amazing how differently things can be interpreted from different perspectives.  I would argue almost the opposite.

The BLM movement is protesting long standing systemic racism created by the establishment.  One thing you seem to misunderstand, or perhaps twist to fit your narrative, is that the BLM protests are not against republicans specifically or alone.  They are against systemic racism that has developed under both parties.  It is true that the BLM protesters are predominantly democrats and support that party, but that does not mean that the democrats are not also responsible for creating the problem.  The difference is that democratic leadership at least recognizes that this is a problem, making them the obvious choice to work with to try to fix it.  You discuss vicimism as if standing up for equality is wrong.  If you were consistently discriminated against, would it be wrong to stand up for yourself?  When the poor repressed white guys occupy government buildings with loaded weapons they are patriots, but Kaepernick is playing the victim card?

On the flip side, the insurrection was not an attack on the establishment as such, it was an attack against a fair and democratic election (as democratic as the US system is anyway) spurred by a would-be dictator who has repeatedly "joked" about staying beyond the clear term limits.  So, I guess you could consider this an attack against the establishment, but it goes deeper and was an attack against democracy itself and the American consition.  If anyone is playing the victim card, it is these yahoos.

[mahagonny]

What's really different about January 6 and this past summer is January 6 was a true rebellion against the establishment. That doesn't automatically make it constructive or justified or intelligent. To me it wasn't much of any of those things. Whereas Black Lives Matter is not much of a rebellion. It's more a piece of the establishment itself, the victimist culture of the democratic party fortifying itself over years to the point of boiling over. As Shelby Steele explains it's an emulation of the 60's civil rights movement that falls short in substance. But being a big piece of the establishment, and also somewhat militant, it could become its own problem. Now it will be President Biden's job to either stop the property destruction and violence of demonstrations gone wild, or enable them, should they happen. Fault lines might appear. If Derek Chauvin is acquitted I expect riots.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-Dw8JRYkpI

It's amazing how differently things can be interpreted from different perspectives.  I would argue almost the opposite.

The BLM movement is protesting long standing systemic racism created by the establishment.  One thing you seem to misunderstand, or perhaps twist to fit your narrative, is that the BLM protests are not against republicans specifically or alone.  They are against systemic racism that has developed under both parties.  It is true that the BLM protesters are predominantly democrats and support that party, but that does not mean that the democrats are not also responsible for creating the problem.  The difference is that democratic leadership at least recognizes that this is a problem, making them the obvious choice to work with to try to fix it.  You discuss vicimism as if standing up for equality is wrong.  If you were consistently discriminated against, would it be wrong to stand up for yourself?

It wouldn't necessarily be wrong, but I would expect to have to show explicitly the ways in which I have been discriminated against without exaggerating before having the likelihood of getting the attention of anyone not already in my camp. Even then, while it wouldn't necessarily be wrong it could easily be darned unimpressive if it were already evident that I was not availing myself of abundant opportunities for success that already existed.
Another piece of this: having people working while poor and scuffling for health insurance is not something the democrats want to do anything about. Many of them think it's just fine. That's why they brand college instructors 'adjunct' and 'part time.' They are trying to parlay the moral high ground for themselves, and it doesn't work.

[Sun_Worshiper]

What's really different about January 6 and this past summer is January 6 was a true rebellion against the establishment. That doesn't automatically make it constructive or justified or intelligent. To me it wasn't much of any of those things. Whereas Black Lives Matter is not much of a rebellion. It's more a piece of the establishment itself, the victimist culture of the democratic party fortifying itself over years to the point of boiling over. As Shelby Steele explains it's an emulation of the 60's civil rights movement that falls short in substance. But being a big piece of the establishment, and also somewhat militant, it could become its own problem. Now it will be President Biden's job to either stop the property destruction and violence of demonstrations gone wild, or enable them, should they happen. Fault lines might appear. If Derek Chauvin is acquitted I expect riots.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-Dw8JRYkpI

It's amazing how differently things can be interpreted from different perspectives.  I would argue almost the opposite.

The BLM movement is protesting long standing systemic racism created by the establishment.  One thing you seem to misunderstand, or perhaps twist to fit your narrative, is that the BLM protests are not against republicans specifically or alone.  They are against systemic racism that has developed under both parties.  It is true that the BLM protesters are predominantly democrats and support that party, but that does not mean that the democrats are not also responsible for creating the problem.  The difference is that democratic leadership at least recognizes that this is a problem, making them the obvious choice to work with to try to fix it.  You discuss vicimism as if standing up for equality is wrong.  If you were consistently discriminated against, would it be wrong to stand up for yourself?  When the poor repressed white guys occupy government buildings with loaded weapons they are patriots, but Kaepernick is playing the victim card?

On the flip side, the insurrection was not an attack on the establishment as such, it was an attack against a fair and democratic election (as democratic as the US system is anyway) spurred by a would-be dictator who has repeatedly "joked" about staying beyond the clear term limits.  So, I guess you could consider this an attack against the establishment, but it goes deeper and was an attack against democracy itself and the American consition.  If anyone is playing the victim card, it is these yahoos.

Yes this interpretation tracks much more with reality, as I see it.

BLM is hardly "a piece of the establishment itself," but rather a protest against the structural racism that is characterizes the establishment. The Capital attack is both anti-establishment (in that it is attacking the US political system) and pro-establishment (in that it is in support of the leader of the US).

[mahagonny]

Liberal academics though do not expect dramatic lasting improvement in the lives of the black man and woman from this activism. They are too smart for that. Their primary interest is either, as Shelby Steele explained, a sense of being cleansed from the guilt of America's inhumane past, or a stimulation to the activism market, which means more democrats elected, more funding for education (ka-ching!), more promotions to full professor, more books sold, a few more blacks on the faculty, mostly teaching race studies and such which don't markedly lift up black Americans and contribute to another young wave of adjuncts, but these things are barely noticed, and the presence of more POC with some of the good jobs makes everyone look good.
Well, as long as I'm postulating that, I can be polite enough to ask: what do you think will come of this activism? And remember, the complaints are
1. income disparity.
2. police brutality
(though if you consider the amount of homicide, disorderly conduct, domestic violence, street drugs etc. police have to deal with, we might consider ourselves lucky if they do as good a job in 2021 as they did in 2020.)