> What happened is awful. It doesn't reflect how genuinely kind people in Minnesota are and how we, collectively feel about what happened and the movement at large. There will always be edge-cases as there is with any situation in any context. But for everyone that I've known, for everyone I've met and encountered with in Minnesota, when I look back at my time spent on either coast I always have found the people in Minnesota to be great.
Characterizing what is happening as an edge case is a huge mistake. People do not spontaneously start protesting with so much anger if it hasn't built up over so long. The police do not act with such impunity against citizens "just in this off case". It needs to be systemic for the reactions to be this strong.
If you haven't experienced this personally, that's great! I will not question your experiences. But please understand that others have not had the same experience. They've had such a bad experience that they're willing to go out in the streets during a pandemic to say "enough is enough". The police have had enough experience to be well prepared with crowd control tools and to use them immediately on peaceful protestors, when they could have de-escalated. People don't burn down a building they consider a symbol of tyranny just because of a single incident; their experience so far has ingrained into them a deep hatred for the police who are meant to protect and serve them.
As others in this thread have said, please try to listen to other perspectives. People experience different realities, and all of them can coexist without having to disprove the other.
Looting and burning unrelated businesses have no justification whatsoever.
>Characterizing what is happening as an edge case is a huge mistake. People do not spontaneously start protesting with so much anger if it hasn't built up over so long.
These protests are at least partly drummed up by out of state agitators, and are implicitly condoned by a feckless and weak state and local government that would rather give ground (literally) than enforce the rule of law. Saying "enough is enough" means going to the polls, not burning down all of the businesses in your neighborhood that were already on the verge of collapse thanks to the pandemic. That people are making up excuses for this behavior is disturbing to me, and signals that America is farther along the path of Imperial collapse than I previously thought. What end do you think we end up with here by condoning this? Agitators taking over City Hall? Disbanding the police department?
Please don't excuse burning down entire neighborhoods. Thanks.
The cops brought this on themselves. There's nobody to blame here but them.
It seriously blows my mind anyone does think this is justified or supports it. That is way beyond reason, even from an understandably aggrieved point of view.
The police largely function as protectors of personal property and relationships of ownership. I mean, look at the very reason that the cops arrested George Floyd; an alleged fake $20 dollar bill. In a time of pandemic 4 police offers showed up to enforce the ownership of capital.
Those guys who the state dispatched to enforce the value of money then ended up killing a guy. Its quite possible that the people who are rioting and protesting feel pretty damn angry at their treatment under capitalism and don't give a damn ownership of resources right now. They might even feel angry about ownership of resources in general. This is their community, and I suspect it's not yours. They get to decide their relationship to owners of resources, not you.
This is a scary response. We saw, today, a black CNN reporter arrested by state police on live television. If that’s how an educated, gently-speaking, Constitutionally-protected member of the press is treated, there is a root issue festering. Blaming it on agitators deflects from introspection.
A big part of the problem is Minneapolis’s moderates have turned a blind eye to the problems in their police force for years. That civic neglect has consequences. Those consequences are coming home to roost.
"Let me say as I've always said, and I will always continue to say, that riots are socially destructive and self-defeating. ... But in the final analysis, a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice, equality, and humanity. And so in a real sense our nation's summers of riots are caused by our nation's winters of delay. And as long as America postpones justice, we stand in the position of having these recurrences of violence and riots over and over again."
Its primary failure in enforcing the rule of law has been its inability to enforce it on police officers.
What we're seeing is the consequence of decades of lawless behavior by police. People have had enough of being terrorized by it.
>A big part of the problem is Minneapolis’s moderates have turned a blind eye to the problems in their police force for years.
I don't understand how people can honestly think this is true. The Police Commissioner is literally the guy from Internal Affairs who filed a lawsuit against the city for not promoting black officers fast enough. The state attorney general is the guy who has proudly photographed himself with an anarchist handbook. All across state and local government in Minnesota you find people who are, allegedly, the kind that are supposed to address the "civic neglect" you assume to exist. What more do you want?
that is a massive leap in agency that doesn't seem appropriate at all. any cities' "moderates" (??) have extremely limited agency over "the problems in the police force": if the head police officer is elected, that's one, and perhaps city council members who control budgets or other things related to police work.
since you're strongly implying that civic neglect is what caused this issue, what are the civic actions that this city's moderates should have taken in order to have prevented these problems?
I think what you're failing to understand is that your kind of rhetoric is directly adjacent to the standard communist revolutionary rhetoric employed across e.g. South America.
>People are fed up with trying to work inside of a system that barely considers them human.
Amazing that people actually believe this, when there's literally laws on the books making it a crime to commit an offense against protected classes of people because of their race alone.
Looking after their own. Should I give them a cookie too and a belly rub?
The protests are not about officer promotions.
Yeah, I'm a Marxist. I align with many (not all) ideas about proletarian revolution.
> Amazing that people actually believe this, when there's literally laws on the books making it a crime to commit an offense against protected classes of people because of their race alone.
We've seen how powerful people, the wealthy, politicians, and law enforcement have time and again broken laws and attempted to circumvent them for their own gain or to preserve the established order.
Accusing people who are trying to explain the logic of why reasonable citizens will take extreme actions as "communist revolutionary rhetoric" is neither here nor there. What if it is? Does that by itself make it false? Please engage with the facts, and if you can't, refrain from such nonsense. It won't take the discussion anywhere.
> Amazing that people actually believe this, when there's literally laws on the books making it a crime to commit an offense against protected classes of people because of their race alone.
The presence or absence of laws by itself means absolutely nothing. Can you not see how tone deaf you seem when there are all these people trying to express their frustration and you dismiss that with "why the f are you so angry, there are laws that protect you".
Once burning and looting starts, well it's like fire, or panic buying.
If you want some facts, here's a list of all of the buildings damaged or destroyed by people "expressing their frustration". Notice that some are government buildings that provide services to the poor, who are obviously more affected by the ongoing pandemic. You can continue defending them, if you like.
>Dissent is the most American value. The country was founded on it.
This statement is thrown around all the time, but it's really an attempt at gaslighting people into thinking that chaos and calamity was what the people who started the American Revolution were fine with. Of course, the opposite is true, and the chaos and calamity of a weak and ineffective English Imperial Regime was what they were rebelling against and the final form of the revolution was an institution of essentially the same style of English Common Law but with distinctly American characteristics.
https://www.startribune.com/these-minneapolis-st-paul-buildi...
do you think the laws are literally broken or figuratively broken then? also there are many laws at many levels of priority. some of them in effect enable you to kill protected classes of people under convenient circumstances
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/29/poli...
"Going to the polls" hasn't worked. Allowing the courts to dispense justice has done anything but that. What then? People get frustrated and angry, correctly feel like they have no voice and no options, so they unfortunately resort to violence.
Local businesses being destroyed is a horrible outcome of this, but I can't even make myself feel bad about the police precinct burning. (I do feel very bad for and worry about the safety of firefighters.)
If you want to blame anyone, blame the police for getting us to where we are today.
Laws are meaningless when those responsible for enforcing them flaunt and ignore them, and the judiciary lets them off again and again with barely a wrist-slap.
People don't look at what's written in a law book and feel like the system is protecting them. They look at how the system actually acts toward them. And in this case, they're justifiably terrified.
What if voter suppression or gerrymandering exists? What if no candidate wants to address police brutality? What if issues are easily forgotten over a multi-year cycle with a complicit media?
Rioting shouldn't be a first choice, but polls don't fix everything.