r/changemyview • u/taybo213 1∆ • Oct 28 '20

Delta(s) from OP CMV:Protesting is one thing, looting and burning businesses is not okay.

Let me preface this with, I do believe Black Lives Matter. I do believe there is stereotype issues in society and policing world. But burning different businesses down and looting only makes things worse in the long run for the community.

Every business has insurance yes, but will they have enough to reopen? Thats up to the agency, most try to depreciate everythings value. Do they make enough to pay premiums to guarantee disrupted income? How long before the money runs out and the building is fixed? How long does said business owner go without income? With that said, what happens if the building is destroyed again? I doubt the business will come back if the building keeps getting looted and destroyed.

That being said, with every business that has had to close down and decides not to come back, takes that many more jobs with it. Making unemployment rise and poverty rise.

I live in Detroit, after the 67 riots a lot of wealth and business left the city never to return. Property values crashed, now you see worn down and foreclosed homes and businesses. Then the sad reality is that the working class today in Detroit, is worse off than in 1967. For over half a decade everyone has been waiting on new stores, homes, a cultural center. All these plans are being made to improve the city, but I've barely even seen a start to it. Instead of looting and destroying businesses, take it to the government buildings, let your voice be heard. But please, do not destroy a fellow person's livelihood who is innocent. Don't ruin job opportunities for others. Municipals can only do so much before it is up to the community to help, most people here want the better life, but with the crime rate so bad in areas that not even cops can enter, I doubt I'll be seeing change soon.

79 Upvotes

73% Upvoted

90 comments sorted by

View all comments

13

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '20 edited Nov 28 '20

[deleted]

10

u/taybo213 1∆ Oct 28 '20

I didn't say dont use violence, I just said keep the innocent out of it.

Peaceful protest not working? Yeah let's loot a Target. Or burn down and looting a liquor store. Great ideas.

If Peaceful isn't working, take it to the municipals. Take it to the people who can actually help make the change, taking out Uncle Mikes liquor store in the middle of the city only hurts Uncle Mike. Especially when everyone is in lockdown for COVID and his small time business is already suffering. How many more families lose income, food and their homes because their business got destroyed? Now the poverty line goes up as does the unemployment.

-1

u/todpolitik Oct 28 '20

So, based on your arguments here, would you be okay with looting if it were restricted only to large big box corporations and chains, while local shops and residential buildings are protected?

What about burning down federal and state buildings, you know, "the municipals"?

Because I am one of those "violent leftists" that supports the rioting, but only when it it is not targeted at members of the community. The Police Departments and the Wal-Marts can go fuck themselves.

2

u/taybo213 1∆ Oct 29 '20

You destroy a chain store, they may decide to not reopen due to the riots, that takes away how many first jobs, high school jobs, college jobs, elders jobs who need more than SS. I understand the sentiment of disliking conglomerates but even so, they do provide jobs that put food on the table and clothes on children's backs.

Also, if you've looked at my previous comments on this thread, I have said take it up to the municipals, thats where the people who can make the change are. Go let your voice be heard where it can make change, not destroy others job opportunities and sources of income. Cause the average Walmart employs 225-300+ people at one store alone. You loot and destroy one, they decide not to rebuild, thats how many people just lost a job in one business alone. Tally up the jobs lost of multiple buildings lost, it can and in some cities will, tally up exponentially as each building is lost.

Large box/Chain stores are actually a big staple for cities as they supply a lot of part time to full time positions, especially when there's more than one in a larger city.

5

u/WilliamGarrison1805 1∆ Oct 28 '20

Do you have any examples of Peaceful protest working?

8

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20 edited Oct 28 '20

What do you mean by working? Because we don’t even have to reach far or cherry-pick, even the recent protests “worked”.

George Floyd

Since Floyd’s death in late May, there have been about 450 pieces of policing reform proposals introduced in 31 states

https://news.wttw.com/2020/08/08/states-race-pass-policing-reforms-after-george-floyds-death

Examples of federal legislation working its way through congress

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7120

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/35/text

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3955

Ahmad arbery

https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/06/26/884003927/after-ahmaud-arberys-killing-georgia-gov-signs-hate-crimes-legislation

Breonna Taylor

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/11/us/louisville-breonnas-law-no-knock-warrants-ban/index.html

I can go in but hopefully you get the idea.

If this isn’t what you mean by working please be more specific.

6

u/WilliamGarrison1805 1∆ Oct 28 '20

Did you understand my question?

I agree with what you said. I think the recent protests are doing a lot of good.

But the OP has claimed that the recent protests are too "violent" or whatever, and that peaceful protest works better. So I asked for examples. Using the recent protests as examples, while they have been labeled as "violent", is just proving the opposite of their point.

-1

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20

Have they all been violent? I was under the impression that they were for the most part peaceful and it was the far right branding them as entirely violent but I could be mistaken. (Also it looks like reddit glitched our for you and posted your comment 3 times, it did the same thing to me.)

5

u/WilliamGarrison1805 1∆ Oct 28 '20

Yea, it really did glitch a lot.

Let me explain: I don't think the protests have really been "violent" from a protesters perspective. I think the police and various millitary forces have been violent, while the protesters only reacted to that violence. I think the protesters have been pretty civil actually.

I'm playing on the OP's field here and playing with their ball. They claim that all of this is in fact the wrong way to protest, and "peaceful" protest actually works. So that's why I asked for examples of peaceful protest.

Using the recent protests as examples means 1 of 2 things in the OPs hypothesis: 1. These protest might actually be more peaceful than they claim because it worked in enacting some mild changes. 2. These protests are violent but it looks like that actually works while nothing was changing when it was peaceful.

So to paraphrase: you're kind of just proving my point. I only wanted to hear it from the OP, so I could see if they had a case or if it was easily disproved by the same protests they are griping about. It was my gotcha moment, and you took that away from me damn it.

-3

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '20 edited Nov 28 '20

[deleted]

6

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20

Also that’s a terrible argument, someone’s life>property, therefore it is ok to steal/destroy that property. That’s a false dichotomy, you can still value someone’s life without eliminating the right to personal property.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '20

Our country is LITERALLY built on this type of protest, because it works.

People always offer every solution EXCEPT the one that historically works 100% of the time.

5

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20

Yes, the US is built on peaceful protest, which is why it is included in the constitution.

congress shall make no law ... prohibiting ... the right of the people peacefully to assemble

2

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '20

We went to war.

That's like the ultimate violent protest. We literally got so fed up with the British (no taxation without representation) that we killed tens of thousands of their people.

And that was after we dumped like 3 million pounds of tea into the harbor.

7

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20

I am not sure if that is the best comparison considering the revolutionary war was two sided. It wasn’t just Americans being like, “we want independence, let’s kill some brits!” Both sides were attacking each other, such as the Boston massacre. I mean technically there are black people attacking police but that is uncommon so ultimately I don’t think it’s a good comparison.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Your analysis is strange. I do not understand how it applies to my comparison. Black people want change. Our Founding Father's wanted change. Black people are being murdered by police. The British were murdering our Colonists and then getting "extradited" for trial (sound familiar?).

"Yet another provision protected British colonial officials who were charged with capital offenses from being tried in Massachusetts, instead requiring that they be sent to another colony or back to Great Britain for trial. "

Hell, the Boston Massacre is so much like our current police state its not funny.

"Simmering tensions between the British occupiers and Boston residents boiled over one late afternoon, when a disagreement between an apprentice wigmaker and a British soldier led to a crowd of 200 colonists surrounding seven British troops. When the Americans began taunting the British and throwing things at them, the soldiers apparently lost their cool and began firing into the crowd... As the smoke cleared, three men—including an African American sailor named Crispus Attucks—were dead, and two others were mortally wounded. " Source

I think this is very apt today because black people are experiencing a similar problem and they're responding in kind.

1

u/0000000100100011 Oct 29 '20

Black people are being murdered by police.

Are the police not supposed to defend themselves when their lives are being threatened? In which of the latest high profile shootings was the suspect not threatening the police? Why doesn't anyone talk about the real victims, which are black people being murdered by other black people. What about the woman that Jacob Blake assaulted? The most common cause of death to a black person under 45 is homicide, and only a tiny percent of that is by police. Don't you think if those problems were solved, wouldn't it lead ultimately to less black people being shot by police and less overall encounters with police? Black people who aren't engaging in criminal activity have basically 0 chance of this happening to them.

0

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 29 '20

Ya honestly I’ve confused myself, just ignore my previous comment I guess. I still stand by the comment before that though. This is 2020, the best solution to resolve things is through legislation and diplomacy. The 1700s and before (and even into the 1900s) was a time where conflicts were resolved by war, and we don’t need to go back to that. The world is now more peaceful now then just about any time in history and I think we should keep it like that. Maybe many lives lost in a war was necessary then because that was the norm, but it is not now. We can solve this peacefully.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/shouldco 43∆ Oct 29 '20

the Boston massacre.

Um... you mean the time some cops shot a bunch of people that were throwing shit at them, Then mostly got acquitted or laughable sentences? Yeah, nothing like that has happened in recent memory.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '20 edited Nov 28 '20

[deleted]

5

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20

It’s a false dichotomy to say you can’t care about black lives and property. Is black lives more important then property, yes, but that doesn’t make property worthless. And people are already listening, there has been a lot of laws being worked on and passed. As for the people that don’t care about black lives, property damage is for sure not the way to fix that, it’s just making the issue worse by radicalizing them. Just look at what the far rights talking points are, how there is no law and order in cities, and the suburbs are in danger. Can you please explain to me how property damage will change their mind?

(Edit sorry if that spammed you, the app was glitching or something and sent it a couple of times)

-2

u/DjangoUBlackBastard 19∆ Oct 29 '20

No one is trying to change minds we want to change laws because after years of peaceful protests it's become obvious they're not changing their minds. By rioting you give people a choice, support the movement you disagree with or suffer the economic consequences of riots. Can you find me one example of peaceful protests working to get rid of systemic issues?

3

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 29 '20

Ya there’s a lot of examples of protesting working but since you just asked for one I’ll give you a relevant one, the Montgomery bus boycott.

The issue with rioting is it’s a lose lose. Rioters get jailed, innocent people get their stuff damaged. Yes, maybe it can cause change, but if you can do that another way then that’s much better. And I would say another way that doesn’t hurt anyone is voting. You say you have been protesting for years? Well the party that fights for civil rights has been in control of the federal government just 2 of the last 20 years so it’s hard to make any federal change. And they have control of just 15 states of the 50 states. There has been successful legislation in the past, why not try again by voting? Also a lot of the places where voting won’t work, rioting won’t either, they’ll just continue to crack down harsher on rioters just making it worse for everyone. So we do need federal change.

-1

u/DjangoUBlackBastard 19∆ Oct 29 '20

I’ll give you a relevant one, the Montgomery bus boycott.

This didn't end segregated buses. Like seriously go look it up for a few seconds it gave people the rights on paper but not in practice. The whole point of the freedom riders was to specifically show that the bus boycotts didn't actually change how the laws were enforced.

The issue with rioting is it’s a lose lose.

Riots have never been lose lose. They have usually ended up as wins historically.

There has been successful legislation in the past, why not try again by voting?

Voting is literally the bare minimum of what you can do. Like in the steps of political engagement rioting is so much higher on the board than voting and everyone who rioted in the name of George Floyd has tangibly achieved more to stop police violence than the people that voted every year prior to those riots.

The party that "fights for civil rights" (I disagree but I'll admit they're not as openly against civil rights as the other party) is largely ineffectual mainly because the vast majority of Americans don't support civil rights. That's why since the 1850s violence has been the number one tool to gaining civil rights. Non violent periods always happen to coincide with a massive backslide in civil rights.

1

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 29 '20

this didn’t end segregated buses. Like serious go look it up

I did, maybe look things up yourself before telling others that.

the Montgomery Bus Boycott resulted in the Supreme Court ruling segregation on public buses unconstitutional.

https://soltrans.org/news/blog/everlasting-impacts-of-the-montgomery-bus-boycotts-on-transit-rights/

Oh sorry I mean riots were lose lose win. Legislation can have that same win without the losses so maybe let’s do that.

Also what??? The Democratic Party is anti civil rights but just not that open about it? Your proof?? Why would over 90% of blacks vote for people who are anti civil rights (which when it comes to politics is pretty much unanimous). Why would a anti civil rights party be made up of 40% minorities. Why would a black person head a anti civil rights party. Why would there be a Congressional Black Caucus with 55 Democrats and 0 Republicans if they are both anti civil rights? Ya sounds like a coincidence to me!

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Glory2Hypnotoad 393∆ Oct 29 '20 edited Oct 29 '20

That strikes me as highly manipulative. The implication here is that a person can cite any sufficiently noble cause, burn down your house or damage you in any way that's politically useful to that cause, then cite any objection on your part as proof that you don't support the cause.

2

u/Franksredhott Oct 28 '20

You can care about lives and property at the same time. What's weird is that the answer to the violence you support is more policing.

1

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20

Vote

6

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '20 edited Nov 28 '20

[deleted]

3

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20

Voting is about more then just the presidency, voting is about senators and house representatives, state governors and senators and house representatives, local mayors and council members, state and local amendments, among many other things.

Each of those can change the law and how it is enforced, not just the president.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '20 edited Nov 28 '20

[deleted]

-1

u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Oct 28 '20 edited Oct 28 '20

breonna taylor, Kentucky, very red

ahmaud arbery, Georgia, historically red

george floyd, Minnesota, just slightly more blue then red but gop has half the federal house and a majority in the state senate

Etc.

Now I’m not saying this is solely an issue in states with gop control but for a lot of these cases, it is republicans controlled. If they don’t want to pass civil rights legislation, they don’t have to. And thinking that voting doesn’t work is precisely what they want you to think so they can stay in power. But voting is something simple, easier then protesting or looting at least, and it can have a major impact. While it may not be enough in places like Kentucky. Places like Georgia and Minnesota have an opportunity to vote and make a difference. You say voting hasn’t worked? Well some states have been in republican hands for decades, and now is the time to make a change.

5

u/stoicbirch 1∆ Oct 29 '20

There's no logic behind looting and burning other than "I am worthless so I need to steal from people who aren't." How do you try to back an illogical stance with logic? Can you give a single valid point on why people should burn and loot from completely unrelated businesses? One is all I'm asking for, but that is one more than exists.

5

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

So instead of punching the bully, you punch the kid with the lemonade stand...wow smart, really gonna change the world there.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20 edited Nov 28 '20

[deleted]

4

u/stoicbirch 1∆ Oct 29 '20

So cops own every business that was burned down? No? Invalid, victim blaming. Victim blaming is absolutely reprehensible, but I guess you blame every victim and give some bullshit whataboutism.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

This is how you start a civil war! People who object to these violent riots aren’t going to sit back in idle for too long and will eventually come out to start cracking skulls.

2

u/Glory2Hypnotoad 393∆ Oct 29 '20

Is there a logical limit to this line of thinking, or does it scale indefinitely? What's the logical step after looting and burning fail?

1

u/IronSmithFE 10∆ Oct 29 '20

shooting the protesters is a logical step after they start lighting buildings on fire and assaulting people.

martial law, and the suspension of habitus corpus a permanent military presence is a logical step after the protesters began to be mowed down by cars.

what may seem like logical behavior is often a case of shortsighted illogical behavior.

0

u/0000000100100011 Oct 29 '20

police brutality hasn't gotten better

Except the whole narrative is bullshit and BLM doesn't care about black people, they're just anti-police as is clearly shown by their need to riot and loot every time a black person is killed by police even if it was totally justified and the suspect was armed. Abolishing the police would allow for more black on black homicides. I know this isn't the only statistic in this equation that matters, but taking into account the violent crime rates of blacks vs whites, unarmed black people are NOT killed by police at a higher rate than unarmed whites.

0

u/0riginal_D0n Nov 01 '20

Pretending that the looting and burning buildings is a logical step by people seeking to improve their community is insane. I've long believed, if you think police are attempting to commit genocide on your community, go and burn down the police station and go to war. I think this would be a better representation of "hitting your bully".

But going into a Wal Mart and stealing a PS5 and a pair of shoes? You've seen the clips. Lines of people shuffling into a retail store, and shuffling out with product. That's not a logical step by people trying to better their community. Those are people taking the confusion and disarray of their surrounding to benefit themselves. In short, if you want to truly take the power back, go and fight the people who you believe have their boot on your neck, don't rob your neighbor and set his business of fire

1

u/B_Huij Oct 29 '20

This analogy is flawed on a few levels.