|>> || 1511057379965.jpg -(62096B / 60.64KB, 920x669) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. |
Well, theres a difference between rioters, insurgents and activists and protesters. To deny that both exist, is ridiculous. Whether or not they coexist is a different question. For instance do you think the poor youth, in Ferguson, who initially began rioting before activists flooded in for protest hold the same "spirit" as protesters? They began chanting "kill the police" throwing rocks, burning, looting. In the days following people were firing guns, taking pot shots at police with rifles, throwing molotovs, chanting "fuck 12" (means fuck narcotics officers).
During the day there were people funded by the Democratic party and other various activist groups that are paid professionals calling for "peace" and "calm", hugging police for photo ops, most were flooded in thru buses and we're in contact with police.
During Trump's inaguaration there were about 800 anarchists and sympathizers all chanting "AK47,367,send these cops to piggy heaven". The spray paint on the walls read " civil war now", "liberals get the bullet too" "burn it down". Despite the police propaganda it was mildly violent, but they had to exaggerate it because it was the first time in over 50 years that the capital saw a large militant crowd. What did happen was, a few Windows and banks got smashed. About 2 cop cars got vandalized. A few Nazis got assaulted. A few cops got hit by flag poles. Overall it wasn't nearly as violent as protests overseas but it was the most defiant thing seen in DC in a very long time.
During the other marches mostly held by Democrats people held press conferences. Gave interviews. Marched around chanting about impeachments. Debated with neo Nazis. Overall they seemed to coexist that day, but they were both very different atmospheres.
In Baltimore groups of high school students walked out of high school. Riot police showed up and they were immediately attacked with rocks. Over 5 cops were seriously injured. People chanted "pigs" and caused over 50k of damage to police property.
Again, at other protests, groups funded by the Democrats called for "calm" "investigation" and wanted police reform. Clergy came in denouncing youth as angry and destructive. They showed little to no hostility towards police and instead debated semantics.
Is it so hard to understand ; one side wishes to work with police and the system in some naive hope that they will one day have a say. Or one could more accurately say professional activists do the bidding of the Democratic party and police by attempting to thwart insurrections. Another example of this would be riots in St. Louis. Some white people were throwing fire into barricades and some activist grabs the mic saying "whites are here to disrupt and demonize us" (divide,pacifiy conquer). People most whites consider to be thugs yelled "fuck y'all we want them here with us".
On the other hand you have people who aren't professional activists. People who feel the direct pain of the police state, the people who have friends and family locked up, the people being stopped every day, people who make their livelihood on crime, and anarchists. They see themselves as being at war with the state and act accordingly.
Not too hard to understand. Pic related. The multiracial group of looters the media doesn't want you to see. Can't have all those whites realizing this is a class war not a race war. Can't have people getting any naughty ideas.