But how are daily protests--that again lead to nighttime violence--advancing any of those issues?
Just out of friendly curiosity: did you express the same concern about Hong Kong?
In any case, I think the public responses may have already had an impact, with regard to Chauvin being arrested and charged. And if the other officers are eventually charged, would one be able to argue that it would've happened anyway, without all the outcry? I'm really not sure.
But certainly, the third bullet point, about whether Chauvin should have even been a cop during this time, is something that I think the PD might take a look at. (And they might very well take a look at other people currently in their department, as well). And that might happen because of the public response to Chauvin and Floyd. That doesn't seem far-fetched at all, given how much pain Minneapolis is going through right now. Surely, they might want to study how they can avoid this happening again, don't you think?
The public response includes death and destruction. And again, it's disrupted the Covid-19 safeguards, to the point that they may have been all for naught, as least with regards to the last month or so.
But sure, the public response led to Chauvin being charged. But that already happened. Last night's protests and riots--that lead to more deaths--had nothing to do with that.
And while people might still want to see the other officers charged--they were already fired, right?--is it still worth it to continue the protests, knowing that the protests have become a pretext for violence? Is it still worth it if it leads to more deaths from Covid-19? If it leads to more long term damage to the economy (that has an adverse effect on the lives of millions)?
And while people might still want to see the other officers charged--they were already fired, right?--is it still worth it to continue the protests, knowing that the protests have become a pretext for violence?
What was that Dan Quayle quote again? "Who is to blame for the riots? The rioters are to blame."
Unless, of course, it's convenient to use them to pin blame on others, as well.
But really, I think the most honest answer I can give is that I think these questions about efficacy seem kind of pointless, in a sense. People are going to answer those questions according to how sympathetic they are to the protests.
The Gothamist--being the Gothamist--is partly focused on apparent police transgressions. But the people who own and work at these various looted and destroyed businesses are citizens, too, who fully deserve the protections their tax dollars supposedly go to support. And there are many protesters who see--rightly, imo--how the destruction and looting is destroying the goals of the protests, because too many people see them as linked, because in moments like in NYC last night it's almost impossible for the police to effectively distinguish between the various groups in trying to do their jobs.
...observers viewed extreme protest actions to be immoral, reducing observers’ emotional connection to the movement and, in turn, reducing identification with and support for the movement. Taken together with prior research showing that extreme protest actions can be effective for applying pressure to institutions and raising awareness of movements, these findings suggest an activist’s dilemma, in which the same protest actions that may offer certain benefits are also likely to undermine popular support for social movements.
A retired police captain was fatally shot by looters in St. Louis on Tuesday — in a chilling incident apparently aired on Facebook Live.
David Dorn, a 77-year-old former cop who had spent half his life on the Missouri force, was shot dead on the sidewalk in front of a pawnshop early Tuesday amid violent protests after the Minnesota police-brutality killing of George Floyd — and several people, including a state pol, said they watched Dorn’s murder unfold in a clip on the social media platform, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch said.
“I just seen a man die on live man! Smh,” state Rep. Rasheen Aldridge wrote on Facebook.
Another person suggested that as Dorn lay dying, no one helped him, instead choosing to record his death.
FB took the video down, but I'm assuming it still has a copy of it. FYI, there's currently no story about Dorn at CNN or MSNBC, though there is one at FoxNews and ABCNews.
And there are many protesters who see--rightly, imo--how the destruction and looting is destroying the goals of the protests, because too many people see them as linked, because in moments like in NYC last night it's almost impossible for the police to effectively distinguish between the various groups in trying to do their jobs.
Perhaps. I dunno if it follows though that the protesters need to dial it back, in order to advance the movement. I tend to think they're gonna get shit on no matter what. And if they go home and the rioters don't, that's going to be a problem as well, I would think.
"When Colin Kaerpernick knelt, they said, 'this is not the right way to protest. When MLK marched in Selma, they said, "this is not the right way to protest.' When people marched in the streets of South Africa during Apartheid, they said, "this is not the right way to protest.' There is no right way to protest because that's what protest is. It can't be considered "right" by the system that it's protesting."
The fallacy of identity is the assumption that a cause must somehow resemble its effect. It is related to the idea which explicitly underlay many folk remedies, the so-called doctrine of signatures, which was a belief that "every natural substance which possesses any medicinal virtue indicates by an obvious and well-marked external character the disease for which it is a remedy, or the object for which it should be employed." 26 Examples are the idea that turmeric is a cure for jaundice, or bloodstone for bleeding.
When the fallacy of identity appears in modern historical scholar-ship, it is apt to be implicit, rather than explicit, but its effects are no less troublesome for that fact. One example is the historiography of early inhabitants of Scotland. The Picts constructed brochs and souter- rains which are small, dark, and mysterious. From this, some have concluded that the Picts themselves were small, dark, and mysterious — an inference which is described as "romance" by a good historian. 27
A more common form of the fallacy of identity is the idea that big effects must have big causes, or that big events must have big consequences. We have already met this assumption in the historiography of the Spanish Armada. What was the cause of the collapse of the Manchu dynasty? One historian has written, "So swift a decline, so unexpected a reversal of fortune must have some deep-seated cause." 28 But must it?
An even more common form of the fallacy of identity appears often in what J. H. Hexter has called Tunnel History. There is a tendency in topical works to assume that economic effects have primarily economic causes, and that the origins of a religious phenomenon are necessarily religious, and that the great happenings in the history of education are to be explained primarily in terms of earlier great happenings in the history of education. The narrowness of such thinking is to be explained in a variety of ways, which we shall consider in a later chapter. But part of the explanation, perhaps, is the hold which the doctrine of signatures still has upon our thought.
On a fundamental level, Noah has a fair point: there is no specific right way to protest against a system within that system. But that doesn't mean all forms of protest automatically have efficacy, nor does it mean all aspects of a given protest (or period of protests) have equal efficacy, just because of events that follow.
Consider the fact that racist-piece-of-shit Steve King lost his primary last night. One might be tempted to ascribe that loss to the protests and other events to the protests. But the fact that an apparent relationship based on obvious facts--Steve King is a racist, the protests were anti-racism, King's loss followed the protests--can be drawn, it doesn't automatically follow that the relationship is causal. It certainly doesn't follow that specific aspects of the protests--the destruction, the inter-personal violence--are causal.