America

[morepork]

6pm curfew here. More agitation on the streets today. Staying in the crib tonight.

[cashead]

It's hardly wanton destruction of property, but it is destruction of property, and if you're going to be amused by destruction of property it's a bit weird to decry the loss of some bottles of milk.

Milk is the easiest way to mitigate the damage of tear gas. Given the police have been summarily gassing peaceful protesters all across the country (including children in Seattle, I hear), yes, I am decrying them actively destroying an aid station that was there to help people who had been hurt.

A note, tear gas is banned in warfare by international treaty. It's a chemical weapon. US police are currently spraying it indiscriminately over crowds.

Puja

Not protesting in the face of police who're nervous and trigger happy seems the easiest way to mitigate the risk of tear gas. Nonetheless whilst the police are wrong to be destroying property (even just milk) it doesn't mean destruction of property by the other side is amusing.

Fuck off.

Here you are, expressing mirth at the death of, at the time, 49 people because they happened to be Muslim.

It's a disgusting act, though I confess a small part of my reaction was 'hah' and whilst that isn't helpful and perhaps doesn't speak well to my character I doubt I'd be the only one.

What, responding in part to horrible situations with gallows humour or simply unacceptable humour? I'd reiterate again it was a disgusting act, but it's just not going to be the case that 100% of the response from 100% of the people is entirely informed by compassion and virtue.

And then now you turn around and act outraged when people aren't exactly tearing up at a building owned by an organisation that has historically supported white supremacist groups?

Fuck you and your fucking both sides decorum bullshit, you racist cunt.

[morepork]

Cas...too much. You can legitimately strive to call out inappropriate comments but nothing Digby has posted, poor comic timing aside, can be labeled intentionally racist.

[morepork]

It's not all bad. Local cops in Camden NJ arm in arm with protestors. Infection statistics to follow. I work in a medical school in Camden, and she's rough and tough, with more heroin moved and homicides than most cities in the US but there is a fantastic community there, vibrant and in your face, that is invigorating. Cudos to the Camden PD for getting involved in all the right ways. Check out the Camden trumpet chics for local vibrance. You heard it here first.


https://www.inquirer.com/news/camden-ge ... 00531.html

[cashead]

Cas...too much. You can legitimately strive to call out inappropriate comments but nothing Digby has posted, poor comic timing aside, can be labeled intentionally racist.

I guess if we ignore repeating right-wing talking points and clutching pearls over the Daughters of the Confederacy, an organisation that memorialises and romanticises the slave-owning South with links to white supremacist organisations, I guess there's nothing "intentionally racist."

Add to that the "49 non-whites got shot? lololol," and yeah, draw your own conclusions.

[morepork]

Cas...too much. You can legitimately strive to call out inappropriate comments but nothing Digby has posted, poor comic timing aside, can be labeled intentionally racist.

I guess if we ignore repeating right-wing talking points and clutching pearls over the Daughters of the Confederacy, an organisation that memorialises and romanticises the slave-owning South with links to white supremacist organisations, I guess there's nothing "intentionally racist."

Add to that the "49 non-whites got shot? lololol," and yeah, draw your own conclusions.

He did not do that. He may be ignorant of the significance of that house of sin being 86'd but I dont believe he was promoting a right wing talking point or clutching pearls. I guess he is not currently in the shit, so could be accused at most of being glib, but intentionally racist, absolutely not. I'm on the ground here man, angry as anyone, but I don't see Digby pouring any gasoline on the fire.

[Mikey Brown]

Photos starting to appear of known ‘Proud Boys’ and other far-right groups, seemingly dressed in Antifa garb, doing the rounds now. I’m not sure how dressing in black has become enough of an indicator to assign any random person’s actions to “Antifa” but Trump certainly seems ready to go all-in on this.

What a shocker.

[Mikey Brown]

Saying that, getting rid of people like this whichever side they appear to be fighting for is at least entertaining.

[Sandydragon]

I still find it odd you chose to protest at someone laughing at a relatively funny dark joke. It was a joke, it was relevant, timely, and had double meanings. It was good.

I said it's a bit weird to decry to the destruction of property whilst simultaneously laughing at the destruction of property. I'm not sure that's a protest so much as an observation. If I were to protest it would though be along the lines of such hypocrisy makes it too easy for those in power to ignore the actual problem being faced right now and the underlying issues, it gives those in power an easy out to dismiss your claims. But I'm not actually protesting anything, so left it as it's a bit weird.

You don’t think that without the protests this sort of racism and murder gets swept under the carpet?

Protest yes, violence no. The officers are being investigated, anything more now looks like mob rule and no one will countenance that. AS despicable as the actions looked on camera, the former police officers involved have the same rights as anyone else when under investigation.

[Sandydragon]

What can I say, I have an issue with destruction of property, with people taking the law into their own hands, I don't view those as safe actions for a society and I'd prefer people were not hurt. I struggle too to see how violence solves violence, and whilst I'm not surprised we're stuck in such a cycle perpetuating I don't see how it helps to glorify the supposed achievements of violence by either side

"Safe actions for a society" "Prefer that people were not hurt"

In 2019, there were 996 people fatally shot by police. In 2019, there were 1,004. So far in 2020, the number is 228 (which is above the total that there was this time last year). 12% of the population is black, but 40% of the death from police are black. A black man in the USA has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying from a police officer - that makes it the 7th highest cause of death, beating out diabetes, influenza, and cerebrovascular diseases. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Dominique Clayton, Eric Reason, Atatiana Jefferson, Botham Jean, Philando Castile, Bettie Jones, Walther Scott.

People were already not in a safe society. People were already being hurt. There have already been peaceful protests, including those mocked and coerced out of existence by the President. These aren't people who have decided they fancy burning down a building - these are people who are being regularly murdered by those who are supposed to protect them and who have been systematically dismissed and unheard.

I would also like to note that, while I don't like riots, not-violence has resulted in the problem being utterly ignored, whereas violence has a history of bringing about universal suffrage, recognition of basic gay rights and civil rights, regime change, law change - I don't like it, but it does have a history of getting shit done with a much higher success rate than asking politely.

"Violence doesn't solve violence" is something someone who is not getting violence perpetrated on them can comfortably say. There was already violence on one side of the equation - it was regular, systemic, and consistent. It wasn't being solved by non-violence and, while I don't like it, I'm not surprised that people have decided to field test whether they get better results with a riot than with a kneel.

Puja

This is very well put.

How far are you supposed to be able to push people? How long are you meant to go on thinking that you must obey the law at all costs, yet might still be murdered like an animal in the street on any given day for no particular reason? Somehow those people aren't held to a similar standard, yet you must keep obeying because it makes their lives easier? That's got to wear off eventually.

I'm not just talking and black and white here but you can't exactly ignore it. There's good reason people struggle to distinguish a lot of class and race issues. It's very unclear at this point who is committing more violent acts and for what reason. That's not to say it's all alright, but surely you can see this is absolute desperation?

This guy was (fortunately) caught on video as he slowly executed a stranger in broad daylight, but often that doesn't seem to be enough. And these people were not sure it would be enough even this time. I think that's pretty valid. Would he have been arrested without all this?

Of course more people voting would be great, but that system is pretty fucked too. People are trying but people are also hitting a lot of roadblocks. How long are you meant to keep hoping that this time your vote is going to matter? 'You and your children might have to eat shit from us for the rest of your lives but please keep voting and we promise it might work itself out.'

It's quite possible the victim wasn't a stranger. They had both worked as bouncers at the same night club. Understanding if they knew each other and if there was a long term grudge would be a worthwhile line of enquiry.

[Sandydragon]

Saying that, getting rid of people like this whichever side they appear to be fighting for is at least entertaining.

The sad thing about legitimate protests is that they are often hijacked. Good on the actual protestors for stopping a dickhead.

[Sandydragon]

Nice to see you performatively clutching your pearls and wringing your hands as the chickens come home to roost for the institutions that have stanned for white supremacy. “Won’t somebody please think of the KKK fan club?”

And honestly, trying to draw an equivalence between the bottles of milk being destroyed and the burning of the Daughters of the Confederacy building is one of the most risible things you’ve posted.

What can I say, I have an issue with destruction of property, with people taking the law into their own hands, I don't view those as safe actions for a society and I'd prefer people were not hurt. I struggle too to see how violence solves violence, and whilst I'm not surprised we're stuck in such a cycle perpetuating I don't see how it helps to glorify the supposed achievements of violence by either side

"Safe actions for a society" "Prefer that people were not hurt"

In 2019, there were 996 people fatally shot by police. In 2019, there were 1,004. So far in 2020, the number is 228 (which is above the total that there was this time last year). 12% of the population is black, but 40% of the death from police are black. A black man in the USA has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying from a police officer - that makes it the 7th highest cause of death, beating out diabetes, influenza, and cerebrovascular diseases. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Dominique Clayton, Eric Reason, Atatiana Jefferson, Botham Jean, Philando Castile, Bettie Jones, Walther Scott.

People were already not in a safe society. People were already being hurt. There have already been peaceful protests, including those mocked and coerced out of existence by the President. These aren't people who have decided they fancy burning down a building - these are people who are being regularly murdered by those who are supposed to protect them and who have been systematically dismissed and unheard.

I would also like to note that, while I don't like riots, not-violence has resulted in the problem being utterly ignored, whereas violence has a history of bringing about universal suffrage, recognition of basic gay rights and civil rights, regime change, law change - I don't like it, but it does have a history of getting shit done with a much higher success rate than asking politely.

"Violence doesn't solve violence" is something someone who is not getting violence perpetrated on them can comfortably say. There was already violence on one side of the equation - it was regular, systemic, and consistent. It wasn't being solved by non-violence and, while I don't like it, I'm not surprised that people have decided to field test whether they get better results with a riot than with a kneel.

Puja

Would you hold that view if you life's work had just gone up in flames? Do you think that burning out a local stores bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

[cashead]

What can I say, I have an issue with destruction of property, with people taking the law into their own hands, I don't view those as safe actions for a society and I'd prefer people were not hurt. I struggle too to see how violence solves violence, and whilst I'm not surprised we're stuck in such a cycle perpetuating I don't see how it helps to glorify the supposed achievements of violence by either side

"Safe actions for a society" "Prefer that people were not hurt"

In 2019, there were 996 people fatally shot by police. In 2019, there were 1,004. So far in 2020, the number is 228 (which is above the total that there was this time last year). 12% of the population is black, but 40% of the death from police are black. A black man in the USA has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying from a police officer - that makes it the 7th highest cause of death, beating out diabetes, influenza, and cerebrovascular diseases. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Dominique Clayton, Eric Reason, Atatiana Jefferson, Botham Jean, Philando Castile, Bettie Jones, Walther Scott.

People were already not in a safe society. People were already being hurt. There have already been peaceful protests, including those mocked and coerced out of existence by the President. These aren't people who have decided they fancy burning down a building - these are people who are being regularly murdered by those who are supposed to protect them and who have been systematically dismissed and unheard.

I would also like to note that, while I don't like riots, not-violence has resulted in the problem being utterly ignored, whereas violence has a history of bringing about universal suffrage, recognition of basic gay rights and civil rights, regime change, law change - I don't like it, but it does have a history of getting shit done with a much higher success rate than asking politely.

"Violence doesn't solve violence" is something someone who is not getting violence perpetrated on them can comfortably say. There was already violence on one side of the equation - it was regular, systemic, and consistent. It wasn't being solved by non-violence and, while I don't like it, I'm not surprised that people have decided to field test whether they get better results with a riot than with a kneel.

Puja

Would you hold that view if you life's work had just gone up in flames? Do you think that burning out a local stores bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Would you hold that view if you were shot to pieces because you happened to have the wrong skin colour? Do you think that shooting up a local black man bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Besides, I'm sure the police will be happy to reimburse them.

[Which Tyler]

Also this:

[canta_brian]

[Puja]

What can I say, I have an issue with destruction of property, with people taking the law into their own hands, I don't view those as safe actions for a society and I'd prefer people were not hurt. I struggle too to see how violence solves violence, and whilst I'm not surprised we're stuck in such a cycle perpetuating I don't see how it helps to glorify the supposed achievements of violence by either side

"Safe actions for a society" "Prefer that people were not hurt"

In 2019, there were 996 people fatally shot by police. In 2019, there were 1,004. So far in 2020, the number is 228 (which is above the total that there was this time last year). 12% of the population is black, but 40% of the death from police are black. A black man in the USA has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying from a police officer - that makes it the 7th highest cause of death, beating out diabetes, influenza, and cerebrovascular diseases. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Dominique Clayton, Eric Reason, Atatiana Jefferson, Botham Jean, Philando Castile, Bettie Jones, Walther Scott.

People were already not in a safe society. People were already being hurt. There have already been peaceful protests, including those mocked and coerced out of existence by the President. These aren't people who have decided they fancy burning down a building - these are people who are being regularly murdered by those who are supposed to protect them and who have been systematically dismissed and unheard.

I would also like to note that, while I don't like riots, not-violence has resulted in the problem being utterly ignored, whereas violence has a history of bringing about universal suffrage, recognition of basic gay rights and civil rights, regime change, law change - I don't like it, but it does have a history of getting shit done with a much higher success rate than asking politely.

"Violence doesn't solve violence" is something someone who is not getting violence perpetrated on them can comfortably say. There was already violence on one side of the equation - it was regular, systemic, and consistent. It wasn't being solved by non-violence and, while I don't like it, I'm not surprised that people have decided to field test whether they get better results with a riot than with a kneel.

Puja

Would you hold that view if you life's work had just gone up in flames? Do you think that burning out a local stores bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Obviously, I would prefer that personal property wasn't damaged, especially that of local businesses. However, there's a great deal more going on here than looking at the microcosm of one business and one person.

Plus, were it my life's work gone up in flames, I would at least have the insurance money with which to start again. George Floyd's siblings can't start a new brother with insurance money.

Puja

[Puja]

Saying that, getting rid of people like this whichever side they appear to be fighting for is at least entertaining.

The sad thing about legitimate protests is that they are often hijacked. Good on the actual protestors for stopping a dickhead.

I've heard tales of right-wing racist internet weirdos (as in 4-chan incel types, not the police) making plans to accelerate their prophesied "race-war" by instigating violence at these protests by starting vandalism, etc . I've not known how much credence to give them as many people talk a lot of shit on the internet.

However, that guy was weird, right? Just randomly deciding to ostentatiously smash a bit of kerb with a hammer in front of the police line, so white that you suspect his only light comes from a computer screen, completely without friends or compatriots when the protestors go for him.

I mean, he could just be a garden-variety idiot, but it does seem weird.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

"Safe actions for a society" "Prefer that people were not hurt"

In 2019, there were 996 people fatally shot by police. In 2019, there were 1,004. So far in 2020, the number is 228 (which is above the total that there was this time last year). 12% of the population is black, but 40% of the death from police are black. A black man in the USA has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying from a police officer - that makes it the 7th highest cause of death, beating out diabetes, influenza, and cerebrovascular diseases. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Dominique Clayton, Eric Reason, Atatiana Jefferson, Botham Jean, Philando Castile, Bettie Jones, Walther Scott.

People were already not in a safe society. People were already being hurt. There have already been peaceful protests, including those mocked and coerced out of existence by the President. These aren't people who have decided they fancy burning down a building - these are people who are being regularly murdered by those who are supposed to protect them and who have been systematically dismissed and unheard.

I would also like to note that, while I don't like riots, not-violence has resulted in the problem being utterly ignored, whereas violence has a history of bringing about universal suffrage, recognition of basic gay rights and civil rights, regime change, law change - I don't like it, but it does have a history of getting shit done with a much higher success rate than asking politely.

"Violence doesn't solve violence" is something someone who is not getting violence perpetrated on them can comfortably say. There was already violence on one side of the equation - it was regular, systemic, and consistent. It wasn't being solved by non-violence and, while I don't like it, I'm not surprised that people have decided to field test whether they get better results with a riot than with a kneel.

Puja

Would you hold that view if you life's work had just gone up in flames? Do you think that burning out a local stores bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Obviously, I would prefer that personal property wasn't damaged, especially that of local businesses. However, there's a great deal more going on here than looking at the microcosm of one business and one person.

Plus, were it my life's work gone up in flames, I would at least have the insurance money with which to start again. George Floyd's siblings can't start a new brother with insurance money.

Puja

Oh yes, insurance companies pay out really quickly and any business can recover from being torched.

Yes there is no replacing human life. Do you see anyone who gets killed in a riot as a useful sacrifice? I don't. Peaceful protest is all well and good, violent protest has no place and any government will crack down on it. Demonstrators are at risk of losing public sympathy.

[Sandydragon]

"Safe actions for a society" "Prefer that people were not hurt"

In 2019, there were 996 people fatally shot by police. In 2019, there were 1,004. So far in 2020, the number is 228 (which is above the total that there was this time last year). 12% of the population is black, but 40% of the death from police are black. A black man in the USA has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying from a police officer - that makes it the 7th highest cause of death, beating out diabetes, influenza, and cerebrovascular diseases. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Dominique Clayton, Eric Reason, Atatiana Jefferson, Botham Jean, Philando Castile, Bettie Jones, Walther Scott.

People were already not in a safe society. People were already being hurt. There have already been peaceful protests, including those mocked and coerced out of existence by the President. These aren't people who have decided they fancy burning down a building - these are people who are being regularly murdered by those who are supposed to protect them and who have been systematically dismissed and unheard.

I would also like to note that, while I don't like riots, not-violence has resulted in the problem being utterly ignored, whereas violence has a history of bringing about universal suffrage, recognition of basic gay rights and civil rights, regime change, law change - I don't like it, but it does have a history of getting shit done with a much higher success rate than asking politely.

"Violence doesn't solve violence" is something someone who is not getting violence perpetrated on them can comfortably say. There was already violence on one side of the equation - it was regular, systemic, and consistent. It wasn't being solved by non-violence and, while I don't like it, I'm not surprised that people have decided to field test whether they get better results with a riot than with a kneel.

Puja

Would you hold that view if you life's work had just gone up in flames? Do you think that burning out a local stores bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Would you hold that view if you were shot to pieces because you happened to have the wrong skin colour? Do you think that shooting up a local black man bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Besides, I'm sure the police will be happy to reimburse them.

What about a black man who owns a business that's been burnt out? I understand the anger; but the protesters are hurting innocent people and that just cannot be right. Don't they deserve protection from the police?

[Digby]

I still find it odd you chose to protest at someone laughing at a relatively funny dark joke. It was a joke, it was relevant, timely, and had double meanings. It was good.

Again I didn't object to the joke nor did I protest, I merely drew a contrast. If you want to look at it another way I made a further joke on the exceptionalism of some property destruction juxtaposed with the ills of other property destruction.

[Digby]

"Safe actions for a society" "Prefer that people were not hurt"

In 2019, there were 996 people fatally shot by police. In 2019, there were 1,004. So far in 2020, the number is 228 (which is above the total that there was this time last year). 12% of the population is black, but 40% of the death from police are black. A black man in the USA has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying from a police officer - that makes it the 7th highest cause of death, beating out diabetes, influenza, and cerebrovascular diseases. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Dominique Clayton, Eric Reason, Atatiana Jefferson, Botham Jean, Philando Castile, Bettie Jones, Walther Scott.

People were already not in a safe society. People were already being hurt. There have already been peaceful protests, including those mocked and coerced out of existence by the President. These aren't people who have decided they fancy burning down a building - these are people who are being regularly murdered by those who are supposed to protect them and who have been systematically dismissed and unheard.

I would also like to note that, while I don't like riots, not-violence has resulted in the problem being utterly ignored, whereas violence has a history of bringing about universal suffrage, recognition of basic gay rights and civil rights, regime change, law change - I don't like it, but it does have a history of getting shit done with a much higher success rate than asking politely.

"Violence doesn't solve violence" is something someone who is not getting violence perpetrated on them can comfortably say. There was already violence on one side of the equation - it was regular, systemic, and consistent. It wasn't being solved by non-violence and, while I don't like it, I'm not surprised that people have decided to field test whether they get better results with a riot than with a kneel.

Puja

The problem wasn't being utterly ignored, nor is the problem now being utterly addressed. There are issues which trigger all of us for some valid and less valid reasons that I'm sure we'd be only too happy to escalate citing our frustrations as just cause, but I simply don't share your faith in violence being part of the answer. So whatever the frustrations are with the current system peaceful protests, and crucially partaking in the democratic processes both voting, writing to/lobbying representative, lobbying the media, supporting a party/representative and even running yourself is kind of all there is.

The idea we can vent with violence is a dangerous one. I would have to confess I thought it funny when George Galloway was attacked, and really my justification that he's sub-human isn't good enough because we will not have a common societal standard to be held to if everyone can set their own standards for what and how to protest.

[Digby]

I said it's a bit weird to decry to the destruction of property whilst simultaneously laughing at the destruction of property. I'm not sure that's a protest so much as an observation. If I were to protest it would though be along the lines of such hypocrisy makes it too easy for those in power to ignore the actual problem being faced right now and the underlying issues, it gives those in power an easy out to dismiss your claims. But I'm not actually protesting anything, so left it as it's a bit weird.

So you’re saying humor is only good when it’s about something you agree with?

Reminder that Digby admitted that he had a chuckle at the Christchurch shooting last year.

Are you another Fausty parachute account?

Yes I did, though I think I said something like that wasn't the whole of my reaction, that that part of my reaction wasn't creditable, and the act itself was actually disgusting, so a little context wouldn't go amiss rather than seizing on one part. Actually its a good point because people in essence that's what we have here again, people laughing at that they find unacceptable, only here Vs in my case it's being defended my those laughing, I accepted my laughter was not of an appropriate standard

[Digby]

Would you hold that view if you life's work had just gone up in flames? Do you think that burning out a local stores bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Would you hold that view if you were shot to pieces because you happened to have the wrong skin colour? Do you think that shooting up a local black man bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Besides, I'm sure the police will be happy to reimburse them.

What about a black man who owns a business that's been burnt out? I understand the anger; but the protesters are hurting innocent people and that just cannot be right. Don't they deserve protection from the police?

Yep, people will be hurt in and possibly die in the riots. And the % rate of solved crimes that take place in a riot is abysmally low, whether theft, arson, vandalism, and even rape and murder. In saying it's abysmally low I accept there will be huge problems for the police in even trying to assemble a storyline/evidence, but for those people and the families of those affected it'll be little comfort.

[Digby]

Obviously, I would prefer that personal property wasn't damaged, especially that of local businesses. However, there's a great deal more going on here than looking at the microcosm of one business and one person.

Plus, were it my life's work gone up in flames, I would at least have the insurance money with which to start again. George Floyd's siblings can't start a new brother with insurance money.

Puja

Oh yes, insurance companies pay out really quickly and any business can recover from being torched.

Yes there is no replacing human life. Do you see anyone who gets killed in a riot as a useful sacrifice? I don't. Peaceful protest is all well and good, violent protest has no place and any government will crack down on it. Demonstrators are at risk of losing public sympathy.

A huge number of local businesses will either not have insurance or will not be able to afford the new rates.

[Puja]

Would you hold that view if you life's work had just gone up in flames? Do you think that burning out a local stores bothers anyone in Washington that much? The people hurt are routine people trying to make a living.

Obviously, I would prefer that personal property wasn't damaged, especially that of local businesses. However, there's a great deal more going on here than looking at the microcosm of one business and one person.

Plus, were it my life's work gone up in flames, I would at least have the insurance money with which to start again. George Floyd's siblings can't start a new brother with insurance money.

Puja

Oh yes, insurance companies pay out really quickly and any business can recover from being torched.

Yes there is no replacing human life. Do you see anyone who gets killed in a riot as a useful sacrifice? I don't. Peaceful protest is all well and good, violent protest has no place and any government will crack down on it. Demonstrators are at risk of losing public sympathy.

I don't want violent protest. I also don't want there to be a country where the police can randomly kill someone and rarely if ever suffer any repurcussions. The latter has historically only got better when the former has happened - I am not surprised that people have turned to it again once pushed far enough.

I don't believe anyone has died in the protests so far (which is a frigging miracle given the number of guns in that sodding country), but the police are spraying around less-lethal ammunition and chemical weapons like they're completely harmless, so it is only a matter of time.

I don't have answers - I can't solve the trolley problem of "Is this person a 'useful sacrifice'" (appalling turn of phrase, btw). I do know that a simple answer of "violent protests are wrong, no matter what" or "these violent protests are justified, no matter what" is reductive and shouldn't be subscribed to.

Puja