On the subject of protest
Why do people keep saying “we didn’t do xyz when Obama got elected” as they reference the acts of vandalism that may accompany some protests? Never mind the fact that many burnt and simulated the lynching of epithets of Obama. The notion of how one group would protest over another is an interesting point that may need closer evaluation.
Firstly— I’m not condoning that behavior, but it’s important not to conflate the action of some with the message of many.
Secondly—possibly, it would be completely ridiculous for those people (such as white people, in the case of BLM, for example) on the better side of the power dynamic to “break stuff” or even “protest.”
Quite generally in history, the powerful don’t participate in civil disobedience because they have no reason to. Rarely do they see the opposition as a viable threat to their power. At the moment, however, that occurs…they fight, utilize arms, and kill to continue their hold on power.
So…even if it was true that other people didn’t do such things when they lost, that isn’t a testament to their maturity. It’s a testament to their power and privilege, the understanding that such a loss isn’t an existential threat.
People protest when their rights are threatened. People revolt when the current power dynamic operates unjustly. People want to gain power or rights, so they act.
It’s called retaliation and a will to continue one’s stranglehold on the reins of freedom if you’re already in power. And when that happens, things generally aren’t merely broken, people die. Wars start. “Peaceful protest” goes out the window.
Still relevant.
