Over 93% of BLM demonstrations are non-violent (2 Viewers)

< Previous | Next >

First Time Poster

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2019
Messages
243
Reaction score
1,170
Age
39
Location
Louisiana, Georgia, Texas
Offline
So, rather than burying this subject in an already broad thread I felt this topic, and the study it is based on, deserved its own thread. A debate about whether the protests have been mostly violent or not has been had multiple times in multiple threads so when I saw this analysis it piqued my interest.

A few key points: It characterizes the BLM movement as "an overwhelmingly peaceful movement." Most of the violent demonstrations were surrounding Confederate monuments. To this mostly non-violent movement, the government has responded violently, and disproportionately so, to BLM than other demonstrations, including a militarized federal response. The media has, also, been targeted by this violent government response. There is a high rate of non-state actor involvement in BLM demonstrations. Lastly, there is a rising number of counter-protest that turn violent. I shouldn't say lastly because there is, also, a lot of data relating to Covid too.

The Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED) begin tracking BLM demonstrations since this summer, the week of George Floyd's killing. I am linking the entire study for all to read. I am highlighting excerpts I personally found interesting.


The vast majority of demonstration events associated with the BLM movement are non-violent (see map below). In more than 93% of all demonstrations connected to the movement, demonstrators have not engaged in violence or destructive activity. Peaceful protests are reported in over 2,400 distinct locations around the country. Violent demonstrations, meanwhile, have been limited to fewer than 220 locations — under 10% of the areas that experienced peaceful protests. In many urban areas like Portland, Oregon, for example, which has seen sustained unrest since Floyd’s killing, violent demonstrations are largely confined to specific blocks, rather than dispersed throughout the city (CNN, 1 September 2020).

Yet, despite data indicating that demonstrations associated with the BLM movement are overwhelmingly peaceful, one recent poll suggested that 42% of respondents believe “most protesters [associated with the BLM movement] are trying to incite violence or destroy property” (FiveThirtyEight, 5 June 2020). This is in line with the Civiqs tracking poll which finds that “net approval for the Black Lives Matter movement peaked back on June 3 [the week following the killing of George Floyd when riots first began to be reported] and has fallen sharply since” (USA Today, 31 August 2020; Civiqs, 29 August 2020).

Research from the University of Washington indicates that this disparity stems from political orientation and biased media framing (Washington Post, 24 August 2020), such as disproportionate coverage of violent demonstrations (Business Insider, 11 June 2020; Poynter, 25 June 2020). Groups like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) have documented organized disinformation campaigns aimed at spreading a “deliberate mischaracterization of groups or movements [involved in the protests], such as portraying activists who support Black Lives Matter as violent extremists or claiming that antifa is a terrorist organization coordinated or manipulated by nebulous external forces” (ADL, 2020). These disinformation campaigns may be contributing to the decline in public support for the BLM movement after the initial increase following Floyd’s killing, especially amongst the white population (USA Today, 31 August 2020; Civiqs, 30 August 2020a, 30 August 2020b). This waning support also comes as the Trump administration recently shifted its “law and order” messaging to target local Democratic Party politicians from urban areas, particularly on the campaign trail (NPR, 27 August 2020).

Despite the fact that demonstrations associated with the BLM movement have been overwhelmingly peaceful, more than 9% — or nearly one in 10 — have been met with government intervention, compared to 3% of all other demonstrations. This also marks a general increase in intervention rates relative to this time last year. In July 2019, authorities intervened in under 2% of all demonstrations — fewer than 30 events — relative to July 2020, when they intervened in 9% of all demonstrations — or over 170 events.

Authorities have used force — such as firing less-lethal weapons like tear gas, rubber bullets, and pepper spray or beating demonstrators with batons — in over 54% of the demonstrations in which they have engaged. This too is a significant increase relative to one year ago. In July 2019, government personnel used force in just three documented demonstrations, compared to July 2020, when they used force against demonstrators in at least 65 events. Over 5% of all events linked to the BLM movement have been met with force by authorities, compared to under 1% of all other demonstrations.

Non-state groups are becoming more active and assertive. Since May, ACLED records over 100 events in which non-state actors engaged in demonstrations (including counter-demonstrations) — the vast majority of which were in response to demonstrations associated with the BLM movement. These non-state actors include groups and militias from both the left and right side of the political spectrum, such as Antifa, the Not forking Around Coalition, the New Mexico Civil Guard, the Patriot Front, the Proud Boys, the Boogaloo Bois, and the Ku Klux Klan, among others (see map below).3

Between 24 May and 22 August, over 360 counter-protests were recorded around the country, accounting for nearly 5% of all demonstrations. Of these, 43 — nearly 12% — turned violent, with clashes between pro-police demonstrators and demonstrators associated with the BLM movement, for example. In July alone, ACLED records over 160 counter-protests, or more than 8% of all demonstrations. Of these, 18 turned violent. This is a significant increase relative to July 2019, when only 17 counter-protests were reported around the country, or approximately 1% of all demonstrations, and only one of these allegedly turned violent.
 

Sandman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
186
Reaction score
682
Age
54
Location
Houston, Texas
Offline
Wasn't sure exactly where to put this, so why not here?

Racists gonna race...

It is sad that he feels comfortable saying this. This country took a big step back on racism (actually turned around and ran a few laps in the opposite direction) over the past four years. That's what happens when the President tells his supporters that they can be their worst and he still loves them.
 

Farb

Mostly Peaceful Poster
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,617
Reaction score
1,013
Age
46
Location
Mobile
Offline
When I read that, I didn't assume the color of the mob, I assumed the mobs intent.

So, the question is still out there, why would someone jump to the conclusion this was said out of racism? Hint: the letter behind the guys name.
 

Xeno

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2020
Messages
384
Reaction score
984
Location
Lafayette
Offline
When I read that, I didn't assume the color of the mob, I assumed the mobs intent.

So, the question is still out there, why would someone jump to the conclusion this was said out of racism? Hint: the letter behind the guys name.
There was no question about the Jan 6 mob's intent. They were chanting, "Hang Mike Pence," erected a makeshift gallows and were actively calling out for Nancy Pelosi.
 

UncleTrvlingJim

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
1,117
Reaction score
2,508
Location
Virginia
Offline
When I read that, I didn't assume the color of the mob, I assumed the mobs intent.

So, the question is still out there, why would someone jump to the conclusion this was said out of racism? Hint: the letter behind the guys name.
Well, it could also be because he said he was afraid of an organization that is largely about protecting the interests of black Americans, and not afraid of a vastly majority white mob that killed a cop and sent dozens of cops to the hospital, chanted about killing Mike Pence and so on.

It certainly opens him up to a charge of being able to see nuance and grey with a largely white mob and not one with a largely ethnically diverse mob.
 

Farb

Mostly Peaceful Poster
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,617
Reaction score
1,013
Age
46
Location
Mobile
Offline
I think the BLM mobs are fairly mixed race. I don't plan to get into the capital thing because it turns out that no one really knows for sure if a police officer was killed by the actions of the crowd. We do know the police did shoot a kill a protester though.

I couldn't read the article provided on the tweet since it is behind a paywall. Here is an article I found that quotes him.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...feel-unsafe-during-riot-but-would-have-if-blm

The Rep senator didn't say anything about race or black Americans. As a matter of fact, he said BLM and Antifa:

"Had the tables been turned, Joe, this could mean trouble. Had the tables been turned and [former] President Trump won the election and those were tens of thousands of Black Lives Matter and antifa protesters, I might have been a little concerned," he added.

Is he wrong? Does that come off as racist? I don't think so. I also think that quote on the tweet was purposely misleading.
 

brandon

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
2,091
Offline
When I read that, I didn't assume the color of the mob, I assumed the mobs intent.
Like I said...disingenuous.
it turns out that no one really knows for sure if a police officer was killed by the actions of the crowd. We do know the police did shoot a kill a protester though.
I’m sure this is exactly what you would say if a cop was killed at a BLM rally.
 

V Chip

Truth Addict
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
857
Reaction score
1,506
Age
53
Location
Outside Atlanta
Offline
When I read that, I didn't assume the color of the mob, I assumed the mobs intent.

So, the question is still out there, why would someone jump to the conclusion this was said out of racism? Hint: the letter behind the guys name.
Nah man, it's the content of what he said (and his history of similar statements).

The intent of the Jan 6 mob was insurrection, storming the capitol to overturn an election they disagreed with and to punish those Senators and Representatives who wouldn't overturn it. They were hunting Rs as well as Ds.

The intent of BLM has never been about targeting politicians for kidnapping or hurting them or worse. ANTIFA activists have never been about trying to overturn elections or kidnapping or hurting members of Congress. To imply anything otherwise shows a specific agenda.

He said about the Jan 6 mob: "I knew those were people that love this country, that truly respect law enforcement, would never do anything to break the law, so I wasn’t concerned." Really? They respect law enforcement by fighting with them, killing one and injuring 140 law enforcement officers, beating them with flags and bats and kicking them while they were on the ground? They would never break the law, except for the thousands who actually did?

GTFOHWTS.
 

MT15

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
4,273
Reaction score
7,135
Location
Midwest
Online
I don’t think there is any doubt that Officer Sicknick died as a result of the actions of the mob on Jan. 6. The FBI is looking for those responsible. I believe the intent is to charge them with murder

The mob contained a significant white nationalist/supremacist presence that day. This is also not in doubt. Black police officers were particularly targeted with venom that day and one of them committed suicide just days after going through it. The fact that the senator identifies with this mob, admires them and denies their criminal actions are why his statements are racist in tone and intent. It’s who he identifies with.
 

SaulGoodmanEsq

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
601
Reaction score
989
Age
42
Location
New Orleans
Offline
I think the BLM mobs are fairly mixed race. I don't plan to get into the capital thing because it turns out that no one really knows for sure if a police officer was killed by the actions of the crowd. We do know the police did shoot a kill a protester though.

I couldn't read the article provided on the tweet since it is behind a paywall. Here is an article I found that quotes him.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...feel-unsafe-during-riot-but-would-have-if-blm

The Rep senator didn't say anything about race or black Americans. As a matter of fact, he said BLM and Antifa:

"Had the tables been turned, Joe, this could mean trouble. Had the tables been turned and [former] President Trump won the election and those were tens of thousands of Black Lives Matter and antifa protesters, I might have been a little concerned," he added.

Is he wrong? Does that come off as racist? I don't think so. I also think that quote on the tweet was purposely misleading.
This is manufacturing argument for argument sake and I doubt you wrote it with a straight face.
 

Yggdrasill

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 12, 2020
Messages
198
Reaction score
288
Age
59
Location
Seattle
Offline
I am not familiar with Ron Johnson's history of racist remarks so can't put these comments into that context. But he is a tool, no question. He has made numerous pronouncements over the years on a variety of topics that are ignorant, simplistic, and totally unworthy of a Senator (let alone a compassionate, reasoning human being). Saying that COVID deaths were a "necessary sacrifice" to keep the economy going is one disgusting example.

That said, I agree with Farb on this one. BLM protests were extremely mixed race, or predominantly white depending on the locale. There may be a racist undertone with this but to infer that he was envisioning a rabid mob of non-whites is a big stretch.

Given Johnson's ridiculous comments earlier regarding the "peaceful, law abiding" nature of the Capitol rioters, I took away from this that he would have felt (slightly - his words) threatened by equally agitated rioters on the other side of the political spectrum. That is a stupid thing to say, not to mention it is disingenuous to imply that somehow BLM/ANTIFA protestors are more prone to violence than right wing extremists. But like I said, he's an ignorant douche.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

< Previous | Next >

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored

Top Bottom