Over 93% of BLM demonstrations are non-violent (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    First Time Poster

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Nov 8, 2019
    Messages
    305
    Reaction score
    1,556
    Age
    43
    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.
     
    Do you think the people in Cuba are marching because they want capitalism?
    I think they are marching because they want more Che shirts. But seriously, the US Embargo has harmed the Cuban people, but the Cuban government has harmed the people even more.
     
    I think they are marching because they want more Che shirts. But seriously, the US Embargo has harmed the Cuban people, but the Cuban government has harmed the people even more.

    Sure seems to be that way. I'm not really a fan of the embargo, but, I do think we can find better ways to put pressure on the Cuban government that doesn't turn their people into collateral damage.
     
    Sure seems to be that way. I'm not really a fan of the embargo, but, I do think we can find better ways to put pressure on the Cuban government that doesn't turn their people into collateral damage.
    Perhaps, however perhaps the Cuban government is viewing their citizens as collateral damage, and they were doing that before the US even put an embargo in place.
     
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/poll...matter-riots-investigated-than-january-6-riot

    As Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi picks members of a select committee to investigate the riots of January 6, a new poll finds that many Americans believe she’s focusing on the wrong riots.

    One-third more Americans believe Congress should hold investigative hearings about last summer’s “Black Lives Matter protests that sparked violence” than think lawmakers ought to probe the riot at the capitol on January 6.

    In all, two out of three likely U.S. voters say they believe Congress should open an official investigation into “the violent protests,” which blazed a trail of arson and looting through major and mid-sized cities nationwide. On the other hand, fewer than half (49%) of Americans support Pelosi’s investigation of the D.C. riot, in which rioters protesting the 2020 presidential election results stormed the capitol.

    Support for a federal inquiry into the riots that engulfed U.S. cities after the death of George Floyd cut deep across racial and political lines. “Sixty-seven percent (67%) of whites, 64% of black voters, 66% of Hispanics and 62% of other minorities think Congress should investigate the 2020 riots in U.S. cities,” reported Rasmussen Reports. “Seventy-five percent (75%) of Republicans, 60% of Democrats and 63% of voters not affiliated with either major party say Congress should investigate last year’s violent protests.”

    The riots were the most expensive in U.S. history, costing insurance companies an estimated $1 billion to $2 billion, according to Property Claim Services. That estimate only includes the share of the damage insurance companies cover.


    The Poll:
    https://www.rasmussenreports.com/pu...oters_want_congress_to_investigate_2020_riots

    I would hate to see the damage if only 90% were non-violent. This is actually really good news. It means the majority or my countrymen do actually think for themselves!!
     
    @Farb

    I will help since again you didn’t read the source material and just went with a garbage source.

    the (Rasmussen) poll asked should the BLM protests be investigated ALSO - not instead of.

    this is why you shouldn’t post the daily wire. They make up stuff and when you post it you look like you are making up stuff too.
     
    1) Investigating these things is not an either/or proposition. 2) Anyone who thinks investigating protests in cities that spurred violent outbursts is more important than a semi-organized assault on the United States Capitol, encouraged by the losing candidate who also happens to be the current President, while Congress is certifying the electoral votes... well... they're a partisan hack who has lost all sense of objectivity.

    Bonus points: How many law enforcement officers were killed during these protests outside of DC? Blue lives only matter when it fits people's political narrative.

    Extra bonus points: Reading the daily wire is bad for your mental health. It's an echo chamber.
     
    Thanks for all the concern on my news choices. I think I will take you all a lot more serious when you also comment on Comedy Central, John Oliver et al. Until then, I have subscription for the DW and I will make an attempt to post more from them for your enjoyment.

    So the key thing was semantics? So everyone here agrees there should also be a commission to investigate and prosecute? That could be going on at the same time or even after the 1.6 investigation?
     
    Who wasn’t arrested and prosecuted already? What do you think there is to investigate? If there would be a legitimate reason, sure.

    Part of the scandal of Jan. 6 to me is the contrast between the two cases. We had massive police presence during the summer. They utilized riot techniques like “kettling”, they used tear gas, rubber bullets and other projectiles. There were mass arrests, they even disabled protesters’ cars by slitting their tires so they couldn’t get away.

    Now contrast that with Jan. 6. Next to no riot techniques were used. We had actual breaking and entering with verbal threats followed up by physical violence toward police officers. Verbal threats towards members of Congress. There is more than a little evidence that political figures from the GOP, possibly elected officials, were involved. And very few arrests were made that day.

    I’m so tired of all these false equivalencies. It’s just so stupid.
     
    Thanks for all the concern on my news choices. I think I will take you all a lot more serious when you also comment on Comedy Central, John Oliver et al. Until then, I have subscription for the DW and I will make an attempt to post more from them for your enjoyment.

    So the key thing was semantics? So everyone here agrees there should also be a commission to investigate and prosecute? That could be going on at the same time or even after the 1.6 investigation?

    No. I'm not in favor in investigations to placate Republicans and make them feel better about supporting insurrectonist.
     
    Are we not placating the Democrats to make them feel better about the BLM summer of love and leaving the citizens of entire cities to the whim of a ruthless mob? They are.
     
    I have subscription for the DW
    I got a bridge in Brooklyn for sale if you are interested. Also, yes, I see no problem with an investigation on those other riots. But... again... those did not involve a sitting President trying to subvert the Constitution.
     
    Are we not placating the Democrats to make them feel better about the BLM summer of love and leaving the citizens of entire cities to the whim of a ruthless mob? They are.

    Oh good lord, dude. You talk like cities were burned to the ground, and ruthless mobs roamed around sacking and pillaging. You have no context, and your hyperbole is embarrassing. Or it should be embarrassing, but I think you have no shame.
     
    Oh good lord, dude. You talk like cities were burned to the ground, and ruthless mobs roamed around sacking and pillaging. You have no context, and your hyperbole is embarrassing. Or it should be embarrassing, but I think you have no shame.
    Your lack of empathy, compassion and emotions for those that lost their businesses, were assaulted and beat for trying to protect their property and the families that lost loved one is really telling.
    I have a feeling if your store was looted and burned or your neighbor was shot in the head while trying to protect a friends store your attitude would be a lot different.
     
    Your lack of empathy, compassion and emotions for those that lost their businesses, were assaulted and beat for trying to protect their property and the families that lost loved one is really telling.
    I have a feeling if your store was looted and burned or your neighbor was shot in the head while trying to protect a friends store your attitude would be a lot different.

    Man, just imagine how we would feel if a group of angry white supremicists/Nazis/Qmorons and others tried to disrupt the certification of a presidential election by storming the capital and injuring multiple LEO's.....but, then you can't imagine that because it doesn't fit your narrative....
     

    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.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom