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
    278
    Reaction score
    1,424
    Age
    42
    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.
     
    That’s not surprising to anyone except the far left.


    The concept of defunding the police is pushed by those on he left that lean on socialism. They somehow crave chaos so they can advertise socialism as the ultimate solution.

    Defund the police and extreme measures to stop global warming are trojan horses for socialism.

    The high crime neighborhoods would benefit from a Marshall type plan. However, if prosperity ever arrives in these areas the current politicians would not have an excuse to run for office as saviors for disenfranchised.
     
    Last edited:
    Law enforcement costs money.

    It would cost less if we didn't use law enforcement for non law enforcement tasks.
    Since when is any politicians, Repubs included, given a damn about spending our money? They don't.
     
    Since when is any politicians, Repubs included, given a damn about spending our money? They don't.

    I agree, they only care about the deficit when they aren't in charge of the spending.
     
    The concept of defunding the police is pushed by those on he left that lean on socialism. They somehow crave chaos so they can advertise socialism as the ultimate solution.

    Defund the police and extreme measures to stop global warming are trojan horses for socialism.

    The high crime neighborhoods would benefit from a Marshall type plan. However, if prosperity ever arrives in these areas the current politicians would not have an excuse to run for office as saviors for disenfranchised.

    I feel like you just say things. On it's face you are talking about abolishing what is, and should be a social service (policing) because the plot is more socialism.

    AFAIK most popular global warming solutions are market driven incentives like carbon tax, and credits.

    What you really need to address in Marshal plan is social mobility. That's why progressives like things like universal healthcare: removes barriers to swap jobs, and create small businesses. Also, free/very cheap college education - removes the barrier of massive student loan when leaving college so you can start to build wealth. You see even moderate Democrats try to pretend this untenable.

    It's weird to me that progressives are really only fighting for what baby boomers enjoyed in their childhood: cheap college, and healthcare. It speaks to a certain amount of defeatism in the American public, and politics. I actually think in a non-dog whistle kind of way progressives should be the ones running on "Make America Great Again - You know like anyone over 65 had it in their childhood."

    If Covid has taught me anything, it's that Republicans will oppose Democrats on anything, even breathing. Democrats are going to have to do all this stuff with their own majorities, and no filibuster. Republicans would try to vote down sunshine at this point.

    P.S. To add it really how authoritarian the Republican party has become. They've gone after teacher's, and their unions, as well as the postal service. Then just about every other public union, and social service. Don't you even dare mention getting rid of the police, a tax payer funded service with a strong public union. I've seen supposed liberals, and "moderates" on this board attack abolishing police. I'm going to start using Paul's schtick though. Republicans want to get rid of a social service? It's a plot for more socialism from Republicans don't fall for it guys!
     
    Last edited:
    I feel like you just say things. On it's face you are talking about abolishing what is, and should be a social service (policing) because the plot is more socialism.

    AFAIK most popular global warming solutions are market driven incentives like carbon tax, and credits.
    Sure, I sometimes say incendiary things. But, there is a tiny minority out there that see these two issues as a trojan horse for their politics.
    What you really need to address in Marshal plan is social mobility. That's why progressives like things like universal healthcare: removes barriers to swap jobs, and create small businesses. Also, free/very cheap college education - removes the barrier of massive student loan when leaving college so you can start to build wealth. You see even moderate Democrats try to pretend this untenable.
    I am 100% for National Medicare and free public college tuition college.

    Medicare only insures the elderly and the disabled whereas the private health insurance gets to insure the young and healthy. Hence Medicare loses money and the private health insurance industry makes money. This is what I called crony capitalism as all they do is collect premiums from the patients, pay medical bills, and the rest is profit. The Medicare folks can do that with no profit in mind.

    I favor free college for those that are academically qualified. Offering free college for those that are not college material solves nothing. I would also not allow free tuition for those that want to study garbage majors.
    It's weird to me that progressives are really only fighting for what baby boomers enjoyed in their childhood: cheap college, and healthcare. It speaks to a certain amount of defeatism in the American public, and politics. I actually think in a non-dog whistle kind of way progressives should be the ones running on "Make America Great Again - You know like anyone over 65 had it in their childhood."
    I agree with the above.
    If Covid has taught me anything, it's that Republicans will oppose Democrats on anything, even breathing. Democrats are going to have to do all this stuff with their own majorities, and no filibuster. Republicans would try to vote down sunshine at this point.
    Democrats have most of the good ideas, but they also have some awful ones that have never worked. The Reps also have some good ideas. What we need is a combination of both.

    P.S. To add it really how authoritarian the Republican party has become. They've gone after teacher's, and their unions, as well as the postal service. T
    The teachers unions have driven American public education to the toilet, they have a point there.
     
    Last edited:


    I watched this video this morning. I am sure it is Russian misinformation or what have you. I found it was very interesting. Especially the part about the infiltration and reeducation of a generation.
     
    That’s not surprising to anyone except the far left.


    Surely you realize that probably less than 5% of Americans actually want to defund the police. I'd wager it is even lower than that. Don't be fooled by the twitter feeds and newsletters you read that tell you 99% of Democrats are in favor of it. It's called setting up a strawman so someone can rail against 't3h ebil l4tists!'
     
    Interesting article comparing the BLM protests with the civil rights protests of the 1960s
    ===================

    Since it emerged in 2014, the Black Lives Matter movement has been compared to the civil rights movement.

    BLM advocates have argued that it continues past efforts toward racial justice; critics have argued instead that the BLM movement has not lived up to the civil rights movement’s nonviolent standards.

    In particular, conservative media outlets have charged that, after George Floyd’s murder last summer, BLM-inspired protests were “tearing apart our cities” and argued that it is “not a civil rights movement.”
Research has found that the 2020 protests were overwhelmingly peaceful.

    Here at the Monkey Cage, political scientists Erica Chenoweth and Jeremy Pressman reported that their Crowd Counting Consortium (CCC) found that less than 4 percent of the summer’s protests involved property damage while 1 percent involved police injuries.

    Other data collections similarly found that 95 percent were peaceful.


    How does this compare to civil rights era protests? Our research finds that on every measure available, last year’s BLM protests were more peaceful and less confrontational…….

     
    Interesting article comparing the BLM protests with the civil rights protests of the 1960s
    ===================

    Since it emerged in 2014, the Black Lives Matter movement has been compared to the civil rights movement.

    BLM advocates have argued that it continues past efforts toward racial justice; critics have argued instead that the BLM movement has not lived up to the civil rights movement’s nonviolent standards.

    In particular, conservative media outlets have charged that, after George Floyd’s murder last summer, BLM-inspired protests were “tearing apart our cities” and argued that it is “not a civil rights movement.”
Research has found that the 2020 protests were overwhelmingly peaceful.

    Here at the Monkey Cage, political scientists Erica Chenoweth and Jeremy Pressman reported that their Crowd Counting Consortium (CCC) found that less than 4 percent of the summer’s protests involved property damage while 1 percent involved police injuries.

    Other data collections similarly found that 95 percent were peaceful.


    How does this compare to civil rights era protests? Our research finds that on every measure available, last year’s BLM protests were more peaceful and less confrontational…….

    I am certain most protests were peaceful, but the media spent weeks showing videos of looting and buildings set on fire. They were obviously looking for ratings.
     

    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.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom