Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninastar
When it was BLM riots or the London riots, or any kind of riot that wasn’t (mainly) white people, the news always portrayed that there was nothing else that could be done because people were hurting and that was a good reason to cause chaos. That society needed to change and only rioting could do that blah blah blah. I remember police stations and locally owned businesses being set ablaze
This time the protests began with people who are upset about the insane things going on with immigration these days
And then of course, trashy idiots take advantage over the protests and just use any excuse to get violent
I know that not all of the BLM and London protestors were idiots who just wanted to loot and mob and set fire.
It’s the same with this situation but people just want to label it racist because the argument is on the political flip side
Not all of these people committing these crimes are ‘right wing’. I feel like we label anything that’s just a tiny bit not left as ‘right wing’ and that just takes away the seriousness of it all
|
Forgetting the left and right wing thought process for a moment, let's consider the real victims are business owners and vulnerable residences. Our governments won't step in to protect them and that says everything to me about what government really supports. In the past, more would be done fairly immediately but now there is plenty of sitting back and speculating to TV cameras instead of dealing with pressing matters actively and firmly. Did the govt suddenly lose the ability to investigate for itself and sort things out? Why is the media sorting it out?
Even if there is no immediate agenda, it is akin to pouring gasoline on a fire because it sends the message to normal folk the politically insane and basic thugs are running society. The longer they sit, the more longterm damage is done for the victims and that means longterm damages for the communities also. Many of those affected may never recover. Even more ironic is that this is why we see more people turning more towards extreme policies to fix things, it's because of their distrust of govt and its systems, which are reinforced by its inaction... and it didn't just start with riots. Riots are a late stage result of a weakened government.
This is one reason why in the US we do maintain a 2nd Amendment. Imagine you become the only person standing between you and your livelihood. That doesn't just mean a literal life. People need a means to survive and that could mean their job, their car, everything they have in those buildings and in their vehicles could be what keeps them sheltered and food on their plate. I feel that doesn't get emphasized enough and that ultimately plays a big role in how average people vote. When these events are on our televisions and we see overpaid idiots on either side contemplating the "good" side effects to watching lives get destroyed, it pushes vulnerable people closer to desperation. But then consider too we each have embedded a drive to survive, which is not evil. It's ultimately noble.
Some will assume money will suddenly come into the communities and make everything OK? I live in a disaster prone area and that money is not as widely available as it is made out to be. There are also other problems money can't solve. So it requires early preparation. But riots... how can anyone foresee when and how that happens and that the govt won't intervene? I don't think the PM intervening is wrong, but I do think they all wait too long and don't make it clear and obvious it won't be tolerated. So each time it happens, it leaves people feeling there are ulterior motives and special interests and thus they start wondering when they will be effected... it's unacceptable.
An example closer to home: The Secret Service was afraid of a somewhat sloped roof. That's supposed to be an agency with a gold standard for providing national security. Now think, this is the kind of thinking that found its way somehow into a govt organization charged with protecting its own interests. I don't want to even begin to imagine what they might find acceptable for the security of the average populace... that's how far we have slipped. So even removing ideology from the entire discussion, it's still a very harsh outlook.