by Sixstrings » Mon 24 Nov 2014, 23:17:02
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'T')he police are almost always heavily outnumbered when they are engaged in riot control. Police tactics are therefore designed to allow them to be absolutely in control at the point of contact between police lines and demonstrators, both to insure their own safety and to minimize injuries to the rioters.
I guess the difference between a riot and a protest is a distinction dependent on what side you're on.
If working people wanted to riot on Wall Street for living wages -- I could fully understand that. I wouldn't condone riot, or participate, but I'd be sympathetic. Just as average Ukrainians at home were sympathetic about the issues in the Maidan.
Dorlomin makes a very good point -- King Mob. If you ignore the people and their suffering, then yeah they're gonna rise up eventually. And then the People (King Mob) make a lot of noise and there's a lot of "No Justice, no peace," and then finally government gives in and makes some changes. In the 1800s, private business employed Pinkertons to beat the crap out of working class protesters. And these things happened again in the 20th century depression too, finally coming to the edge of revolution and then that was averted with FDR's election and him telling Republicans -- look, I'm gonna fix some things whether you like it or not, deal with it.
Child labor laws were passed, minimum wage, social security -- the New Deal.
Dor mentioned ancient Rome, and King Mob. There were many, many times that the rich elite patrician class let the people get too poor and hungry, and that's when King Mob arose. Sometimes they'd have leaders. There was a bourgoise class called the "knights" and they had elections for some offices. Usually these posts got bought off by the rich Senators, but sometimes when the pendulum swung, the People would elect real representatives of the mob and its demands.
Some senators at various periods appealed to the mobs, like the dictator Sulla.
And then Julius Caesar -- he was a patrician senator, and capitalized on one of these periods of the People getting the shaft and ignored to the benefit of the rich. A big issue at that time was slave labor and that it had put so many free men out of work.
Caesar rode populism into Empire.
There does come a point where you ignore the Mob at your peril, if you're a rich senator. Ask Yanukovich about that -- now a Russian citizen in Moscow, having fled in the night in his helicopter leaving the animals abandoned in his little disneyland dacha.
When is a protest a riot? Depends on where you stand, I guess, if you're a patrician or if you're in the mob.
The thing about the race riots we've had at times in the US, though, is that sometimes it's just so simplified. "The Poh-lease shot somebody." Well maybe that somebody was a hoodlum, ya know?
There were real civil rights issues in the 60s.
Now it's 2014. This Michael Brown was no Rosa Parks. He was a dangerous hoodlum. So what does the Mob want? Do they even want a job, to start with, with a living wage? Or no job at all and just a check?
Is it a riot of citizens, or more like a prison riot? Why do they not realize all they need to do is vote?
I don't sympathize with the Ferguson stuff at all, to me that's a riot, I'm not seeing any issues that would cause me to sympathize. And ultimately, if you actually LIVE in the middle of something like this -- if you're just a law abiding citizen, and you've got a job and aren't among the poor and hungry storming the Bastille, or you're a small business owner getting your shop windows busted and everything stolen and trashed, then yeah you're not going to sympathize at all.
You're just going to want to be safe, and be able to drive down the street, and not get pulled out of your car and attacked.
So those are my thoughts on it.