Why is Baltimore burning?

[Horatio Parker]

Can someone help reconcile why if burning down the city where you live is so explainable/predictable/justifiable/inevitable so few people participate in it?

What "reconciliation" ? People are upset and a subset of those people are willing to riot.

 

[ksen]

Can someone help reconcile why if burning down the city where you live is so explainable/predictable/justifiable/inevitable so few people participate in it?

Why do those need reconciling?

May as well try and reconcile why if defeating Hitler is so explainable/predictable/justifiable/inevitable we sent less then 10% of our population to participate in it?

 

[dismal]

Can someone help reconcile why if burning down the city where you live is so explainable/predictable/justifiable/inevitable so few people participate in it?

Because it takes so much egregious and accumulated injustice to precipitate it and the aggregation of enough people to be empowered to risk it.

So to the vast majority of rational people this has not yet occurred?

 

[Bronzeage]

Can someone help reconcile why if burning down the city where you live is so explainable/predictable/justifiable/inevitable so few people participate in it?

You are missing the point, D. The city needs the cooperation of all citizens in order to stop people who want to burn and steal. When the city loses that cooperation, it can no longer govern. The government has two choices. Either use more force, or do something to change the circumstances which led to this situation.

Suppose you had a deal with someone to do a particular thing, everyday. You agree to do something for them, in return. One day you notice they don't do it everyday, maybe once a week. Soon it never happens at all. You've been doing your part everyday, just like you agreed.

Do you keep on keeping on, or do you stop providing your part of the bargain?

 

[TSwizzle]

Can someone help reconcile why if burning down the city where you live is so explainable/predictable/justifiable/inevitable so few people participate in it?

You are missing the point, D. The city needs the cooperation of all citizens in order to stop people who want to burn and steal. When the city loses that cooperation, it can no longer govern. The government has two choices. Either use more force, or do something to change the circumstances which led to this situation.

Suppose you had a deal with someone to do a particular thing, everyday. You agree to do something for them, in return. One day you notice they don't do it everyday, maybe once a week. Soon it never happens at all. You've been doing your part everyday, just like you agreed.

Do you keep on keeping on, or do you stop providing your part of the bargain?

This "bargain" as you put it, only exists in your head.

 

[dismal]

Can someone help reconcile why if burning down the city where you live is so explainable/predictable/justifiable/inevitable so few people participate in it?

You are missing the point, D. The city needs the cooperation of all citizens in order to stop people who want to burn and steal. When the city loses that cooperation, it can no longer govern. The government has two choices. Either use more force, or do something to change the circumstances which led to this situation.

Suppose you had a deal with someone to do a particular thing, everyday. You agree to do something for them, in return. One day you notice they don't do it everyday, maybe once a week. Soon it never happens at all. You've been doing your part everyday, just like you agreed.

Do you keep on keeping on, or do you stop providing your part of the bargain?

Your view is that there is some small subset of people who always want to riot and burn and the "accumulated injustice" causes the non-rioting majority to lose the will to stop them from doing it?

 

[Rhea]

Because it takes so much egregious and accumulated injustice to precipitate it and the aggregation of enough people to be empowered to risk it.

So to the vast majority of rational people this has not yet occurred?

The vast majority of the population does not labor under constant and egregious injustice **AND** have enough visible, vocal peers to feel strong enough to do something about it.

Sometimes, of course, those injustices can be exaggerated, such as the Bundy Ranch thugs.
Sometimes, the injustices are exaggerated AND the protests are damaging and destructive, but not in a face-to-face immediate way, instead it's underhanded and complicated but no less destructive. Such as Wall Street theft and looting of the middle class.

 

[Bronzeage]

You are missing the point, D. The city needs the cooperation of all citizens in order to stop people who want to burn and steal. When the city loses that cooperation, it can no longer govern. The government has two choices. Either use more force, or do something to change the circumstances which led to this situation.

Suppose you had a deal with someone to do a particular thing, everyday. You agree to do something for them, in return. One day you notice they don't do it everyday, maybe once a week. Soon it never happens at all. You've been doing your part everyday, just like you agreed.

Do you keep on keeping on, or do you stop providing your part of the bargain?

Your view is that there is some small subset of people who always want to riot and burn and the "accumulated injustice" causes the non-rioting majority to lose the will to stop them from doing it?

You're so close, oh so close.

Law enforcement depends upon cooperation from the general population. That is a simple fact of life in this world. It's the same for all public services. When the general public is not orderly, such as by walking in the streets, the resources of the government are stretched to thin. Government can't deal with both at the same time.

No one got up in the morning and said, "I'm going to go peacefully march in protest, so people can loot and burn without police interference." It doesn't work that way. The government has to ensure safety and order in the general population, in order to fulfill it's other mission of preventing crime. There cannot be law and order, without the order coming first. When the normal procedures for addressing problems with the government do not work, the government loses the cooperation of the people. Baltimore is actually a mild case.

If you want to see a severe case, look to Ethiopia or Somalia, places where there has been no government for quite some time.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

We know why Baltimore is burning.

Um, is it because the vast majority of the protestors are non-violent?

it's your fault dismal. Admit it so we can all move on.

 

[dismal]

Um, is it because the vast majority of the protestors are non-violent?

it's your fault dismal. Admit it so we can all move on.

What evidence I have suggests I am not one of these exceptionally rare individuals whose social injustice meter indicates it's time to riot.

Plus my bad shoulder would probably hurt after a few rocks.

And I already have a flat screen TV.

 

[ksen]

And I already have a flat screen TV.

Me too!

We should totally be playstation friends because oligarchs own PS4s while thugs own Xbones.

 

[fromderinside]

It could also be that you are from Texas where its likely you fear being stoned if you only threw stones. Isn't common form there to use chains and pick up trucks to do your work on blacks.

 

[Saint_of_Me]

It could also be that you are from Texas where its likely you fear being stoned if you only threw stones. Isn't common form there to use chains and pick up trucks to do your work on blacks.

Oh man...that is a bit harsh on the Lone Star State, bro.

Austin is a great city. They only use Priuses on blacks there.

And no chains. Bungee cords.

See....it's a liberal city.

 

[fromderinside]

FDLMAO

 

[dismal]

It could also be that you are from Texas where its likely you fear being stoned if you only threw stones. Isn't common form there to use chains and pick up trucks to do your work on blacks.

Oh man...that is a bit harsh on the Lone Star State, bro.

Austin is a great city. They only use Priuses on blacks there.

And no chains. Bungee cords.

See....it's a liberal city.

This sort of bigotry is quite common here. The funny thing is I'm not from Texas, I live in Texas. I'm from the Northeast.

But I have probably seen 100s of comment like this here over the years.

 

[ksen]

I'm from the Northeast.

Me too!

I live in Florida but am from the great state of NH.

 

[Bronzeage]

You are missing the point, D. The city needs the cooperation of all citizens in order to stop people who want to burn and steal. When the city loses that cooperation, it can no longer govern. The government has two choices. Either use more force, or do something to change the circumstances which led to this situation.

Suppose you had a deal with someone to do a particular thing, everyday. You agree to do something for them, in return. One day you notice they don't do it everyday, maybe once a week. Soon it never happens at all. You've been doing your part everyday, just like you agreed.

Do you keep on keeping on, or do you stop providing your part of the bargain?

This "bargain" as you put it, only exists in your head.

Okay, let's pretend this is my fantasy.

Why do you stop at redlights when there is no cross traffic.

 

[fromderinside]

The funny thing is I'm not from Texas, I live in Texas. I'm from the Northeast.

Funny thing I'm living in Oregon, I lived in California. As everybody knows all Californians believe the bast place to be in Texas is in the geographic center so anywhere they walk would be away from Texas.

Drove trough it once on the way back to CA from FL. It was disturbing. All that bible thumping.

Baltimore is burning because it is not Annapolis.

 

[Bronzeage]

 

[dismal]

I'm from the Northeast.

Me too!

I live in Florida but am from the great state of NH.

I notice you didn't stay...

Actually my Mother's family is from NH.

But I have an Xbox.