Amid the media-fueled, Democrat-endorsed chaos currently gripping our cities, much effort has been made to both justify and romanticize the violent rioters and the destruction they’ve wrought. But despite these pathetic rationalizations, the rioters are not aggrieved citizens “deeply hurting” and “in pain” and engaging in serial arson and random assaults as a coping mechanism for the trauma they’ve suffered or as a desperate plea for peace and justice. On the contrary, they are criminals and nihilists setting stuff on fire because it’s fun, and stealing shoes and booze for the rather simple reason that they want shoes and booze.
How do I know this? Well, for one thing, I have seen the footage. They smile and laugh with glee as they commit these atrocities. These are not the faces of the aggrieved. They are the faces of bullies who delight in the suffering of strangers. The point isn’t the pain these crooks are in. It’s the pain they enjoy inflicting on others.
Also, I understand basic human psychology. A human doesn’t think to himself, “The police are racist, therefore I must run into this burned out Target and steal a pile of jeans.” Rather he thinks, “I have an opportunity to run into this burned out Target and steal a pile of jeans, therefore I will run into this burned out Target and steal a pile of jeans.” The latter is a coherent calculation (unlike the former, which is a non-sequitur), but it is the calculation of a criminal, not a victim.
But isn’t it a simplification on the other extreme to write the rioters off as nothing but a bunch of nihilistic hoodlums? I don’t think so. Arbitrary destruction, after all, is the very hallmark of nihilistic hoodlumism.
Of course, I use words like “arbitrary” and “random,” but that description only applies to the behavior of the grinning criminals who can’t believe their luck that their local government has decided to step aside and let them steal and burn stuff at will.
At the center of the swarm are domestic terrorist groups like Antifa and their wealthy sponsors who are acting in a way that is anything but arbitrary. They have specific political and ideological ends they hope to achieve, and they are using the rioters and looters and their penchant for arson, as a means to that end. So that is what we are dealing with. A core of domestic terrorists surrounded by, and exploiting, thieves, arsonists, and miscreants of various other types.
To be clear, not every person taking to the streets is burning buildings and looting stores. In fact, most are actually protesting. The problem is, if you join an overtly violent “protest,” you are knowingly joining a mob that includes a significant portion of rioters and looters and terrorists. Some protests are not overtly violent. Some are. Those who join such overtly violent protests are literally providing cover for these elements and metaphorically (and maybe also literally) clasping hands with them in solidarity. You will be lumped in with them because you have lumped yourself in with them.
Just consider this: would the people currently arguing that the protesters demonstrating alongside looters are two separate groups and the former shouldn’t be lumped in with the latter still be making that argument if a bunch of abortion clinics were burned to the ground during a pro-life demonstration? Or what if there was a resurgence of the Tea Party but at a majority of Tea Party rally large groups of avowed white supremacists showed up and started assaulting bystanders, ransacking stores, and burning police stations? Is there any doubt that the entire Tea Party, and everyone who attended one of its demonstrations, would be cast in the same light as the Nazi looters? And the thing is, as someone who supported the Tea Party the first time around, I would also cast them in this light. Because it just wouldn’t be credible to claim that the Nazi looting, which happens every time, is some sort of coincidental aberration.
Unfortunately, most people, even many supposed critics of violence, seem to err on the side of kindness to the mob, which is why their criticisms are couched in a series of disclaimers and qualifications about the profound legitimacy of their grievances and the great importance of the “conversation” they are allegedly trying to have.
“Now the people who set AutoZone on fire for no apparent reason are right to be upset and their feelings are so important to me and I very much share their concerns and I’m sure that they are all wonderful people and by the way, can I just say, I find them all to be strikingly good looking, but with that said…” By the time the point is made, it’s already been lost. And our cities continue to burn while we play footsie with the people holding the match. Enough of this. It’s time to speak plainly and respond boldly.