First, I'll say that I don't agree with Seth's take on the matter. I don't think his perspective is helpful, though I do understand where he is coming from.
That said, I also don't really think that the fact a body was found is particularly relevant. What the rioting was, was largely a reaction to a failure of the system to remedy its abuses. And it wasn't a reaction based around logic. How could it be? We like to talk about how our government works as if it responds to the reasoned will of the people, but there have been people expressing their frustrations logically for decades. When our systems fail to act to remedy their abuses, and we are shown that being logical and calm doesn't provoke change, that frustration will inevitably boil over. There is no weighing of pros and cons necessary, because the riots were not a result of such an analysis. They are the result of unanswered cries for justice spilling over.
To quote Martin Luther King Jr:
"[A] riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice, equality and humanity. And so in a real sense our nation’s summers of riots are caused by our nation’s winters of delay. And as long as America postpones justice, we stand in the position of having these recurrences of violence and riots over and over again. Social justice and progress are the absolute guarantors of riot prevention."
The damage that was done is terrible, but I don't think that weakens any of the voices demanding change within these broken systems. Riots are a reflection of a system that has failed. The damage that was done doesn't weaken these voices, they only add to the urgency of calls for change.
I'll give credit in one respect: at least the initial responses continued to climb up in complexity (until they didn't). Anyways...
Although I find Dr. King's assessment incisive on its own, 'cry of the unheard' during the Minneapolis riots is just a linguistic trick turned battering ram to paper over immoral actions.
My first issue would be the context between then and now. We're talking about a quote trying to understand riots during The Civil Rights Era. The motivations of those involved were infinitely more clear and pinned their response on discriminatory abuses that was explicitly allowed by law. That codified exploitation has been removed. And I'd argue the 60's rioters MLK references were more logical in methodology. Their aim was more deliberately honed in clashes against police. While there tends to be property fallout in a riot, I'd say it pales in comparison to marching through downtown Minneapolis with deliberate intention to complete smash 'n grabs or raze a local business to the ground, especially when you've been successfully maintaining peaceful protests beforehand. Not to mention the violent acts against civilians (as I've already touched on).
Another problem comes back to this: where's the "unheard" in all of this? George Floyd was one of the most popular news developments across the globe. It seemed like most agreed this was a wrongful death. Even before fires started, all four officers were fired outright with investigations already underway for their actions. Sure, the follow-through on charges didn't happen that same day. It never does. Usually you expect them to be formally charged a few months down the line (a reform that's worth pursuing).
[That's all I can muster before logging off.]
I will acknowledge that a lot of progress has been made since the '60's, but at the same time, I believe we should also acknowledge how much work we have left to do. We have taken a lot of steps towards justice, however we haven't gotten there as of yet, and the interesting thing about justice is that every step leading up to it is still injustice. It doesn't really matter how much injustice is behind us, as the mere fact of this progress does little to help those who are suffering under our current, broken system. These systems are still mired in injustice, so these calls for reform are just as valid today as they have been for the last several hundred years. The fact that clear racism codified in law has been removed simply provides a mask, to allow people to justify their blindness to these flaws.
That said, I don't believe I agree with you assessment of the 60s riots. Your wording is a bit muddy, so I could be misunderstanding you, but the riots of the 60s were significantly more violent than what we have been seeing over the past several months. If your assertion is that what we are seeing now is worse than those riots, I believe you are sorely mistaken (however, again, I could be misunderstanding you as your wording wasn't entirely clear).
Additionally, I think you and I have severely different understandings of what it means to be unheard. If the people are speaking out against injustices in our criminal justice system for decades and the necessary changes aren't made, I consider that being unheard. It doesn't matter if it makes international news. The fact that it can make international news and still we don't see change says to me that those in power simply aren't listening. And while I am glad that the individuals involved in this incident were arrested, these protests don't start and end with George Floyd, and arresting a few officers neither rights this wrong, nor acts to ensure that this same thing won't happen again. We need systemic, proactive change, not a couple of band-aids.
That is again fighting the symptom, not the cause. We will continue to wind up in these situations until we actually fix the broken systems which led to these protests. Plus, as a tiny little bonus, we will also not have a broken criminal justice system, which is good I guess.
What do you do when a mental ill person that had years of abuse shoots down his whole class at school?
There are two things here that needs to be dealt with,and that's the same with certain peoples behaviour in the riots like we also hold the police accountable for pannicking or losing control and beating up innocents.
The cause is the one that draws the most attention but the symptoms already developed from it wont go away if you take away the cause because they already happened and those people need to be also held accountable.
In my opinion no one has the right to get a free pass on violence against innocents.
Don't get me wrong, I am not speaking out against arrests. I agree with you that sometimes the symptom needs to be treated alongside the cause. If individuals are arrested for major crimes such as assault or arson, I won't take issue issue with that. However, we should all understand that these arrests will do little to prevent the same thing from happening again (and again (and again)). KLA is acting like all we need to do is throw a few arsonists in prison and crime will be solved, but both logic and the US crime rate beg to differ. That isn't how this works. Again, if you wish to stop this from happening again in the future, you need to rectify the cause.