Skip to main content

To riot or not to riot

Obama has called for peaceful reaction to the decision the grand jury in Ferguson has reached.  In his speech, he mentions what Mike Brown's father said about the matter--also that people should be peaceful.  I am a peaceful person.  I do not feel a need to personally be violent.  I see the wisdom in being peaceful and in striving for harmony with others in the community.

However, I do not agree with the argument.  Obama says that there is never an excuse for violence.  Of course I find that ironic because he's using violence left and right in the Middle East.  I am a pacifist.  I don't like violence.  I like peace.  But I cannot say that I feel there is never an excuse for violence.  I empathize with those who feel so frustrated that their only recourse is to turn to violence.  I feel even that it may be logical to do so.  When injustice reaches a certain level, revolting against authority figures guilty of creating that injustice becomes justified.  Or, as Thomas Jefferson would put it:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
I admit I didn't understand the particulars of the justice system here.  I had to look up what an indictment was because I'd never even thought about it before.  Darren Wilson was not tried and found innocent.  The grand jury was to decide not whether he was guilty but whether he would be tried for a crime.  The decision they made Monday night was that he shouldn't be tried.  Sadly, police officers are almost never indicted.  That is to say that, in nearly all cases, officers aren't tried for any actions they commit while on duty.  They might kill people but never be tried for murder.  In Utah, police kill more people than gangsters do.  Why do we tolerate such behavior?  Why do we excuse such behavior?  Why do we allow such behavior?

I think that it's perfectly reasonable for people to feel defeated by the system--to feel that justice is impossible when working within the system we have established.  Statistics would certainly indicate that there is a huge problem with racial profiling in our justice system.  When it becomes apparent that the system does not work to provide justice as it is meant to do, the only logical conclusion is that we must step outside the system in order to achieve justice.

Standing peacefully by as people perform atrocious acts only sends the message that those acts are acceptable.  Watching police officers pick off our fellow citizens in the streets one by one and reacting peacefully will only encourage more police officers to kill more of our fellow citizens because they see that they can get away with it.  We must not tolerate such behavior.  We must let them know that their behavior in unacceptable.  I do so by writing strongly-worded blog posts.  Other people do so by rioting and looting.  I do not disapprove of their methods.  I believe that the violence has a place.

Violence is sending a strong message of discontent.  There is sufficient and justifiable reason for the discontent of many members of the Ferguson community, and in other communities all across the country--and indeed all over the world.  There is, in my opinion, justifiable reason for the violence of those who feel unfairly represented by the law and the legal system.  Obama says that we are a country with the rule of law established.  Theoretically, that is true.  However, in practice that is clearly false.  We do not serve justice in our country, we serve those in power.  Rich white people with connections are treated much better than poor non-white people with no powerful connections.  We have the rule of cronyism, not the rule of law.

I will not be joining in any violent protests.  I will not be looting or burning or vandalizing any property.  However, I will not speak critically of those who do.  I empathize with them.  I feel their frustration.  I feel their intense hurt and anger at the blatant injustice that they feel.  To be clear, in my opinion, this is not a question of Mike Brown being killed by Darren Wilson.  This is a much larger issue.  For the sake of argument, let us assume that Wilson is not racist and that Brown was attacking him and Wilson only killed the young man out of necessity to save his own life (not that I believe that--but for the sake of the point I'm trying to make in this blog post, let us assume all of that).  There are far too many injustices toward black people in our country.  There are far too many cases where a young black male is shot and killed by a white police officer.  There are far too many cases where black people are arrested for a crime that a white person would not be arrested for.  There are far too many cases where a black person will receive a much harsher sentence for precisely the same crime that a white person committed.  The injustice is glaring.  It is not something that happens every once in a while in extremely rural places.  It is something which happens on a regular basis all throughout the country.

I wish that all people could get along.  I wish that we could all live in harmony with each other.  I would like to see people voice discontent peaceably.  However, I believe that there is a place for violent protest.  I believe that there comes a time when circumstances are so intolerable that they justify or even demand that violent action be taken.  If someone insists on oppressing you, politely asking them repeatedly to please be more fair clearly will be ineffective.  When the message is clearly sent that a peaceful reaction will be ignored, violent reactions seem to be justified.

As Martin Luther King Jr did, I dream of a future where all people are judged by their actions and not by the color of their skin.  That day has not yet come, but I dream of a future where it is reality.  That day will be a brighter day in the annals of human history than today was.

Popular posts from this blog

What's a gainer?

If you haven't already done so, I would suggest reading my previous post before reading this one.  It's sort of an introduction and gives the motivation.  Also, by way of disclosure, this post is not sexually explicit but it does touch on the topic of sexuality and how that relates to the subject at hand.

So, what is a gainer?  I'll relate, as best I can, the experiences I have gone through myself to help answer the question.  I remember when I was a young boy--perhaps around 6 or 7--I would have various fantasies.  Not sexual fantasies, just daydreaming about hypothetical situations that I thought were interesting or entertaining.  I had many different fantasies.  Sometimes I would fantasize about becoming very muscular, sometimes about becoming very fat.  
These fantasies varied in degree of magnitude and the subject of the fantasy.  Sometimes I myself would change weight--I would become muscular or fat.  Other times, I would do something to make other people fat or musc…

The scientific method vs the religious method

I find it interesting when people cite the fact that science keeps changing as a reason to disbelieve it and to believe instead in the "eternal" doctrines taught by some church or other.  Let's examine why science keeps changing.  Here's the scientific method.

Develop a hypothesis (this means "have a belief").Design an experiment to test the hypothesis.Conduct the experiment.Determine whether the hypothesis is believable based on the results of the experiment. This is why science keeps changing--because people notice flaws in it and correct them.  People once thought the solar system was geocentric, but now know that it's heliocentric.  How did this happen?  By using the scientific method.  Scientists are willing to admit that they're wrong.  They're willing to give up a bad idea when they see evidence that it makes no sense.  Contrast this with the religious method (simplified version). Have a belief.Look for evidence to support that belief.Ignor…

Cancel the gym

After I went to the gym this morning, I pulled in to the McDonald's drive through.  While waiting for my food, I played out in my mind a possible conversation I might have with someone concerning just this.  In fact, I have had many real conversations of similar nature.
"How was your morning?"
"It was good.  I went to the gym.  Then I grabbed a late breakfast at McDonald's on my way to work."
"Won't that cancel out?"
"Cancel what?"
"Going to McDonald's after the gym.  Won't that undo all the work you just did?"

I understand the humor.  I laugh about it.  It's funny.  And I think humor is an important thing, and that we should all laugh a little bit more and be offended a little bit less.  And so I write this not up-in-arms, but in the attempts of perhaps reaching some of those who literally believe this line of reasoning.

To the person who asserts that eating "cancels out" going to the gym, I ask just this…