Whose home was destroyed?
Comment on Why is youtube suggesting aggressive actions against protestors?
CloverSi@lemmy.comfysnug.space 1 year agoI think the point they were making was that someone whose home, safety, or means of income were damaged or destroyed would have a different perspective than someone who wasn’t adversely affected, regardless of the big picture.
Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 1 year ago
hakase@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
…wikipedia.org/…/List_of_arson_damage_during_the_…
Multiple individual residences and at least two apartment buildings in Chicago, for starters, and that was just one of the riots.
TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Oh I agree with that statement, the original comment just needs to be narrowed down. Nobody’s city was destroyed. Some people had their business properties destroyed, but I imagine most of the shops that were broken or burned had some sort of insurance, and most of them avoided bankruptcy.
I do feel bad for anyone whose livelihood was affected by that, though. I think a lot of the rioters’ anger was misplaced.
Drusas@kbin.social 1 year ago
The problem is you framing protesters as rioters. There were relatively very few rioters and a lot of them were simply opportunists who would have been rioting regardless of what the protests were about. Bad actors exist everywhere.
SJ0@lemmy.fbxl.net 1 year ago
It was the riots that most people I know of had problems with. The violence, the destruction of property (500 million dollars in Minneapolis alone, which is a lot), Secoriea Turner, an 8 year old little girl who was shot to death during protests for the crime of her parents trying to turn the car around in a Wendy’s parking lot. And the opportunistic looting done in the name of the “protests” and defended in the establishment media (how many news and opinion shows had that piece of garbage who wrote the book “In defense of looting” on?)
On the other hand, I was uncharitable in both my examples. Do you think the Canadian truckers were trying to secretly clone Hitler?