Anonymous #1 14w

What?

17

Anonymous #2 14w

From people I know in LA, the stuff on fire is limited to a few blocks in LA. Naturally, peaceful protests don’t get covered as much. They don’t attract attention. News sites rely on you clicking on their links and headlines so they can make money

12

Anonymous #2 14w

Violence against vehicles is peaceful lol

4

Anonymous #2 14w

Cry for Waymo tho

2

Anonymous #2 14w

People really need to start learning the difference between peaceful and nonviolent. Property damage isn’t violence.

3

Anonymous #7 14w

Okay so…wait what? Okay ill peacefully set fire to your car ✅

5

Anonymous #3 14w

My whole point is that effective protests are not peaceful. They’re loud and disruptive and force people to watch. You can be nonviolent without being peaceful. People in power use “peaceful” as the bar for acceptability instead of nonviolence to keep dissent from being effective or a threat to power

2

Anonymous #7 14w

MLK’s marches and Gandhi’s satyagraha are nonviolent but they were never peaceful, and setting a car on fire isn’t violence, but shooting reporters with rubber bullets and trampling protesters with horses is.

3

Anonymous #3 14w

Yeah I think setting fire to property usually has a high chance of causing bodily harm- 😬

-2

Anonymous #2 14w

Same shit people said about the Suffragists, Abolitionists, Civil Rights protesters, anti-Vietnam war protesters, and labor activists. History will not remember you kindly.

1

Anonymous #7 14w

Meh idk most recent “mostly peaceful protests” haven’t achieved much. Can’t believe the same will happen here. Atleast I won’t be known for setting cars on fire

-1

Anonymous #6 14w

I was watching a journalist’s videos on YouTube about the protests in LA and some dude literally tried intimidating him and slapping his camera with hopes to get him to leave the protests. That is violent

1