Anonymous #1 20h

He definitely was a popular figure in his time, ignore his 25% approval rate, white people loved him trust and the only way to get change is peaceful protest that doesn’t cause even a minor inconvenience for anyone

9

Anonymous #2 20h

Tbh saying that the BLM protests were 99% peaceful is frankly slander. It was damn near 100, and violence in the instance where it did get violent was pretty much universally caused by the cops

1

Anonymous OP 20h

Ok well I’m not really trying to make claims about whether or not the BLM protestors were causing violence, I’m saying there were people who took advantage of the chaos to just loot and destroy storefronts of like family businesses and stuff. These generally aren’t people who I think actually care about the cause people are protesting for, and their actions tend to undermine the protests. Like there’s obviously a discrepancy in a lot of people’s minds when you say “100% of BLM protests were

5

Anonymous #2 20h

nonviolent” compared to the losses suffered by a lot of people probably closer to the common man than some capitalist fat cat. I’m not trying to say people are right for associating these people with the protests themselves, but I do think it undermines the public perception of these protests when people do shit like that

3

Anonymous OP 20h

I’m sorry, what? That is such a rewrite of history. The whole of Downtown crossing in Boston was smashed up and looted. That was not the cops. That story was reported everywhere. They firebombed a government building in Portland. There were multiple mob assaults filmed on camera. The BLM protests in the morning were usually fine, but turned into riots and looting by the evening. Even the BLM organization was stealing, wym?

4