> English is not my first language, honestly I am trying to understand here.
You're doing better than many English natives, who can't use their own language correctly. Some of the key misuses in this event are referring to "looters", "vandals", "arsonists" and other criminals as "protestors". Protestors protest, they don't invade, pilfer and destroy other people's private property.
A left-wing media is complicit in continuing these kinds of misuses of English to stir up people driven by emotion rather than logic. By failing to separate peaceful protest from violent crime, they've helped to drum up a wave of violence spreading over many US cities.
The people calling for this behaviour to spread are absolute hypocrites, because they will call for destruction and chaos under the excuse of "historic racism," but will never direct people to their own homes or businesses or provide them the box of matches to set it ablaze. It's OK apparently, to destroy other people's private property, but not my own.
Of course, racism has nothing to do with the violence and theft. There are two groups engaged in the crime: one is simply petty thieves who want a quick reward and are taking advantage of the situation to do it. The other is white "liberals" who feel they can use the opportunity to bring about a socialist revolution. I quote liberals because they only self-title this way but do not behave like a liberal (another case where correct use English is being dismantled: people believe that if they self-identify as something, it must be true, even if reality and action prove otherwise).
To be clear, what happened to George Floyd was a disgrace and the officer in question should be brought to swift justice. The emotionally driven mob seem to believe that if you are against the destruction of private property then you mustn't care about what happened to Floyd and other cases like his (which are absolutely not exclusive to blacks). They are unable to use logic correctly and will attempt to shame anybody calling for an end to the wave of crime spreading through American cities, labelling them as racist or whatever fits their narrative.
It's pretty clear that the protesting should be peaceful only, and should be about police violence, without the racial narrative. Police violence happens to people of every creed. It's kinda funny that these protestors will call for an end to injustice handed down by the State, but then go home and return to calling for a bigger State - the socialist state.
The root of the problem here is that the State does not work for the individual, it works for the State. The police are not there to protect you, they are there to protect the State. The worst-offender for misuse of English is the term "we" to try and convince people that the State is, or includes them, as individuals. Take note every time you see terms like "we", "ours", "we should", etc. in news print. Who are they really referring to when they use these terms? Are they talking about themselves, or are they talking about you? It is very important! If you can't understand the basic language, how are you ever going to make sense of reality?