Destroying a community and the businesses within shouldn’t be equated with peaceful marches.
Someone taking a PlayStation and some overpriced sneakers from a store and burning down several city blocks is not okay.
This complete failure of analysis comes through when the individual is completely incapable of disintangling disconnected events from each other as if people holding signs destroyed a community. This usually coincides with holding views opposite of the protestors wherein the speaker is attempting to degrade the opposition by fictitious association with criminality. It often further coincides with exaggerating actually negative events within scope in an attempt to generate an emotional instead of rational response.
Eg 10,000 people protest, 5 people loot a Walmart and we degrade the 10,000 by declaring that "protestors" burned down the city as if a meaningful portion of the people protesting looted the Walmart in protest rather than 5 opportunists.
If you look at it a little closer it's not much different from having a million immigrants having 99 rapes committed by citizens and 1 by an immigrant and declaring immigrants rapists even when the population commits the act at no higher rate than baseline.
It's manipulative, disingenuous, and unhelpful.
In short we never started calling looting protesting so have no need to stop doing so.
Oh loon you did the same thing you complained of. “5 people looted”. 5 people is just theft.
The real issue is conflating the two groups. When somebody is saying looters they are talking about looters, not protesters. Ans when somebody is talking about protesters they are not talking about looters. No reason to ever bring up protesters when talking about rioters or looters.
That being said. We are told that white silence is violence and the lack of action makes you complicit. So if there are protest going on and under the cover of the protest some subset loot or riot then maybe the protesters should be held accountable for not stopping said bad actions?
EG means for example it is meant to serve as an example of a a large number protesting a small number committing crimes not serve as a literal description of the exact number of criminals kind of like the entire protest didn't take place at a singular Walmart.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/03/us/george-flo...
Someone taking a playstation and some overpriced sneakers from a story several blocks away from the protests does not make protests a violet uprising with arsonists and looters. It means the vast majority of those people were protesting, and a small minority were committing crimes.
The "small minority" caused over 1B worth of damage at the time of the riots with some cities having never recuperated.
We can avoid future misadventures murdering fewer minorities in the future.