Amazon.com Widgets

Do riots work to make change (yes) or do they simply incite chaos and violence (no)?

  • They do make change.

    I know it is an unpopular sentiment among my fellow lefties, but sometimes riots do have to happen in order for change to take place. Standing outside of a city hall with tacky signs and chanting "Hell no, we won't go." isn't even going to make the law bat an eye. A riot, though, will.

  • Yes, riots do work to make change.

    Riots work to make change because they bring attention to an issue that may have already been talked about several times. Riots show how passionate people are about an issue because of their risk for hurt and harm. Riots cause political entities to react quicker than when constituents take a less aggressive approach.

  • The Ukrainian situation proves that riots work.

    Well, as much as I detest violence it looks like recent history proves me wrong on this one. What's going on the Ukraine right now? Their impeached President is on the run, the illegal updated Constitution has been scrapped, and power is being redistributed. All because people took to the streets with force and violence.

  • They definitely make a change

    When a riot starts people opposing the situation see riots on TV breaking news. Once a breaking news tragedy goes on TV politics have to get involved to get the citizens back in line. They try to help satisfy the citizens need but not over do it. Silenece will never get anything done but acting specially in huge amounts with other citizens can. I do believe their are people out their that do it to harm society but there will always be those people.

  • Riots Have Created Change

    Many people see riots as just violent criminals looking for a reason to promote more violence. Historically there have been hundreds (perhaps thousands) of riots throughout the United States. Every single riot that has taken place with a political motive has produced changed. For example, in Ferguson, we will never know for sure if the Department of Justice stepped in because of the riots or not. What we do know is that the oppression and abuse of the local police had been going on for years prior to the riots and the Department never once stepped in to take a look to see if police were overstepping their boundaries. Same thing in Baltimore, until riots took place no police officer in Baltimore had ever been held accountable for their actions.

    We certainly we have right to voice our opinions, cast our votes and to protest. What we are seeing though in our country is that voice of the minority is often unheard and their rights are stripped away by those who are in power. We honor our men and women who serve in our military who protect our freedoms, preserve our way of life and defend us from foreign enemies. Let me remind you all that the birth of our nation was founded on riots. Anyone remember the Boston Tea Party? We rioted against the dictatorship of England, our nation was born out of riots and rebellion.

    We can examine all the evidence throughout history of politically charged riots and truly never with absolute certainty if the changes that come after the riots are a result of the riots or a result of the protesting. What we do know is that protesting alone doesn't work, it is often ignored and suppressed and falls on deaf ears. Riots on the other hand cannot be ignored, when people are fed up with oppression, limited freedoms and injustice and have exhausted all other methods to have their voice heard and instigate change, then as a last resort they put their lives on the line and resort to riots.

    There has certainly been riots that did not produce change. Riots that break out over a beloved sports team losing for instance, won't create change. Every single riot that had a political motivation has created positive change. We can look at the smoldering buildings, the burning police cars, injuries suffered during riots and simply dismiss rioting as a lewd act on vandalism. The scenes that we saw in Ferguson, NYC, Baltimore and in other cities this year were often described as "war zones" by people have seen war. War is never pretty, innocent people often get caught in the middle and it's difficult to rebuild areas that have been affected by war. These same points apply to riots. Innocent people get caught in the middle, it's difficult to rebuild in these areas and it certainly isn't pretty but, is it necessary? It is as necessary as the wars we fight to preserve our freedoms abroad.

  • Depends who's Involved

    Let's be honest, we aren't blind. We do see the difference in people. We do stereotype.

    If a riot consisted mainly of young coloured men, it would be seen as a violent act of uneducated thugs. If it were a group of young white men, they would be seen as uneductaed estate kids/ trailer trash.

    However, if it was middle-aged women, of a motherly disposition, in my opinion, it would seem as either they deserve to be heard out or the sexist view that they don't know what they're talking about.

    In all cases, a riot that causes a LOT of trouble for the people in charge, consists of MANY people, and doesn't diminish in numbers over a fee days, will be a riot that causes change.

  • Riots make change

    People who riot try to change something. They want freedom, they want to prove a point, and they want to express their opinions to the country or even the world. When Gray died in Baltimore, people rioted because they wanted to show police and everyone else that people should not be racist. In conclusion, riots do make change.

  • Riots have the ability to foster change, good or bad.

    A riot is usually done for one of two major reasons:
    1. A group of people have some type of grievance that they have with the larger society within which they live and if that group feels that the grievance is not being remedied, or at the very least seriously addressed, then in the group's opinion a breaking point is reached and rioting feels like a last resort to force change.
    2. When a society lacks solid structures and institutions of law and order along with relatively strong social cohesion, then groups of people are bound to take advantage of the situation and cause chaos for some reason, whether personally motivated like looting, or for more ideological purposes like removing groups or individuals perceived as threats or problems.

    Now when I say that riots have the ability to foster change, I mean that going both ways. The change can either be good or bad. Race riots have broken out in the United States since the American Civil War (arguably even before then), usually on the grounds of anti-immigrant or anti-black hatred by white nativist groups. Then there's the riots that broke out during the Civil Rights movement throughout the 1960s on the grounds of African Americans responding to racial injustice, sometimes violently. These days we have occasional riots breaking out in major cities whenever a police officer kills an unarmed African American and isn't convicted, or in some cases not even taken to trial or fired over the killing. The Rodney King L.A. Riots and the riots in Ferguson, Missouri and Baltimore, Maryland are obviously the biggest examples that come to people's minds.

    My overall point is that depending on what the end objective is, riots can be effective in fostering change. If a group from one racial background wants to outright evict another racial group from a neighborhood or city by force, then rioting can make that desire a reality. If a group of people wants to force society to acknowledge perceived grievances that group has and take steps to remedy the problem, then rioting has the ability to make that happen, albeit in a rather coercive way. If a person or group of people wants to take advantage of temporary chaos and anarchy and do a little looting in order to better their personal lot in life by obtaining goods and valuables at no charge (which YES is both illegal and morally wrong), then rioting can make that type of change possible too. It all depends on what the end objective is and what type of change is attempting to be implemented, whether for noble and righteous purposes, or for something more nefarious and selfish.

  • Why do you need to make a riost? Is it a good way to be heard?

    I want to start making a contrast, Between Colombia and French about the way that they are doing for being heard, And I am going to tell you my opinion about what are the upsides and downsides of doing that.

    First at all, In France, They are making a change for avoiding to have high taxes, So, They do riots and the purpose of that was achieved; the taxes of fuels and electricity will be postponed.

    On the other hand, In Colombia, We are disgruntled with the government, Because it doesn't want to invest in public universities's
    education, So here, Students are making a protest, But at this moment, It hasn't worked because it is pacific and the government doesn't want take account it; so, Do you think we have to make riost for being heard?

    To make this text short, We can see two ways to try making a change; but as you see only of these worked. Despite, The chaos is not only for promoving the violonce is for making a quickly and effective change in the society.

  • It's sad but it's true.

    In this world it's really sad to know that the only way for the goverment to listen us is making riots. If we don't destroy the city they will never pay attention to our complains. I think that in Colombia is the only way to make a change. Also these kind of riots can hurt other people that are not follow this kind of protest. Is really sad, But unfortunately in Colombia is imposible to hold a protest in peace because they are never going to pay attention to us.
    We have to find the way to make a change without violence.

  • You can't fight fire with fire

    Solving problems and creating problems are two different things. Yes riots are expressions of opinion but the change that they create only harms a movement. The news will not support violent outbursts because they have 'a good cause'. Media focuses on the violence. If the media is given something they can hold against a movement, they can ruin the movement. Support is diminished and the only thing people will remember is the violence. If you wish to express something or create change then do it in a way that gets the public on your side. If you have public sympathy and support you can do much more than a riot could ever achieve.

  • Riots have long since ceased to be effective in the US

    While a case could be made that some of the riots in the 60's helped to effect social reform the last legitimate Riot to make any difference was December 16, 1773 Boston Tea Party. In this modern age riots do nothing but make everyone look bad. Government looks inept, Cops look like dicks and Rioters look like opportunistic thugs. And all it does is further the gap between the disenfranchised and fuel the "see this is why" mentality.

  • Baltimore riot bad?

    It just cause chaos and maybe cause damage to people. It shows barley any reason I heard they want you to riot so they can show you that you are the bad guys. This does not really show much when your destroy and burn things down like buildings I see no reason to do that at all.

  • Right to Protest or Unrest?

    The very definition of the word 'riot’ implies the lack of coordination, a common goal, focus, and a positive outcome; riots do nothing but create damage and destructive behavior and are not at all protected by the Constitution of the United States. Many people confuse the concept of ‘riot’ with ‘protest’ because many protests can become violent and uncontrolled very quickly if a common focus is not held fast. The reason that protests are upheld in our laws is to protect a person and group of people’s rights to express displeasure and help to encourage public officials to change policies and laws. Riots, on the other hand, are punished (and rightfully so), because they are simply gatherings of more than one person for the sake of violence or displays of uncontrolled behavior. While some riots erupt because of a sports team’s triumph or a positive event such as a concert, many of them erupt because a protest loses its focus and the people involved become uncoordinated, confused, frightened, and then defensive. Once this has happened, it is common for people to simply join in because of a psychological principle that explains a ‘diffusion of responsibility’ which allows people to behave unbelievably aggressively (which is usually repressed and then released when one is no longer inhibited by fear of retaliation or punishment) and exhibit negativity that would normally be held back by society’s constraints in their personal perception. While organized protesting is one of the most incredible forms of implementing change that the USA encourages and takes part it, rioting is an entirely different set of circumstances and has an entirely negative outcome.

  • Lots of people get hurt

    All riots do is cause chaos and violence. They don't help solve the problem they just get people hurt. They start fires and tip over cars vandalize everything in sight. They don't help get the message across to anyone. Plus once a riot start even more people get hurt once the police are involved.

  • At least not positive change

    Riots are about destruction. Destruction is easy, Fun and even satisfying. But it doesn't actually build something good. The people rioting often lose sight of the real problem, And therefore lose sight of real and viable solutions. Riots are more an outpouring of rage, And are good for the expression of that. The bring attention to the angry people. But screaming I'M ANGRY, Doesn't address how to fix an issue and doesn't move society in that direction. In past times the most riots have managed to do is to dislodge some ruling body. However, They are TERRIBLE at stopping just another oppressive, Power-hungry regime from taking over! And they are even WORSE at building a society that works. They often cause unnecessary deaths and so much damage that they burden the poor even further. People who riot often feel accomplished, But they've really done very little except spread their pain around. They cause more people to suffer with them. It makes them feel better, But doesn't stop the injustices and in fact adds to them. In the end, Rarely is the harm done by riots worth the damage they cause.

  • Just look at the civil rights movement

    If you think rioting is necessary for change, Have you learned nothing from the American Civil Rights movement? MLK and his supporters accomplished so much with peaceful protesting and we can use peaceful protesting to help end (or at least drastically reduce) police brutality.

    Rioting is terrible. There are many innocent people getting caught up in it. Imagine being a perfectly peaceful person driving on the interstate in San Jose and rioters stop you and start smashing your car windows even though you did nothing wrong at all. Or imagine being a business owner or employee at that business and, When everyone is already in a bad situation from the coronavirus, Rioters come and destroy and steal from your store even though you are a completely peaceful person and you've had nothing to do with police brutality.

    We should follow the ways of MLK, Not violence.

    Posted by: TRTR
  • Possibly yes, But pretty much no.

    Riots promote change out of annoyance. They get what they want just because the people who are being attacked (or rioted against) just want it to stop. They don't actually understand the problem nor do they care. It isn't doing what it is supposed to. If the people doing the riot expect anything good to come out of it in the future not just the temporary case of their problem being solved, They shouldn't deal with it in an immature way like riots which cause chaos and violence up until their problem is solved. . .

  • Why do you need generate chaos and violence for defending your rights or thoughts?

    I think that the riots only generate violence, Because in some cases, The government use this events to said that need this changes or reforms for repairing all the things that the protesters damage
    And as a result, Only would do that the government or the president do not change the decision like a form of punishment.

  • Making a riot its another way of human regression.

    I think riots doesn't work, Because most of the times they incite violence, For exmaple in a country like Colombia which has too much violence has and social problems, Making a riot could be another reason to make people cause chaos just to get what they want, Also I think there's always a good way to do things, Just as long as you're respectfull, Modest, Also always giving your opinions with good arguments and demostrating that your opinion it's the best decision to the problem.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.