Originally Posted by
drillerpie
An academic, writing as an academic, should in my opinion use a cautious academic style.
This academic doesn't go into much detail about his methodology (he counts comments by the police reported in the press, about violence at these demonstrations, that's great, but which media, and what if there was violence that the police didn't comment on? )
He records violence in different categories,.but what about severity? (damage to property could mean anything from knocking a Trump 2020 sign over to burning down the building it stood outside) and his description of Antifa as anti-fascists doesn't inspire me with confidence. He also makes sweeping conclusions that are not (clearly at least) supported in the text. Sorry to be a party pooper but the line between activism and academia, much as with the line between activism and journalism, has become blurred, so you have to be careful.
Still, if this research is to be believed, if you go on a BLM protest, the chances of being subjected to police violence is really quite small. Not too bad for a systemically racist, white supremacist, neo-fascist dystopia.
Sorry to press you on this but do you think the meme we have both seen, which compares the National Guard getting ready for the 5th day of violent protests in June, with a few under manned normal uniformed policemen facing a huge mob, a few minutes into in a fast developing situation, was an honest attempt to portray the truth or an attempt to mislead people?