> Economic damage

Exactly how is destroying low income housing, small businesses (many of them minority owned) and peoples places of employment going to persuade "the elites"?

I'm not promoting or condoning violence. But Apple shut down their retail stores over this, so it definitely is impacting "the elites" to some extent.

I own shares of Apple via my retirement plan. Am I elite?

If a large enough share of your income is returns on capital to both meet your expenses and increase the store of capital, or you have a sufficient store of capital that depleting with your expenses would take lifetimes even though it isn't growing after expenses, you can plausibly held to be in the haut bourgeoisie, the elite of capitalist society. If you are an intellectual worker with a modest amount of stock held through a retirement fund, your probably between the proletarian intelligentsia (in the working class, if among the better working conditions and higher pay of that class) and the petit bourgeoisie (the capitalist middle class), but not at all elite.

Yes.

Ok. Then a good 50% of this country is elite. What a dumb definition.

Are you purposely being obtuse? Or are you trying to argue against a different point than the one I made?

If not, please explain how you having a mutual fund means that "the elites" who control Apple aren't impacted by lost revenue.

I'm really lost here. How exactly will hurting Apple sales help resolve police violence?

I don't think we're there yet, and I think we can still use the ballot box to effect change, but fear of a socialist revolution and mob violence was one of the catalysts behind the new deal.

So if you can't understand how hurting the pocket books of "the elite" can encourage them to compromise, you haven't been paying attention to history.

History says that mob violence is probably more likely to lead to a dictatorship than to another new deal, but you're being willfully ignorant if you don't acknowledge the existence of a potential chain of consequences that starts with "damaging companies' bottom lines" and ends with policy change.

Where is the MLK of 2020? I want to see someone who can go beyond their anger and have a plan and lead.

You remember a few years back when some athletes took knelt during the national anthem?

And they were told to "shut up and dribble" and the president said they were sons of bitches and should be fired? [1]

There's your peaceful leadership right there.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._national_anthem_protests_...

If you're black in the US, there's just no correct way to protest. Street protests get painted as riots (and often turn into riots due to excessive police response fanning the flames), quiet personal protests are claimed to be disrespectful (since when is kneeling a sign of disrespect?), speak up and they get told to shut up. There's no way to win.

MLK was despised by white America of his time, _because_ of his leadership of protests.

There are many of them. They dont get media coverage. They "miss the cutoff" for debates. The party doesnt give them a chance. Even so called "liberal media" do hit jobs on them.

Then, people who are complacent complain no one is trying.

So they can be assassinated? Good plan. (sarcasm indicator. It is not a good plan at all.)

Voting has changed things. Every legislative change comes from your representatives, not some unelected force that only reacts to violence.

You just don’t like the priorities of everyone else so you’re claiming it hasn’t worked.

>> You just don’t like the priorities of everyone else so you’re claiming it hasn’t worked.

That bit is correct. Yes, it does work -- for some. But the masses that are angry are whom it didn't work for. When it starts working for the other 90% people wont be as angry.