The argument
One of the biggest problems that the Black Lives Matter Movement has is when some of their peaceful protests get violent. This leads to a drop in support from people who were initially in favor of the movement. There are many different people who have pointed out some of the movement’s faults. And it is not only people who are against the Black Lives Matter movement that are alarmed with the problems brought up by the violent nature of some of the protests. There are some people who acknowledge that what the Black Lives Matter is trying to do is good, but the are being too violent at times.
Nicole Russell, writer for the online newspaper The Federalist, addresses the problem of violence in the Black Lives Matter Movement protests in her 2016 article “Black Lives Matter’s Violence Undermines Its Credibility”, published in The Federalist. In her article, she writes that “BLM may intend to do the right thing: enlighten the public about injustices within the black community, especially at the hands of law enforcement”, but that “their methods of achieving redress are questionable and may hurt the movement’s long-term goals.”. Here, Russell is explaining how even though the movement has good intentions, when they try to send a message in a violent way is perhaps not the way to go, as it makes other people stop supporting them, which in turn hurts their aims. This relates back to the thesis, as it reinforces the idea that the movement must cut out these violent outbursts to be effective.Unlike Spollen, Russell does not view the Black Lives Matter Movement as a hate group, but knows that there are problems with it.
There have been cases in the past where a Black Lives Matter protest was violently escalated and hurt the movement's reputation and goals. A clear example of this the interstate 94 incident, which Russell writes about in her article. After Philando Castle’s death at the hands of cops, the Black Lives Matter movement shut down part of Interstate 94, a major highway in St. Paul. The article provides a link to a video in which one can see the manner in which the protest transpired. Though the protests appears to begin peacefully, as the video goes on, it is evident that things quickly get out of hand. Some people started throwing water bottles, pieces of concrete, rebar, brick, molotov cocktails, and rocks at police. At around halfway through the third minute of the video, one of the protesters threw a small firecracker towards the police. In the conclusion of the whole ordeal, about 100 protesters were arrested and more than 20 cops were injured, including one officer who suffered spinal fracture. Russell writes that “Few people are likely to be sympathetic to Black Lives Matter when they protest police by throwing Molotov cocktails and rocks at them, spurring multiple arrests, then demand to be released.”. It is a valid point that many people’s support for the movement could very well waver following reports of violence like this. It would be difficult for a movement to win over people and convince them of their ideas and arguments with violence and by destroying property. People will just lose respect and credibility for the group. This relates back to my thesis in the sense that it is an example of some of the Black Lives Matter movement problems and it’s effect on the people’s perception of it. Russell’s closing statement really highlights one the problems the Black Lives Matter movement must face, as she writes that if the movement wants to be remembered and achieve change, “they must do so without provoking police or inciting violence. Until they can figure out how to do this, their actions will continue to besmirch their reputation and cause.” Again, like I mentioned before, The Black Lives Matter movement must cut out the violent outbursts, as it causes a loss of support from people, which in turn prevents them from achieving their goals.