why American liberals lost their rule

The Internet has made people too easy to divide and conquer

Why is this yellowed like it's been in a smokers house for the last 15 years?

Has this been aged? Lol looks like sepia

Are USians not still working 10 hours day/6 days a week? The USA are usually near the top of the "time worked per week" OECD rankings.

Also, interesting how the poster and first replier have the same avatar. Is that a historical figure?

The State only respects power. If a group of people show that they have more power than the State, change can happen. However, what is power?

Power comes in many different forms.

There is economic power which is showcased through strikes and boycotts.
There is democratic power which is showcased through the ballot box.
There is soft power which is showcased through the lobbying, and speeches.
There is non-violet power which is showcased through protests, marches, and sit ins.
There is violent power which is showcased through physical violence such riots.

While, the populace has access to many different forms of power. The State is limited to either soft power or violent power. Depending on the State, soft power might not even be contemplated.

Riots are just one form of power for the populace to exercise.

The only reason we have 5 day work weeks, 8 hour workdays, overtime pay, benefits, workplace health/safety/environmental regulations, unions, health care, paid time off, vacations, etc. is because our grandfathers and great-grandfathers busted heads, and got their own heads busted, fighting corporate goons in the streets - and WINNING!

Those heroic workers would be ashamed at what their grandchildren have let the Sociopathic Oligarchs have done to America. They fought hard to keep those psychopaths under control, and we not only let them up, we helped them take full power.

I think it’s worth pointing out that calling these riots isn’t really appropriate. When we think of riots, we think of unfocused, unplanned, unmanaged, etc. Highly organized protests sometimes wind up turning into riots because capitalists use violence, but it’s not the norm.

Remember to thank your local anarchist for the 8 hour work day.

did you find this post in a bottle on the beach

Violence is the only answer, and until youre ready for that nothing will change. Extreme violence is the only answer.

Funnily enough there's a very similar situation to the US that's going on in Serbia, where a canopy falling and killing a bunch of people due to government cheapening out led to lots of outrage and exploded into a massive student movement against the president due to corruption, election rigging, suppression of dissent and executive branch abuse.

At first, they did peaceful protests, blocked roads and all that jazz constantly, but after seeing that it had led them literally nowhere (they got nothing except for a fake concession that was some minister resigning) except on getting arrested and beaten up in jails, they decided to give a green light to civil disobedience, violence, trashing ruling party's headquarters all over the country.

What did this escalation result in? A whole load of nothing except cracked skulls, mostly for the students.

If you're looking at reformism 'fixing' things during the course of history, civil disobedience the vast majority if not all of the time was noise. What eventually got implemented or changed wasn't because the ruling class got scared, but because they were either getting major gains in terms of compromise as a result of the reform, or the reform itself was beneficial to their interests and only a small minority didn't want them to pass.

Funny how it's getting harder and harder to find a job in the US that isn't 10-12 hours a day, six days a week.

This state of affairs is not especially surprising -- if it were the popular belief that violence is justified to change society in some particular way, then society would already be changed in that way. Just like how no stock on the market can be widely seen as undervalued.

This is why class consciousness is important.

Civil disobedience for the sake of it is just stupid. When we retroactively look at civil disobedience in history, we intentionally filter out the vast majority and just highlight the few examples that we're done in ethical ways, for the right causes, and achieved results. Civil disobedience is not a virtue nor is it uncommon. What actually matters are the motivations, principles, and methods used behind the civil disobedience.

You've got to seize the means of production, of course in the US that means getting on a plane.

You can't abuse people and expect to keep running things. So don't abuse. That's it.

unreasonable? it is generally categorized as criminal

The response by quasi-normalcy reads like a cherry picked simplification to lead to a likely incorrect conclusion.

The statements suggest all (or most) riots:

• change public policy for the better; they don't
• are justified by the rioters; they aren't

Here are some examples:

Battle of Blair Mountain

For five days from late August to early September 1921, some 10,000 armed coal miners confronted 3,000 lawmen and strikebreakers (called the Logan Defenders)[6] who were backed by coal mine operators during the miners' attempt to unionize the southwestern West Virginia coalfields when tensions rose between workers and mine management. The battle ended after approximately one million rounds were fired,[7] and the United States Army, represented by the West Virginia National Guard led by McDowell County native William Eubanks,[8] intervened by presidential order.[9]

In the short term the battle was an overwhelming victory for coal industry owners and management.[52] United Mine Workers of America (UMWA or UMW) membership plummeted from more than 50,000 miners to approximately 10,000 over the next several years, and it was not until 1935—following the Great Depression and the beginning of the New Deal under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt—that the UMW fully organized in southern West Virginia.

This union defeat had major implications for the UMWA as a whole. As World War I ended, the demand for coal declined adversely impacting the industry. [citation needed] Because of the defeat in West Virginia, the union was also undermined in Pennsylvania and Kentucky. By the end of 1925, Illinois was the only remaining unionized state in terms of soft coal production.

So in this example, most of us today would say the riot was justified as the coal miners were seeking safer working conditions under unionization. This riot failed and largely destroyed the union.

So was the riot justified: yes. Did it lead to positive change: no.

Tulsa race massacre aka Tulsa riot

The Tulsa race massacre was a two-day-long white supremacist terrorist[13][14] massacre[15] that took place in the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma, United States, between May 31 and June 1, 1921. Mobs of white residents, some of whom had been appointed as deputies and armed by city government officials,[16] attacked black residents and destroyed homes and businesses. The event is considered one of the worst incidents of racial violence in American history.[17][18] The attackers burned and destroyed more than 35 square blocks of the neighborhood—at the time, one of the wealthiest black communities in the United States, colloquially known as "Black Wall Street."[19]

More than 800 people were admitted to hospitals, and as many as 6,000 black residents of Tulsa were interned, many of them for several days.[20][21] The Oklahoma Bureau of Vital Statistics officially recorded 36 dead.[22] The 2001 Tulsa Reparations Coalition examination of events identified 39 dead, 26 black and 13 white, based on contemporary autopsy reports, death certificates, and other records.[23] The commission reported estimates ranging from 36 up to around 300 dead.[24][25]

So in this example most of us today would say the riot was NOT justified as the black residents were just trying to live their lives in peace and prosperity before the white supremacists came in with violence and murder of black residents.

So was the riot justified: no. Did it lead to positive change: no.

The original premise by that poster is questionable as only through the lens of history can we pick out specific riots that lead to positive policy or positive societal change.

Why are you pro-rioting before a massive rally? The regime WANTS a riot so they can engage in massive retaliation. You're literally doing their work for them, get smart.