1/
The riots happening in LA are not organic or spontaneous.
They're designed to look chaotic to cover up the fact that they're well funded, exceptionally organized, and carried out by well trained activists using intelligent, highly developed tactics.
Here's a primer:
2/ First, notice the protestors have shields (pic 1)
These types of shields were used by the 2024 pro-Hamas rioters (pic 2), and 2020 BLM rioters (pic 3)
Each shield takes 3 hours to make, and activists spend all day making them (pic 4) That's not spontaneous, it takes planning
3/ Those shields are not cardboard signs. They are designed to *look* like cardboard signs.
They're in fact made of plywood and have metal handles (as seen in the pics below). They have a cardboard sign attached to the front to disguise the fact that they're made of wood.
4/ In 2020 these shields were brought in and distributed to rioters in organized drops (video 1)
In LA we see the same strategy. They hand out protective equipment to rioters (pic 2) who then use them in their attacks (pic 3).
Note the same home depot bucket in pics 2 and 3
5/ It isn't just the shields that are planned, everything is, from what rioters wear to the tactics used in each situation
They're implementing highly developed theory of protest violence in order to create pressure and try to force politicians to give in.
I'll show you...
6/ To see how this works we need to understand the TACTICS they're using.
The first strategy is to put their target in a "decision dilemma" by implementing a method of protest that leaves the person with no good options. No matter how the target reacts they look bad. beautifultrouble.org/toolbox/tool/p…
7/ That strategy is paired with: "the real action is your targets reaction," in which Rioters use people's reactions to the protests against them.
The goal here is to try to force the authorities to overreact so rioters can play martyr for the camera.
8/ The final move is "lead with sympathetic characters."
They put sympathetic people out front to garner sympathy and make them look like sympathetic underdogs fighting an uphill battle.
This is why they brought a baby to the protest. It was an INTENTIONAL pre-planned move.
9/ Putting it all together, by blocking a road using benches as barricades they give the authorities no option but to use force, but by having a baby they force the police into an impossible situation: using force without harming a baby.
It puts police in an impossible situation
10/ The principle at work behind this entire strategy is "play to the audience that isn't there" Activists pick their tactics and strategies based on *OPTICS*.
They want to make themselves look like sympathetic underdogs to the audience seeing it on youtube or watching the news
11/ All of these strategies and tactics are used to create actions which activists can turn to their advantage. When they do this correctly they can paint themselves as the sympathetic powerless underdogs even when they are the aggressors.
It's social and political jiu-jitsu
12/ That isn't to say they aren't also intentional in doing damage. They are. The book Black Bloc, White Riot: Anti-Globalization and the Genealogy of Dissent by author AK Thompson is the starting place for their theory of what counts as violence, and when violence is justified.
13/ Alex Hundert defended "a diversity of tactics" which is a euphemism for allowing violence at protests. Hundert explicitly states a commitment to non-violence is "dogmatic" and "stifles debate" about which tactics to use.
Violence is part of the strategy as we will see...
14/ Leftist academics theorized about how violence could be used to build political leverage.
Oberlin professor Jenny Garcia explains how violent protests "make it a more salient issue and provide greater pressure on elected officials and candidates"
15/ These tactics are not new.
David Graeber explains that in 2000, protestors at the Summit of the Americas had Green, Yellow, and Red zones of protest. Each color represented a level of violence allowed. Green was non-violent, Yellow was "obstructive," red was "disruptive".
16/ Just so we are clear, "obstructive" is a euphemism for blocking road, entrances, and so fourth; and "disruptive" is a euphemism for the use of violence and property damage to try to shut things down.
The use of sophisticated pre-planned violence goes back a long way...
17/ and it is backed by a set of academic theories about how violence, property damage, blockades, and so fourth can be used to put pressure on the authorities and create political leverage that can be used to extract concessions from politicians, businesses, and other groups.
18/ As @DataRepublican has shown (see her thread for details) these protest are created, funded and organized by people with large networks and resources
My goal is to explain the theoretical foundation that the rioters tactics and strategies are built on
@DataRepublican 19/
These riots implement a set of very specific tactics and theories which operate according to a theoretical foundation built by radical professors for the purpose of helping woke activists manipulate, create, and control the cultural narrative in order to get political wins.
@DataRepublican 20/
The worst thing that we can do right now is to overreact.
The entire point of these riots is to make the police, the mayor, and the other authorities to overreact. They are absolutely, 100%, baiting the police and the Trump administration into overreacting.
That's the play
@DataRepublican 21/
I know this because the book that all of these tactics comes from is called "Beautiful Trouble" and one of the Co-authors lived in my city.
He used to run activism camps and made appearances at the University I attended **while I was there**
I know these people first hand.
@DataRepublican 22/
Co-Author of Beautiful Trouble, Dave Mitchell, was the Chief of Staff to the leader of the Leftist political party in Saskatchewan while I working in the Legislature for one of the government ministers.
I am telling you I know *EXACTLY* how these tactics are used.
@DataRepublican 23/
Mitchell was arrested in a protest at the Summit of the America's in 2001, the same Summit the I mentioned earlier in which there were Red, Yellow, and Green zones.
I'm telling you from experience that they are trying to force the Trump administration to overreact...
@DataRepublican 24/
You can't win the battle here with a brutal crackdown since that only gives the protestors what they want: a chance to look like underdogs being abused by police.
Since I know the people who created the tactics, I'll tell you the strategy to beat all of these tactics...
@DataRepublican 25/
The first thing is to refuse to overreact. In the battle for optics the team that looks worst loses, and the way the police lose is by overreacting.
The second thing is to recognize that protests run on energy and momentum, so you need strategy to drains their momentum.
@DataRepublican 26/
The way to do this is two-fold:
First, begin making arrests of only the worst and most violent offenders. The goal is to get the most dangerous people of the streets while highlighting the most violent elements of the protests. That second part of VERY important.
@DataRepublican 27/
By highlighting the worst offenders you begin to build a narrative about how violent the protests are. Normal people don't like political violence, and a steady stream of announcements about the arrests of violent protestors frames the protests are violent.
@DataRepublican 28/
This will both decrease the political pressure to restore order (because people will the arrests as proof the police are doing something without overreacting) while simultaneously framing the protests as violent and making it harder for the protestors to recruit normal people
@DataRepublican 29/
By the time you are finished arresting the worst protestors the people will already be sick of the riots and disorder. Then you can begin arresting the rest of the violent people, and the people who are engaged in "non-violent obstruction" of things like roads and bridges...
@DataRepublican 30/
People will have lost their patience for road blocking. People usually give road blockers a few hours, or a day, to "make their point" before they get sick of blocked roads. So then you can begin to arrest the road blockers, while using EXACTLY the following messaging....
@DataRepublican 31/
"The right to free speech in America does not mean protestors can prevent Ambulances and Firetrucks from reaching the people that need them. Protesters have no right to make Firetrucks sit in traffic while buildings burn, or make ambulances sit in traffic while people die."
@DataRepublican 32/
This framing makes the protestors look like they are taking the city hostage (which they are) and makes them look even worse in light of the violence that LA has seen.
When you hit this stage, you will begin to notice public opinion shift very quickly...
@DataRepublican 33/
Once the people see the protests as violent and see that the protestors are holding the city hostage they will begin to turn against the protestors, and (more importantly) the CAUSE the protestors support
Once that happens, the protests begin to backfire on the protestors...
@DataRepublican 34/
When protestors realize public opinion is turning against them it will begin to destroy their energy and momentum and the protests will begin to die out.
At this point we have to make sure that this never happens again.
Here's how we do that...
@DataRepublican 35/
What you want to do is avoid the J6 mistake. The authorities charged people who were peaceful just for being there, and this made it look like the authorities were overreacting.
What you want to do is start charging and convicting everyone involved in any violent action...
@DataRepublican 36/
The goal is to create a steady stream of convictions over the next couple of years. This is so that the public sees a steady stream of "protestor convicted of assault" stories in the news. Two years of such stories will solidify the narrative that the protests were violent.
@DataRepublican 37/
Don't press charges against people who were just there...only the people who were violent or blocked roads.
By getting a long series of undisputed convictions you solidify the narrative that the protests were violent without looking like you overreacted.
@DataRepublican 38/
By not charging people who were just there you avoid falling into the trap of looking like you arrested people for speaking their mind.
Arrest their violent shock troops, show them for what they are, and win the narrative battle while putting away the most violent people.
@DataRepublican 39/
Don't go for revenge or a "show of strength," because that will backfire.
Stay strong, stay calm, go in stages, and let the attrition and natural decline in momentum make the protests die out with a whimper.
That's how you beat their strategy.
Thanks for reading :)
/fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Since "noticing" appears to be a thing, I'd like to say that I "notice" things as well....And I can't help but *notice* the obsession that certain people have with Israel, even though other nations (China, India, Russia, etc) impact the U.S. far more....
I also can't help but notice that those same sorts of people are obsessed the influence of wealth Jews, but have nothing to say about the influence of money from China, Qatar, Russia, India, and so on.
The Jews are, apparantly, an item of incredibly deep concern...
For a great number of people, and I can't help but *notice* that the far greater and more pernicious influence (and subversion) coming from foreign money in other countries gets mysteriously ignored, and I *notice* that Israel is held to a higher standard than every other country
1/ Wokeness is the alloy of the political ideology and moral value framework from Critical Theory with the social constructivist worldview and epistemology of postmodernism.
As the political side of woke recedes culturally, it leaves behind the underlying postmodern worldview.
2/ The teleology of the woke project came from the moral commitments of intersectional social justice (Trans-rights, Race based activism, etc)
Those movements are being dissolved by their own incoherence and absurdity (Land acknowledgements, claiming men can become women, etc)
3/ The dissolution and exhaustion of the political movement that provided the teleology and moral value framework for wokeness leaves the entire social movement around which those things were built without any thing to serve as locus for meaning, purpose, or values.
The left has what @wesyang calls a "Vertically Integrated Messaging Apparatus." It's an apparatus of messaging distribution which is owned and operated by leftists top to bottom, and disseminates only the information which aligns with leftist moral norms and political priorities.
@wesyang The lefts messaging apparatus used to be the information distributor for all of society (we called it "mainstream media") but new media alternatives and the rollback of social media censorship regime's mean society is no longer a captive audience for the lefts messaging apparatus
For decades it was the progressive leftist worldview from which the norms of public life and the values of the common culture were derived. The at-large culture was the home of leftists, and conservative evangelicals were treated like unwanted guests.
Those days are over.
The culture is changing so quickly that people are about to get whiplash. It's no longer the case that the default values of public life are those of the social-justice left, (or of "progressives") and progressives no longer get to determine what is allowed in "polite company."
In other words, the progressives no longer get to simply assume that their goals, values, and priorities get to take center stage in the at-large culture.
The presumption of progressive leftists that they get to set the terms of the debate no longer carries any weight.
For years conservatives told people that leftists used violence and intimidation to silence dissent, and the media downplays and ignores it. Charlie Kirk's assassination proved the right was correct, and gave them the moral high ground in the culture for the first time in decades
Kirks' assassination validated what the right had been saying about free speech, censorship, and political violence exactly because Charlie was a vigorous free speech advocate who was killed for his speech.
Free speech is therefore the root of the rights' moral highground...
This means the right now has the backing of the culture, and the culture largely *agrees* with what the right has been saying about free speech, cancel culture, intimidation, censorship, information supression, and so fourth.
Any leftist podcaster or celebrity can hold an event at any University in the United States with minimal security and be completely safe.
Conservative speakers can't hold events on campus without armed guards and a bullet proof vest.
Let's talk about why🧵
Universities have basically said there is no penalty for *trying* to do violence against conservatives; there's only a penalty if you actually manage to injure one of them.
You can try to do violence as much as you like, and there's no penalty until you actually hurt somone.
It's like telling a man with a loaded gun "shoot as many bullets at people as you like — we won't stop you until you actually hit someone."
This is the logic universities use when responding to the threats, protests, and riots the left uses to intimidate and shut down speakers.