An interesting theory on the funding of No Kings Day

I watched what transpired with protests that was anointed as "No Kings Day" with the same emotion that I think most people did and that was a level of indifference. After what went down with the St. George Floyd protests around the country 4 or 5 years ago the whole protest that turns violent and especially turns violent in blue cities is not even surprising anymore.

When I see the footage of people taking to the streets that are just destroying anything that they can get their hands on I am no longer shocked. I am disgusted sure, but not even surprised. This sadly, has just become what a certain subsect of the American population does and since the government in those places of the world doesn't do very much to prevent them from doing those things, they continue to do it: I believe it is pretty simple. Those states and cities have also tied the hands of the population so therefore the citizens in those places can't do anything about it themselves either. As I have said before though, there is a reason why these sorts of protests do not erupt into chaos in North Carolina and other states with laws like it don't have buildings being destroyed and people being harassed inside their cars as they drive somewhere: It's because those rioters would get ventilated at 1200 feet per second.

src

I was watching thinking to myself the destruction and mayhem is happening in blue cities that overwhelmingly vote liberal and if they want to throw a collective tantrum and wreck their own communities in the process, then let them. Just don't pay for the repairs when the time comes.

This topic matter ruffles a lot of feathers and gets people worked up in a way that just isn't possible with anything else so I wont go into much detail other than to say that the No Kings Day wasn't really interesting to me despite the media constantly covering it and of course spinning it with comments like calling riots "just a bunch of people that like to sit around and watch cars burn" un-ironically.

src

What I really wanted to talk about was a theory I saw on some forum the other day that of course was crazy and is based, at least in what we are able to detect, on not-at-all confirmed information but in the end it kind of made sense to me. The person said that even though it is really unlikely, that organizing something like No Kings Day and then prodding the people involved to start wrecking shit would be a wonderful political tactic to actually be financed by people on the right.

Think about it for a second ok: The places where this turns violent and results in destruction of communities, looting of businesses, and overall mayhem, well they are almost entirely liberal places. Anyone that is living in that community that isn't 100% behind the movement of the mob is extremely scared to voice their opinion and they are powerless to stop it. Therefore, anyone that was kind of on the fence about how to vote the next time around is going to quietly vote for a candidate that has vowed to prevent this sort of thing from ever happening in their community, much like that Florida Sheriff that went on TV to tell the press that people who participate in riots in his county will go to jail or the graveyard. One of the funnier things that he said was "if you damage property you are going to jail, if you damage property and then run from us, you are going to go to jail tired."

src

The media tried to spin this to make him look like a bad person or at the least, to make him look stupid, but their efforts to cherry-pick his words and misquote him failed. What ended up happening was people made the comparison between what happened in his county and other counties like it and compare it to the mayhem in LA, Seattle, New York etc, and see how the places where law enforcement promised to be very harsh on people who cant maintain order did in fact manage to maintain order. There was no destruction in those parts of the country specifically because they have conservative leadership - or at least that is the impression.

This impression, which the media desperately tries to conceal actually could have an impact on those communities and encourage the people to vote differently in the future. Let's be honest here: If your community erupts into chaos and your car gets torched even though you had nothing to do with it, are you going to support the group that is responsible for that? To me it seems like it could have a rather sizable impact on encouraging people to vote for the "law and order" side.

Now before anyone jumps on my case an accuses me of wanting daddy government to oversee everything and have everyone arrested who steps out of line that is not what I am saying at all. My community has almost zero law enforcement because it doesn't really need it. We are a peaceful area for a lot of reasons but one of them is because we have Castle Doctrine that allows us to defend our homes, businesses, and our vehicles with lethal force, legally... and people here are ready and willing to do so.

If you look at conservative places in the country there were still protests, but they for the most part remained completely peaceful.

src

The media loved to point at Boise, Idaho and showcase how they were protesting there and say "hey look, a conservative State is pissed off too!" even though Idaho, outside of Boise is extremely conservative and therefore has conservative leadership even in Boise. This was never going to turn violent because places like Boise aren't just going to stand back and let the people spray paint the capitol building and then go loot the Apple store afterwards.

If the right was in fact throwing some funding at the inner cities where everyone knows violence is likely to kick off (because it has in the past) this would actually be a pretty effective tactic and showcasing the difference between a mayor with a D next to their name and one with an R next to theirs.

It's not what I want to happen and no, I am not saying that is what happened, but honestly, it would be an effective strategy even though it would be absolutely awful if that ended up being the case.

Politics is so dirty these days though that if it did come out that this was the case, it honestly wouldn't surprise me.

To me, the No Kings Day protests accomplished nothing at all. it was a bunch of people showing up to show that they don't like Trump, but the exit polls from the last Presidential election already showed me that. All they managed to accomplish was to cost their own communities a bunch of money and make one hell of a mess.