What's going on right now can be defined by three terms.
Marching - a collective group of people demonstrating their disdain for current affairs. This usually brings up awareness to the situation. No destruction of property.
Ex: Occupy Wallstreet, Martin Luther King Jr civil rights movement
Protesting - marching, but with thoughtful declarations of demands and a willingness to negotiate terms. Demands with solutions to reconcile current issues. This brings legitimacy to the movement as the willingness to talk through the issues shows a sign of good faith. Civil discourse is still possible. May have destruction of property and harm to human well being.
Ex: Hong Kong Protests
Demands: https://i.maga.host/rjI4rbV.png
Yellow Vest French Protests:
Demands: https://i.maga.host/fahk1Zj.png
1776
Demands: Taxation without representation
Riots - lawless gatherings of people actively showing disdain for current events with no consideration another person's property or well being. Demands are displayed, but with no real tangible solution to an outcome. Only purpose is to show the level of unhappiness through the rage and emotions. Destruction of property and human well being is expected.
Ex: Current day BLM
Demands: Justice for George Floyd, Justice for [insert, other names], defund the police, release prisoners
I've tried searching for demands, but it was hard to find any. Only one I could find were Oklahoma City demands.
I'll actually give props to the OKC BLM for addressing the issues thoughtfully, They at least want to have an open discussion and that things have the chance to be peacefully resolved.
However, from other searches I couldn't find any type of set demand to give this movement credibility to be resolved through civil discourse. You also have photos of people from other nations "marching" to show their awareness to current events. Virtue signal, if you will. But alot of it seems to be "Justice for" or "Fuck the police" without any actual meat and potatoes to resolving the conflict.
If you really want change, you have to be accountable to yourself, to the movement as well as considerate of the opposing party to have discussions. Right now, it's almost the same as a child going "wah, wah, gimme this candy. I'm going to keep misbehaving until I have this piece of candy. wah wah"
But there doesn't seem too many out there that want to take the time and do the hard work of re-examining themselves, the situation, the wrongdoings, and come with working solutions. For the most part, they just want--want. Give credit to OKC BLM though.
One more point, I haven't yet found any research points from mainstream media or alternative media (youtube, twitter) being considerate of how the police members are actually feeling --- other than actual supporters of the police.
With mental illness and drug use on the rise, I don't think these rioters understand how difficult a job that police officers have it. I don't think these people understand that most often times that police officers deal with people when they are having their worst of days when these police officers are also human themselves. No one can ever be the best of who they are at all times, just doesn't work. Every case is also different, some with underlying political undertones and others with people down on their luck on their worst of days.
Take for example, a police officer approaches a suspect who he thinks is the identity of a suspected pedophile. The officer greets him with the known alias and is immediately shot by the suspect. In a matter of seconds. Where's the empathy there for the police officer?
There's many cases out there where there's more side to the story than outrage that a police officer shot or killed a person. These rioters are expecting these police officers to have the perfect response for every single occurrence. Sure with countless training dedication, but that's never usually the case with so many variables.
At the end of the day though, if you really want change, you have to have empathy for yourself and for others, so that the opposing parties will want to cooperate in discussions. Both sides have to want to come to the table willingly and in good faith considerate of the other side's position.