Is damage to property violence? I think it can be. I don’t think it is in Minneapolis. I think anyone calling looting or property damage “violence” has anti-protester agenda. Here’s the internationally accepted definition of violence: /1

“The intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation” /2

So property damage could be violence if, for example, it’s going to cause a person or community to starve, like damaging crops or a water source. But in Minneapolis we’re talking about commercial property that’s insured. It’s not violence. That term is just a smear.