legit struggling to understand why in a moment of widespread desperation and few outlets for anger people would NOT expect mass unrest to be about many things at once

likewise - and this is a hard thing to think and talk about - in a situation where violence is already distributed with stark geographic and demographic inequalities why would people expect both righteous resistance and opportunistic acting out to not reflect that also

there is a distinction between wanting emergent social movements to precisely channel the energy of mass unrest & defaulting to a position where their inevitable failures to do so become a reason not to do anything about the underlying causes & to side w/ authorities by default

esp since many of the charges of illegitimacy levied against furious and desperate people - that they police themselves, that they take supererogatory risks, that they have public leadership etc - ignore a history of, among other things, decades of dismantling by state security!