Is There Any Argument For The Proposition That The Riots Are (a) A Proportionate (b) Response To the George Floyd Killing/Murder?

   They seem wildly disproportionate to me. And not even clearly and plausibly a response to that event. Though I suppose we have to take the rioters at their word to at least some extent--and, if their chants are to be believed, then Floyd's killing/murder really is, to some extent at least, a motive. 

   My guess would be that this is, to at least some extent, a general spasmodic leftist uprising against the state, and against their hated opponents in the culture war. And it's the latest action by #La#Resistance# against Trump. 

   It's also, to some extent, a rational reaction by people brainwashed by the media to believe that cops and white people are gunning down black men with impunity. If that were true, then I don't think this would obviously be an overreaction. That's why leftist/media "narrative"-building (i.e.: lying) matters. For the record, I said something similar many times about the right and Obama. Some on the right repeated various versions of the Obama is intentionally destroying America line relentlessly. If that line were true, then it would have been reasonable to think that he ought to have been assassinated. I'm a bit surprised there were no such attempts. If you convince someone of false premises for a conclusion to the effect that violence is justified, you bear responsibility if that violence occurs. And, to a large extent, that's what's happened in the present case. There is no doubt in my mind that many of the rioters believe the "open season" propaganda.

   (Note also: even a minimally honest and competent journalist would find and report on the actual data about police violence and race. And yet it is basically never reported-on in the MSM. The drawing of the relevant conclusion is left as an exercise for the reader.)

   Another element of all this is likely the background philosophical view of the contemporary PC left that, roughly, neither facts nor reason nor laws nor practical details like the necessity of social order can be allowed to stand in the way of their march of justice "narrative." To question the truth of the tale they are weaving is to be on the wrong side of history. As is any mention of objective truth at all, actually. Reality is "socially constructed," and they have constructed a reality of pervasive, systemic racism, white violence, and righteous uprising. They are in the right by something akin to definition. Questioning, reasoning, advancing arguments and evidence, dissenting from the "narrative"...all just more reactionary wrong-side-of-history-ness. Bigot. To question claims of oppression is itself oppressive. Oppressors are not permitted to speak about oppression except to apologize for it and request instruction and correction. Oppressors will comply. They will contritely admit their crimes and tearfully beg forgiveness--which will, of course, never be granted. The left offers the sinful no grace. The original sin of whiteness cannot be forgiven. The secular sinners don't literally go to the Gulags nor up against the wall...just yet... But be patient. That's another couple of steps down the inevitable emancipatory arc of history. Utopia isn't built in a day.

   Any normal Republican President could basically start planning for his second term right now. Even a minimally sensible and articulate politician could step forward as the voice of sweet reason and hit this anarchic pitch out of the park. Trump, of course, sits rabidly tweeting--tweeting for the love of God...tweeting!--inflammatory gibberish. If he keeps botching this as badly as he's done thus far, the destruction of social order might actually turn out to be a winning move for the unhinged left. Despite the media's insistence on twisting his words--e.g. his post-C'ville statements--Trump is actually capable of rising at least part-way to such an occasion. Perhaps, though, he's seen that, no matter what he says, the left/MSM will pretend that he said something evil. So perhaps he thinks it's not worth the effort. But he can do it and he ought to do it--for the rest of us, at least. No goddamned tweets. No goddamned press conferences in which even half-hearted effort by leftist reporters can goad him into angry incoherence. Just make a statement to the country. 

   Anyway, on a final strategic note: what on Earth can Biden say? It's going to be hard for him to finesse this without alienating the loony left--which he absolutely needs in order to win. Though it probably won't be hard to do better than whatever Trump does. Much less: to do better than whatever the media decides to say that Trump did.