fbpx
Articles

Explainer: What you should know about the George Floyd protests and riots

/
June 5, 2020

What just happened?

An ongoing series of protests began on May 26, 2020, in the Minneapolis–Saint Paul metropolitan area. The inciting event was the homicide of George Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, by multiple officers with the Minneapolis Police Department, most notably Derek Chauvin, the officer who pressed his knee on Floyd’s neck for eight minutes and 46 seconds. Since then, the events in response to police brutality, protests and at times riots, have spread throughout the United States and to several countries around the globe.

What is the difference between a protest and a riot?

Protests are public events in which citizens express their disagreement, disapproval, or opposition. Riots are violent disturbances of the public peace by three or more persons assembled together and acting with a common intent. Rioting includes a range of criminal behavior, including arson, looting, and vandalism.

Protests are an important political activity and are protected by the First Amendment. The right to assemble for protest has been a crucial legal and cultural protection for groups seeking to express their views, like pleading for racial justice, or protecting the rights of the unborn and promoting religious liberty.

In contrast to protest, riots are a form of criminal behavior. This is why the terms should be used exclusively for the activities they are describing. Referring to protesters as rioters implies that they are engaging in illicit activity, while referring to rioters as protesters implies their actions aren't criminal.

Unfortunately, rioters often take advantage of protests, and the distinction between a riot and a protest can shift as criminal actions overshadow the news coverage of the peaceful activity.

Where are the riots and protests occurring?

Protests have occurred in more than 400 cities and towns in all 50 states. Outside the U.S., protests have occurred in Athen, Auckland, Berlin, Brisbane, Calgary, Copenhagen, Lagos, London, Montreal, Paris, Perth, Rio de Janeiro, Sydney, Tel Aviv, Toronto, Vancouver.

Rioting has also occurred in numerous cities. At least 12 major cities have implemented night time curfews, and governors in 24 states and the mayor of Washington, D.C., had called in 17,000 National Guard troops.

Who is doing the rioting?

Because the riots are occurring in so many locations across the country, it is difficult to present an accurate demographic portrait of the rioters. The result is that misinformation and overstatement by some public officials, as well as rumor and speculation, have clouded the discussion about who is behind it.

For example, in some locations—such as New York City—rioters from outside the local area are a significant factor (in NYC, about 1 out of every 7 arrests for rioting has been people from out of state), while other places—such as Columbus, Dallas, and Minneapolis—the agitators have been local.

Similarly, the blame has also been put on far-left anarchists, like antifa, as well as far-right white nationalist groups, like the boogaloo bois. The issue is clouded even more because those groups often point to each other (a white nationalist group posing as antifa was found to be inciting rioting on social media), and because they are decentralized, and often disorganized, there is no clear way of identifying their ideology. There have even been reports of possible foreign influences attempting to use the riots to incite further violence among Americans.

What we can know for sure is criminals and extremists often use the cover of large crowds to disrupt the peace.

What leads people at a protest to riot?

This question needs to be deconstructed because violent rioters and peaceful protestors are rarely the same people, even if they are mixed into the same crowd. Studies of previous riots have found that people come to an event with either a specific desire to assemble peaceably or an intention to take advantage of an opportunity to engage in criminal actions. While it’s possible for one group to turn into the other, such overlap is relatively rare.

In their 1994 paper, “Understanding Riots,” David D. Haddock and Daniel D. Polsby explain the initial conditions from which a riot often begin:

When something happens that causes a large number of riot-prone people to mass spontaneously in one place while police cannot mass at a correspondingly rapid rate, the cost of starting a riot, as anyone participant would figure it before the fact, would begin to decrease dramatically. It would decrease still more if it seemed to a prospective troublemaker that his own hopes and expectations about the potential behavior of the crowd were also the hopes and expectations of many of its other members, because in that case it would seem a better bet that if he did cast the first stone, many others would follow.

In the past, riot-prone people faced an informational asymmetry: Unless they showed up with other people who also intended to riot, they couldn’t be sure other people would follow their lead. However, social media has made it possible for such troublemakers to coordinate riotous activity—even when they do not know each other.

For example, an anonymous account may post that they will be attending a protest and signal that they will be engaging in property damage. By using a hashtag connected to the protest, other potential troublemakers can see the intention. Knowing that “if he did cast the first stone, many others would follow” lowers their individual risk of starting such violent behavior. As Haddock and Polsby say, the logic is, “If somebody else gets the riot started, I can participate without much risk. But if I stick my neck out and nobody follows, I’ll be the only one arrested. So I’ll wait for somebody else to go first.”

How do these protests and riots compare to similar incidents in the past?

The latest events are part of a long history of protests and riots in the United States that are related to racial injustice.

Since the Civil Rights-era of the 1950s and early 1960, there have been thousands of protests, and from 1964 to 1971, as many as 700 riots erupted in cities across America. From 2000 to today, there have also been at least a dozen mass protests or riots that were sparked by incidents involving racial minorities and police departments.

In terms of arrests, loss of life, and property damage, the riots of 2020 are likely to be the most destructive since 1968.

Why this issue matters for Christians?

Last week, Southern Baptist leaders issued a joint statement on the death of George Floyd that helps to explain why this issue is of importance for all Christians.

As a convention of churches committed to the equality and dignity of all people, Southern Baptists grieve the death of George Floyd, who was killed May 25, 2020, in Minneapolis, Minn.

While all must grieve, we understand that in the hearts of our fellow citizens of color, incidents like these connect to a long history of unequal justice in our country, going back to the grievous Jim Crow and slavery eras. The images and information we have available to us in this case are horrific and remind us that there is much more work to be done to ensure that there is not even a hint of racial inequity in the distribution of justice in our country. We grieve to see examples of the misuse of force, and call for these issues to be addressed with speed and justice.

While we thank God for our law enforcement officers that bravely risk their lives for the sake of others and uphold justice with dignity and integrity, we also lament when some law enforcement officers misuse their authority and bring unnecessary harm on the people they are called to protect. We further grieve with our minority brothers and sisters in the wake of George Floyd’s death, pray for his family and friends and greatly desire to see the misuse of force and any inequitable distributions of justice come to an end.

Throughout the Old and New Testaments, the Bible speaks to matters of justice and human dignity. We are taught by Scripture that human beings are distinct among the rest of creation as those beings which bear the divine image. From the beginning of life to the end, all human beings, both male and female–of all ethnicities, colors and ages–are sacred beings that God values and loves.

Throughout the law, the prophets, the gospels and the entire canon of Scripture, murder is condemned and God’s people are called to protect the vulnerable. The Bible further condemns injustice and the misuse of authority and force. And in the example of Jesus Christ, God’s people are called to love others, care for their needs, grieve with them in brokenness and labor for the well-being of our neighbor. To follow Christ is to follow in these examples He puts before us.

Therefore, as a matter of Christian obedience and devotion, followers of Jesus Christ cannot remain silent when our brothers and sisters, friends and/or people we seek to win for Christ are mistreated, abused or killed unnecessarily.

Therefore, we pray for our local, state, and national leaders as they seek justice, and call on them to act quickly and diligently to ensure that these situations are brought to an end. As a people, Southern Baptists stand ready to help towards that end. May God give us His favor, help and strength in this effort.

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24