Looting is Co-option of the BLM Movement but the Focus on Looting is More Detrimental than the Act

*I want to make it clear before the reader goes any further that I don’t condemn looting, I understand what it means to be desperate, angry, or opportunistic and I understand how it can be used as a form of protest. I have no grounds to throw stones and that is not the purpose of this op-ed.*

Image shot by a staff photographer at The Philadelphia Inquirer.

“We don’t want to see Targets burning. We want to see the system that sets up for systemic racism burned to the ground...It is your duty not to burn your own house down for anger with an enemy ... We have to be better than this moment...We have to be better than burning down our own homes because if we lose Atlanta what else do we have?” - Killer Mike

George Floyd wasn’t murdered so you could steal an X-Box and say that it was an act of revolution, let’s get that out of the way right now. Looting is a byproduct of protest, one that is driven by a combination of economic need, opportunism, and a myriad of other factors. The reasons behind the act and the arguments defending it can be legitimate, yet looting still detracts from the movement by giving fodder to the opposing force and stealing the spotlight from what really matters.

Co-Option is defined by Oxford Languages as (to) “adopt (an idea or policy) for one's own use”. The looting ‘raids’ going on at protests are examples of co-option because property damage and financial gain are not the goals of the protests but the looters are protected by the protest’s numbers, anonymity, and the commitment to the reasons protest started, police brutality, justice for its victims, and the end goal of criminal justice reform and societal change. The aims of the protest most people can get behind or at least understand, but as with everything else in life, there is no consensus. There are people and organizations who oppose the movement, their stances ranging from disagreeing with how the protests are conducted, or the policies the protest (for the most part) supports, to outright denial of police brutality and violent counter-action. Looting has no correlation to the goals of the movement and doesn’t further any of the reform championed by the protests, yet it is being performed under the largely unintended protection the protests give. The majority, if not nearly all, protesters reject looting (in the name of the victims at the very least) because of these reasons. Even if someone comes from the standpoint of being pro-looting, or neutral, the gain on behalf of the looters is temporary and the effect on the public’s opinion is lasting; so the question you have to ask yourself is this: does the inevitability of the act, and the problematic depiction of it in the media, absolve it of the harm?

Looting may be co-option, but focusing on looting alone undermines the movement in the same way the act does, by taking the spotlight off of the work being done and the overwhelming positive change the protesting has brought about. News coverage, both written and T.V., of the protests is erratic. Articles and news segments going from constructive spotlights on, and interviews with, protesters or people connected to the movement to the demonization of protesters and fear-mongering while conveniently ignoring the good. This fluctuation is of course interspersed with COVID programming keeping us on top of the ever-climbing statistics to add a little extra spice to the dumpster fire. The flip-flop of the media being on the side of the protest, to the protesters being the ‘other’ that is being condemned attests to the fact that this subject is hard to cover in a complete, unbiased way. The protest arose out of strong emotion about controversial issues and the people who create the news we consume are just that, people. They have opinions about what is going on and this is reflected in their coverage, some outlet’s bias starker than others.

As Aesop said, “Every truth has two sides; it is as well to look at both, before we commit ourselves to either.” Looking at the problem from a black and white perspective leaves the nuances unseen and the problem as a whole neglected, only by educating ourselves to the best of our ability and forming opinions off of that can we hope to reach an understanding.