Riots

"The limitation of riots, moral questions aside, is that they cannot win and their participants know it. Hence, rioting is not revolutionary but reactionary because it invites defeat. It involves an emotional catharsis, but it must be followed by a sense of futility." ~MLK~

sometimes riots do not ignite starting from nothing, or better to say, are not the first reaction towards the opposite ideology. They occur after the participants exhaust other means to make their case. So, they are used to get the attention of the "suppressor", or a third body. They are used, as MLK said in his speech( from which I quoted the ... Read Moreabove piece), to throw the very guilt on the system the participants are against to ...so that others would condemn not the sin they committed but the cause for the darkness which their soul is left in. However, their immediate result is another reaction instead of civil debate, a chain of riots and violence, more loss of life and property until the"suppressor" gives in or compromises or to the worst until the "rebellion" is crushed.. But it means that it requires the latter either to have a good will or to be cornered. Best examples are what happened after the murder of MLK and the spread of protestantism(Reformation)...
But what happens if the more powerful does not want to yield?
>>it will get an opening to mention loud the disorder, the loss of life and property. The participant will eventually be an outlaw. Doors will be closed for any progress, the suppressor will be more negligent. That is what happens in the developing countries after every election cycle... Read More.
And as MLK said defeat will be the ultimate result. The defeat is worse because it will come not from the outside but from the participants themselves. Low morale and finally lack of purpose...