I'll use the Baltimore rioting to make some general observations:
i) Democrats believe their own propaganda. They think rioting (e.g. looting, arson) is a legitimate form of black protest. This goes back to the obsolete notion that blacks have no other remedy since they are shut out of the system.
ii) Now that position has some merit in principle. By that I mean, if you have an oppressed underclass with no legal or nonviolent means of redress, then you could argue that the authorities left them with no other recourse. Illegal and/or violent resistance is their only available option.
I don't necessarily disagree in principle. After all, Protestant political theorists developed a theology of revolution.
iii) However, even where illegal or violent resistance is justifiable, that doesn't mean it's justifiable to loot and burn businesses. Destroy cars, &c.
For one thing, that's not counterattacking the political establishment. Rather, that's attacking your own community.
iv) In addition, that's not a political protest. Rather, that's just a pretext to steal and go on a rampage. It gives thugs a chance to do what they've been spoiling to do all along.
v) In addition, it's based on a false premise. In America, there are two groups that typically riot: blacks and anarchists.
There is, however, no excuse for blacks to riot. Blacks have direct access to the levers of power. They can vote. There are black mayors, councilmen, police chiefs, policemen, judges, prosecutors, Congressmen, a president of the US, and the Attorney General (to name a few).
So this is not a legitimate form of protest, even in principle. Not to mention that burning cars and buildings and looting stores is not a political statement in the first place.
The other group are anarchists who riot on May Day or riot at WTO conferences. These are generally young white radicals. Some of them seem to be professional agitators. Someone subsidizes their travel expenses.
vi) This happens because Democrats, including prominent black leaders, pander to a false narrative. They do that in part for cynical reasons, and in part because they really do view the world through their victimology.
They send a message to would-be rioters–with predictable consequences. If you permit thugs to commit mayhem without fear of reprisal, that's exactly what they will do. It's not the thugs, but the politicians, who are running scared.
It this is allowed to continue, Mogadishu will be a microcosm of America.