In South Africa, mobs are toppling or vandalizing statues. Pols shrug, say "We can't do nothin'."
Most liberals will probably claim this is a novel, imaginative and mostly harmless form of protest by the oppressed members of the...groups of unspecified race and political orientation.
These are the same liberals who claim the "knockout game" isn't real. Or maybe it might be real but it isn't really hurting anyone.
If confronted with news articles they might backtrack a bit and say well, it might be real and maybe a few whites--who as every good liberal knows are absolutely rolling in "white privilege"--might be getting slightly hurt by "it," but certainly not enough to get irate about.
If you show them even more news stories they might admit that it's just barely possible that a couple of unlucky victims of these sneak attacks on unsuspecting whites may have been killed by their assailants, just because they happened to land on their head or something. But that's really an accident--the perps never intended for that to happen so you can't possibly hold 'em responsible for what's essentially a mostly harmless form of protest by a mostly powerless group of people who may have had ancestors who may have been slaves.
So, it makes perfect sense, see?
Of course liberals will happily say and do anything to tear down western civilization, so you might want to keep that in mind. And of course it wasn't their wife or daughter or son who got sucker-punched and knocked cold. But even if it was, they'd probably use their imagined white guilt to rationalize it as being somehow deserved.
So back to South Africa: The vandals are almost exclusively black, and the statues are of non-blacks (but not exclusively whites: they damaged one of Mahatma Ghandi, which makes you wonder what insults or injuries they attributed to Ghandi).
A particularly sad example was a memorial to the "war horses" of WW1: It was a statue of a soldier on one knee offering his faithful horse a bucket of water. But of course the black communists of South Africa consider all works of non-blacks offensive, regardless of how benign the subject.
These are the folks who would burn the Mona Lisa, or blow up the Sistine Chapel. Their counterparts in Iraq are already blowing up ancient churches and walled cities established by ancient civilizations (and not remotely white) for the same reason: "If we don't approve of it, we'll destroy it just to show our unmatched power."
It seems clear this is nothing less than an attempt at intimidation. Like the "knockout game" here. It's "We can do this and get away with it, and if you don't do as we demand, we will increase the violence against you."
Interesting philosophy. If whites were doing this to blacks liberals would be shrieking and screaming to high heaven. But it seems as though liberal-pushed notions of "white guilt" have now made it possible for blacks to attack whites without a moment's fear of being either caught, prosecuted or jailed.
Seems to me that there's an easy and obvious fix for that. And not hard to discern, either.
I do see the experiences of South Africa as an indicator of what will happen here in another 15-20 years, unless some big factor intervenes. Like, maybe, a small percentage of whites who refuse to be victimized by thugs.