Nowadays whenever you see "violent protests" and "destructions of private property by vandals during protests" you can never be certain whether they are organized by people who are against the government or by the government itself.
Then, the government is pushing cities to denounce the most popular Left party as the instigator of the riots.
They are preparing to ban them next elections for this. It's pretty clear it's all a political maneuver to ensure it's once again Macron's party versus Marine's far right party, hoping it ensures their win against her
I'm not saying Macron is happy with the "extreme left", but it seems to me he's much more against the "extreme right". And not just him: pretty much every politician and their dog is trying to distance themselves from the Le Pen's party.
Compare that with violent ones that see the opportunity coming with 3-4d heads-up (because peaceful protests are normally covered with a little advance - 3-4d - by mainstream press), create an Instagram/TikTok/Whatsapp/Snapchat group, spread it aggressively thanks to zero cost of social/IM, and their only objective is to smash everything in their path (and if they manage, steal some loot to resell).
Also many "violent" protesters are organized, and even more so have to be to stay as safe as possible.
In practice there may be many roadblocks in that, so this isn't absolute. But if that's the case, it's still on the people who notice the roadblocks to convince most everyone these are real. Without that any protest will lack widespread support and be suppressed regardless.
Arguing that the system has escape hatches is just an excuse. The escape hatches have also failed, clearly, since they either haven't been used (which is their fault) or their use did not fix the system.
there are many NGOs aligned with the current protests, and they receive substantial government funding, because they are in symbiosis. the regime doesn't provide funding for ideologies that actually threaten its interests.
public opinion has now reached a tipping point, any further vandalism/arson/violence will not provide a net benefit to the regime. that's why now they finally try to stop it.
The best way for governments to deal with protests is to have policies in place that fulfill what We The People want. Everything else is a band-aid atop an ulcer: it hides the problem for a little while, but the problem itself keeps growing regardless.
We The People's desires are mutually exclusive.
We want lots of benefits, low taxes; high government spending/services, a stable currency; economic growth, low inflation; security, freedom; etc.
Representative democratic government is the reconciliation between those wants.
So no, the answer isn't as simple as giving the people what they want.
In fact, remarkable long-term lack of massive protests would be a very good metric for determining whether ongoing reconciliatory efforts are moving in the right direction. If such protests start happening, correct course sooner rather than later, and measure success by a newfound lack of further massive protests.
This is not true, and very much the kind of propaganda spewed by the (far-)right, please do not trust it.
The entire crowd chants very explicit chants against the government and police, gathers around fires in the street, shouts at police when they attack the demonstrators or fire gas canisters and flash-bang grenades. The crowds that get out are not getting smaller, despite mainstream media and government equating the protests with violent looters, so it seems everyone marching feels a need to. There are looters, but they're a tiny, insignificant minority.
The protests are violent because the repression is violent, and because they are marching against real suffering.