Nothing that happened at Charlottesville should have been much of a surprise.
By now there had been similar clashes in cities across the country. With very similar results. Police behaving erratically, standing by as the violence escalates and then engaging in a partial and insufficient break-up of the rallies.
Standard doctrine requires keeping opposing groups (even non-violent ones) separate. And preventing anyone from bringing potential weapons into the protest zone. This can be legally tricky in some jurisdictions. But it has been enforced in the past.
So what has been going wrong?
The policing meltdowns appear to be happening in cities with governments that are friendly to the left. Some people have taken that as evidence of a stand-down order. It's not impossible, but the likelier explanation is that they're suffering from a variant of the Ferguson Effect in which the police feel disempowered to do anything about violent marches and protests. Especially if they involve Black Lives Matter.
In short, it's not a micro problem, but a macro one.
Police departments have adapted to an environment in which the DOJ is a clear and present danger. And officers choose not to put themselves on the line. In that kind of environment, it becomes easier for them to let the fights happen.
If you connect the dots, this didn't begin with the current wave of protests and counter-protests. It goes back to Ferguson and Baltimore. It goes back to Dallas, where police were exposed to a Black Lives Matter sniper so that they wouldn't appear threatening.
After the initial show of force in Ferguson, the militarized equipment and heavy firepower, which was condemned by the left, by the media and by some pro-crime "conservatives", a sea change took place.
Black Lives Matter activists, with the support of the established, harassed and terrorized cities across America in ways that would never have been allowed before. The race riots that happened under Obama took place with limited police interference. As in Baltimore, the rioters were given "space to destroy". Ir's not just a racial issue. It's a leftist issue.
After the "Battle of Seattle", which was glamorized by the left, Black Bloc routinely smashed up Seattle businesses with limited police interference. That's also a less publicised "space to destroy."
The violence in Charlottesville could have been averted with a heavy police presence. But after Ferguson, the police find it easier to intervene less and let the politicians take the blame.
I've seen that happen in pre-Giuliani New York. The Crown Heights Pogrom took place because the police maintained a policy of limited intervention. As a result, black racists were able to rampage around a Jewish neighborhood. It certainly helped that they had the support of Mayor Dinkins.
And so we have a combination of two elements.
1. The Ferguson Effect
2. Implicit support by the authorities for some of the rioters
In that kind of situation, the police will engage in limited intervention. They have a job to do, but they won't put their necks on the line unless they feel that they have the support of their bosses.
This is another example of the damage done by the Obama years. And it will require time and effort to change law enforcement culture back to what it was a few years ago.