Wanted to tweet this but figured a short blog post makes my point (violent vs. non-violent political strategies can be substitutes) better.
Premise 1: Politicians like to win elections.
Premise 2: The rationality of political choices are separate from their morality. E.g. Riots, i.e., systematic violence against communities, are an effective strategy for electoral success. This unfortunately means that immoral strategies that work (in this case riots), will always be popular amongst politicians.
Premise 3: Less violent strategies for electoral success are available.
Conclusion: Promoting political/legal substitutes to riots, such as gerrymandering should reduce communal violence.