Having seen the article (original source seems to be ZeroHedge) that has the above headline, I'm still not 100% sure of where the "Violence Is Inevitable" declaration comes from. The author immediately references the Daily Beast after saying this is what "the media" said, but doesn't link the two directly. I tried to go to Daily Beast, but their article is behind a pay wall, so I couldn't find out if it was in there.

Either way, language matters! If someone did say this, they are implicitly sanctioning an environment where violence is acceptable because there is no other option. The only way violence can be contained, however, is precisely the opposite messaging than that here! Violence can always be avoided when people work to avoid it. Violence is a decision. There is no such thing as inevitable violence, only violence you're not willing to forsake. Those who are engaging in violence are so committed to the vision they hold that they are unwilling to discuss the premises behind their vision. Once people are unwilling to be challenged that (God forbid!) they might sometimes be wrong, they become like fundamentalist religious zealots. Anyone who disagrees with them is morally despicable and deserves death.

Needless to say, this cannot lead to peace and prosperity, only chaos and bloodshed. I've never in history seen a majority agree with this attitude, and I expect there is none now. The majority, however, needs to find/generate someone with sufficient charisma to challenge this message and find a way to bring those so blinded back to a sense of cooperation. Until that leader comes along, there will be dark times ahead.

Terrible, terrible message to promote.