Of all of the adjectives I could apply to the violence at the Unite the Right rally in Virginia, “unimaginable” would be quite low on the list.  No, I’m sorry to say that it was pretty imaginable.  Predictable even, considering how these Antifa/BLM and White Nationalist/Alt-Right/Whatever fools both keep escalating their mutual hatred with relish at every new opportunity.

A few months ago, there were some on the Left who were amused to see Richard Spencer get punched.  After that, it was somehow considered to be a noble on righteous thing to “punch a Nazi”.  This attitude was circulated even by a lot of usually-respectable people who should have known better.  Noam Chomsky tried to warn the Left about the folly of holding this attitude, but it fell on deaf ears.  Then came the Berkeley riot and now this.

The more extreme elements of the Left, struggling with the idea that they are losing politically, have embraced violence as an acceptable form of “resistance”.  In the White Nationalist, they’ve found a happy enemy.  Nazis are and always have been thugs.  If street violence is what Antifa and its ilk wants, they’ll find plenty of it and more people will die in the course of whatever it is they think they’re trying to accomplish.

No, I’m not blaming the victims in Charlottesville.  Heather Heyer was just crossing the street at the wrong time, by all accounts.  I also don’t believe that all of the people who were injured were participating in violent acts (although some definitely were).  Again, I don’t think what Heather Heyer’s murderer did was justified, but I will never stop reminding everyone that violence begets violence.

This is why I consistently condemn the violent rhetoric coming from both sides.  Every time some brutal act occurs whether it is a protester getting assaulted at a Trump rally, an attendee at a Trump rally getting assaulted, a Republican Congressman getting shot, or protesters getting run down it should be taken by the American public as a warning.  It’s a chance for us to reassess the path that we’re on and agree that the extremists on both sides must be condemned and abandoned.  Even now, I’m saying that it’s not too late and we can resolve our differences peacefully.  We’re a long, long way from another civil war, contrary to what some believe.

Of course, the violence isn’t going to stop anytime soon.  I don’t know when–or even if–sanity will reassert itself.  Both sides will point to Charlottesville as proof of the other side’s fundamental wickedness and use it to justify ever greater violent acts.

The Right sees the Left’s calls for violence not only as a challenge, but also a dream come true.  They feel embattled and threatened as the prospect of a “white genocide” circulates among their favorite message boards.  Inevitably, whenever left-wing protesters start punching “Nazis”, they end up punching perfectly normal white people who aren’t involved in the Alt-Right nor do they agree with anything it stands for.

White Nationalists love it when this happens for the same reason ISIS likes it when there’s a backlash against Muslims in Western countries following a terrorist attack by an Islamic radical. It polarizes those communities against each other.  It forces people to take a side and spurs them to join the fight.  ISIS wants Muslims to think that living peacefully isn’t an option in infidel lands.  White Nationalists want whites to think that they can’t really live in peace with minorities and their liberal sympathizers and that they will have to protect themselves.

Witness that they’re already claiming that the killer acted in self-defense or maybe he “panicked”.  That Antifa had surrounded his car and that he was in fear of his life.  They’re not the least bit sorry that Heyer was killed.   This violence isn’t senseless when either side does it.  It has a purpose, it’s just that it doesn’t serve the interests of sane or decent people so it’s still hard for us to grasp what it all means.

The challenge is mostly on local governments to decide what they do to ensure public safety during protests.  If there’s one lesson I hope they learn from Charlottesville, it’s that all protesters should be disarmed of anything that could be used as a weapon, vehicle traffic should be contained, and outbreaks of fighting should prompt an immediate forceful response by police.  This was preventable, I say.  As preventable as it was predictable.

I hate to say it, but the wingnuts on both sides cannot be trusted to restrain themselves.  I think they’ll do far worse before all is said and done, if allowed to.  Local and state governments are going to have to use violence where appropriate to keep them from killing each other and normal people in our streets.  Violence isn’t speech and deserves no constitutional protection nor should it ever have approval from the public.

81 comments

  1. I feel pretty passionately that this act should be condemned on its own terms, without the tit-for-tat “well they did it too” rhetoric that seems to have permeated through almost ALL conservative media regarding this story. This group is something the trump campaign openly courted, pandered to, and called to arms with his campaign rhetoric and Breitbart’s dedication to “white plight” sensationalism.

    I don’t get angry at the hypocrisy of the conservatives pearl clutching over the incident. That’s almost a passé reaction to what has happened here. No one gets off the hook for this in my mind. Conservatives, republicans, alt-right, or whatever sub culture they identify with to create paper thin distinctions own this act and the perpetrators.

    Everyone with reasonable intelligence and human decency knows that white nationalists, white supremacists, cultural white nazis, the kkk, kekistanis, the alt-right, etc. are physically violent in nature yet they were openly courted and invited in to Trump’s coalition.

    I understand that the president is an “everyday man” and we cannot depend on him for ANY form of leadership or valor, so it’s up to everyone else to put on their big boy britches, own the fact that white supremacy was allowed in the front door of conservatism during the election and disown it without the “well, antifa does it too! Nyuh” childishness.

  2. To all that, I’ll just ask why Democrats never have to denounce Antifa. That and BLM have become the mainstream face of the Democratic Party, far removed from simply being allowed in the door.

    When you try to hand-wave the existence of far-Left elements and ignore their own role in provoking this violence, you send the message that you approve of it, because “Nazis”.

    I’m saying NONE of it is okay and I won’t excuse any political violence. You shouldn’t either.

  3. I haven’t defended or drawn any kind of relative defense for antifa’s role in the weekend’s violence. Whether it was lapse security, lack of permit enforcement or whatever there is absolutely no defense for this act of terrorism.

    I don’t think these white nationalists right to peacefully assemble should be infringed upon. I don’t think there is any benefit to commit acts of violence should they peacefully protest. There’s no justification for anyone on the left that did.

    What is at issue here is specifically what this man did,, killing someone else. There shouldn’t be anyone trying to muddy the waters on that act of violence. If the democrats don’t want to denounce Antifa or do more to include white makes into their coalition they’ll pay for it in the voting booth.

    Someone died due to an act of terrorism at the hands of an alleged white nationalist. Any sort of rational debate over the removal of historical confederate symbols is now diminished. I think it’s ill timed to draw up a scoreboard of violence when simply admonishing the act without a “but” will be more impactful.

  4. I’m not “keeping score” of violence though. If this is about terrorism, the terroristic violence of Antifa was exactly what led to this happening.

    The White Nationalists had a legal right to assemble and to be where they were. Antifa and the rest showed up with no permit and armed with baseball bats and other weapons. Once the WN were kicked out of the park by the police, they were attacked by Antifa.

    The way Antifa behaved was terroristic. That should be clear. To me, it’s far less clear that Fields was out to commit an act of terrorism. I’m not saying it wasn’t, I’m just saying it’s not clear based on the circumstances or what evidence we know of so far.

    Antifa had been brutally beating everyone who was trying to leave the rally. They were also blocking roads. If Fields were placed into the situation where he panicked and tried to force his way past the blockade–even with a reckless disregard for life–then it isn’t terrorism and the behavior of Antifa is completely relevant.

    It’s not about “scorecard of violence”. It’s about how Antifa directly provoked violence and got violence in return. They showed up at what was a lawful and peaceful rally with the intention of causing mass violence. That they did that is what got Heyer killed.

    Keep in mind, I don’t think Fields has any defense for Heyer’s death. Even if a jury believes that he panicked and was just trying to escape, it’s pretty clear that she wasn’t threatening Fields. He’s definitely going down for 2nd degree murder, at the minimum.

    But is he a terrorist and are other White Nationalists terrorists simply by association with this act? No. I don’t see it.

  5. Ballsy? That’s your response? Disgusting. But this was the guy sufficient people voted for. They’re getting exactly what was advertised.

  6. So long as the right enables and embraces Nazis (including by voting for and supporting Trump) then others have a duty to stand up against it. You don’t appease Nazis. Fuck Nazis and fuck those who equate them with those protesting against them. And fuck those who can’t differentiate Nazis (“whites are the master race”) with BLM (“stop killing black people”). Disgusting.

  7. What’s disgusting about it? I find it disgusting that people are lying about what happened in Charlottesville and ignoring that the violence was not in any way one-sided. I find it disgusting that many people feel that violence is justified when the intended target is “a Nazi” or “might be a Nazi” or “kind of looks like a Nazi”.

    I agree with what Trump said and yes, I think it was a ballsy observation for him to publicly make.

    Tell your side to quit showing up to protests with bear mace and baseball bats if you want some semblance of some kind of moral authority in this discussion.

  8. The problem, CM, is that so many who hold your view happen to think that EVERYBODY who is merely conservative is a Nazi. If we let you guys start defining who it’s acceptable to assault, you’ll never stop with just the skinheads.

  9. Wow, the ultimate slippery-slope cop-out. You’re making that the people protesting racist White Nationalists with full offensive and defensive gear are just going around causing trouble randomly, in a vaccum.

    It doesn’t get any easier than disavowing Nazis. It’s a gimme.

  10. I find it disgusting that you’re hiding beyond such obvious bullshit. I don’t think you even know what “moral authority” means.

  11. But this is ALL a natural and inevitable result of Trump being elected. So everyone who voted for him also owns this and shares responsibility in it. Even though responsibility will continue to be abdicated in favour of “many sides”, which Trump has now doubled down on at his latest surreal press conference. The Handmaids Tale and other such fiction is fast becoming reality and yet people like you are lapping it up.

  12. Well said Judge Dredd, bang on.

    the terroristic violence of Antifa was exactly what led to this happening

    Pathetic and disgusting.

  13. I don’t claim moral authority, but I have two things I believe in: free speech and the right to non-violently assemble. If you are opposed to me on that, then you are literally as bad as a Nazi.

    Nazis also suppressed unpopular opinions and used violence to suppress them. Read a fucking book.

    If the political Left thinks it will win the arguments of the day with intimidation and violence, then all I can tell you is that you’re on the losing side.

    Your lack of self-awareness is stunning, you know. Look at your comments in this thread:

    “The people who voted for Trump share responsibility for the violence of white supremacists!”

    And then:

    “It’s a slippery slope argument to claim that we can’t differentiate between people who vote for Trump and Nazis!”

    Really. Tell me more about how I’m making an unfounded slippery slope argument even as you prove that I’m right.

    What’s next? I’m trying to consolidate your responses into one comment to make this easier to keep track of. Let’s see…

    I dislike Nazis and white supremacists. They’re hateful and deluded and wrong. However, they have the right to be that way, so long as they advocate their wrongheaded beliefs within the law. Let’s face it; anytime they show up in public, they beclown themselves.

    God, I wish that woman hadn’t gotten killed. Partly because if she hadn’t, the ONLY thing we would be doing this week is laughing at how stupid those goons looked carrying tiki torches around like they were at some trashy barbecue party.

    Instead, your Antifa heroes showed up and started beating people up. Then they blocked the roads and got themselves hit by a car. Yeah, in a “vacuum” those people wouldn’t have gotten hurt and Heyer would still be alive.

    The bottom line is that your champions showed up to brutally attack demonstrators who had a legal right to be there and made everything worse. Instead of the Nazis looking like dorks with their tiki torches, now they look like terrifying maniacs. Why don’t you understand the pointlessness of this?

    Yeah, disavowing violent, ignorant, and hateful political movements is “easy”, CM. Why don’t you try it now? You should definitely do it before one of your Antifa champions kills some innocent person (and they will) as tensions rise, unless you want to share the blame as you think Trump supporters should now.

    You might hate Trump, but as far as I’m concerned, he’s a better man than you are because he acknowledges that the violence on both sides is unacceptable. You’re aligning yourself with thugs.

    Think this through, please.

  14. Sorry but I’m in no way opposed to free speech and the right to non-violently assemble, and nothing I’ve said suggested otherwise. So you take shove that straw man where the sun doesn’t shine.

    Nazis also suppressed unpopular opinions and used violence to suppress them. Read a fucking book.

    I’ve read plenty of them, thanks.

    If the political Left thinks it will win the arguments of the day with intimidation and violence, then all I can tell you is that you’re on the losing side.

    If you think that’s the argument I’m making, you’re mistaken.

    Really. Tell me more about how I’m making an unfounded slippery slope argument even as you prove that I’m right.

    There’s no slippery slope involved in voting for Trump and what we have now as a result of Trump winning. It was all foreseeable – what you saw and knew about Trump is exactly what you’re getting. Exactly the same slope as advertised.

    Instead, your Antifa heroes showed up and started beating people up. Then they blocked the roads and got themselves hit by a car.

    Where is your evidence that it was clearly just one side who started it? There’s plenty of video evidence showing Nazis attacking those protesting them.
    They got themselves hit by a car? Well then I guess the Nazis got their faces in the way of whatever the anti-racism protesters were aiming at them then, if you want to try that horseshit.
    I never said they were heroes.

    The bottom line is that your champions showed up to brutally attack demonstrators who had a legal right to be there and made everything worse.

    Evidence of that unqualified bold claim? Are you going to point me to white supremacist websites or Trump?

    Why don’t you understand the pointlessness of this?

    You don’t actually seem to see the larger point, which is the consistent enabling of these fucktards by your lying shithead of a POTUS. Where is the leadership? Hiding behind “ah well, free speech, they started it” only gets you so far.

    You might hate Trump, but as far as I’m concerned, he’s a better man than you are because he acknowledges that the violence on both sides is unacceptable. You’re aligning yourself with thugs.

    Trump has LITERALLY aligned himself with a racist violent part of society that hasn’t been able to come out into the light for decades, for fucks’ sake.
    But that you’d say that Trump is a better man than me, despite that and everything else that makes him a horrific human being, really sums this all up. You might as well just put that as a post. The rest is just a weak and morally bankrupt attempt at justification.

    Think this through, please.

    Pu-lease.

  15. It’s also very telling that you completely fail to acknowledge that the counter-protesters would not have been there were it not for the neo-Nazi rally. It takes something special to turn what happened into how you’re portraying it.

  16. I see you took my advice and thought about things. It’s good to see that you’ve shifted from a position of simply “fuck Nazis” with all of the tacit approval of street violence that comes with it to “well, the Nazis started it!” I call it progress. I’m still not seeing the denunciation of fascist tactics that the Alt Left is using though.

    It’s a journey, not a destination, I guess.

    Where is your evidence that it was clearly just one side who started it?

    I didn’t say which side “started it.” What is noteworthy is that the rightwing crowd was there lawfully to attend a demonstration. Antifas DID show up armed and attack the rightwing protestors. They continued roaming the area and assaulting rightwing protestors after the police ordered the area cleared.

    You want links that show the mindless aggression that your boys have? Here’s someone who was assaulted by Antifa who isn’t even white, much less a white supremacist:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/15/antifa-assaults-black-conservative-student-vigil-c/

    A female journalist from the Hill was punched in the face:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4785564/Reporter-punched-face-Charlottesville-rally.html

    And a journalist from a local news affiliate had his head busted open by Antifa, possibly with a baseball bat:

    http://wtvr.com/2017/08/14/cbs-6-journalist-attack-richmond-protest/

    These were innocent people, not Nazis at all, who were attacked by a bunch of thugs who showed up to fight. Nothing else.

    There’s plenty of video evidence showing Nazis attacking those protesting them.

    You’re right. Problem is that I’m the only one denouncing both the Nazis and the Antifas. It’s almost as if I’m the only one who thinks brutally assaulting people is wrong or something when both sides do it. Gee, if only you could bring yourself to denounce Left Wing violence with manly firmness. You still haven’t.

    In fact, Trump has repeatedly condemned the white supremacists. He has condemned Fields. The fact that you ignore it or make bitchy comments about how he didn’t say it early enough or loud enough or whatever the fuck you people want doesn’t invalidate it.

    Trump has decried extremist violence from both sides. You tacitly support it when it’s your buddies doing it. You’re sure as hell not denouncing it and for that, you should be ashamed of yourself.

    Do you care anything about the fact that innocent people were assaulted at this rally by Antifa? Or are they just collateral damage you’re happy to accept in the course of egging on violent conflict in my country because you don’t like the president we elected?


    It’s also very telling that you completely fail to acknowledge that the counter-protesters would not have been there were it not for the neo-Nazi rally.

    Again: the Nazis had the legal right to be there and had obtained the proper permit. It’s very telling that you don’t seem to care that the Alt Left who showed up to commit mayhem were carrying out multiple illegal activities in the form of protesting without a permit, refusing to comply with the instructions of the police to leave, blocking city streets, and assaulting people.

    Trump says they’re wrong. You don’t seem to think so. Trump is making you look like a disgrace. Why don’t you just acknowledge that political violence is wrong, both sides were at fault, and Nazis look like complete dinks with tiki torches? It’s better if you disassociate yourself from this. The violence from both sides is going to get worse and you shouldn’t want to be seen as approving of it when it comes from the Left.

  17. Political violence is bad, on both sides.

    There I said it.

    Bigger topic. Thrill, don’t you think it’s fucked that 36 years after Indiana Jones fought them, and 72 years after my grandfather fought them, that Nazism is such a large movement in the US? That there’s a large swathe of people who want to ethnic cleanse the US. This weekend they clashed with a group that didn’t want the US to be ethnic cleansed, and it got violent. But wasn’t it weird that the President didn’t immediately disavow the Nazis? Even after they killed an American? Reckon we should do something about the rise of Nazism in the US? Or not?

  18. Let me get this straight. According to you, the entire political right bears culpability for the actions of one racist person killing an innocent, yet there is no culpability whatsoever for the left in the violence of Antifa, BLM, and allies?

    And fuck those who can’t differentiate Nazis with BLM

    Near as I can tell, you’re the one not able to properly differentiate, aside from a very black-and-white view. Clearly there is a correct side when you’re talking about the general aims of the sides–white nationalism vs. anti-racism. But there is definitely guilt and culpability from both sides in causing this violence. I’m not sure why this is such a difficult concept for people to grasp.

    The fact that one racist person killed an innocent is no justification to excuse the violence on the leftist side.

  19. Is it really a large movement? I don’t think so.

    In looking at the initial photos coming out, you see things like ” rel=”nofollow”>this one, which make the white nationalist movement seem more intimidating.

    But then I saw ” rel=”nofollow”>this image, a zoomed out view of the torchbearers surrounding Jefferson’s statue. I count maybe 2-300 there.

    If it was a local group, that would be one thing, but these people came from all over the country to attend this rally, and a few hundred is the most they could muster.

    This is not a “large movement” nor a “large swathe” of people. It is the remnants of a failed ideology invigorated by the trend of identity politics.

  20. So everyone who voted for him also owns this and shares responsibility in it.

    Bullshit. Then everyone who voted for Obama owns and shares responsibility for drone bombings of innocent people. Not to mention the astronomical rise in cost of my health insurance – who do I send the bill to?

  21. “Nazi” does not equal “white nationalist right-wing idiot” no matter how many swastika flags they have. Remember that Hitler’s rise to power was largely due to a socialist platform.

  22. It’s amazing to watch the liberal media try to pin this entire situation on Trump. I watched an interview on CNN with some of the left-wing protesters, where the commentator basically asked one cursory question about how they are feeling after the tragedy, then the second question was something along the lines of, “Seeing as Trump encourages this type of behavior in racists, how does that make you feel?” It was absolutely asinine. They’ve abandoned all semblance of an impartial view, and now look for any excuse to blame Trump for anything and everything.

    The story isn’t about domestic terrorism, or the idiotic racist moron who committed this heinous act, but about Trump, and how he’s at fault.

  23. Thank you for that first point, ilovecress. Once we acknowledge that violence is unacceptable, we can discuss these issues. I know some of you guys might think I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time talking about it here, but that’s only because I think it’s essential that we get a consensus on it before we can go any further.

    Moving past it, you’re opening a deep rabbit hole with this (you’re good at that, you know) and it’s probably worthy of its own post. I’ll try to keep it within scope here for now.

    The first thought I have is that you’re painting with too broad a brush. This isn’t a Nazi thing. Nazis are and always have been a fringe in the US and always will be. They’re championing a foreign “-ism” with weird symbolism and pagan religious practices. Americans don’t like that noise. It’s also why they’ve traditionally been hostile to Communism. It’s violent, weird, alien, and has nothing to do with our culture or traditions.

    No, I’m not terribly worried about Nazis. Their message isn’t selling now any more than it ever has and you shouldn’t simply say that what’s happening in America now is that it’s being swept up in Nazism. Admittedly, I’ve been throwing the word “Nazis” around on this thread for the sake of simplicity, but that’s only because I didn’t want to dig in to the larger issue. But now that you’re asking about it directly, I will.

    Trump is not a Nazi. He doesn’t have any affinity for their beliefs that I’ve ever been able to detect nor does he speak their language. Not German, I mean he doesn’t use the same jargon or echo any of their concepts I’m familiar with. He’s not a white supremacist either. Again, if you go through his history and statements and even his family life with his Jewish daughter and son-in-law, it doesn’t add up.

    Why doesn’t he denounce this stuff to your full satisfaction? I don’t know. Quite frankly, I don’t think anything he says really matters to people who already think he’s Literally Hitler. I mentioned after the Olathe shooting and the Jewish cemetery desecrations that he needed to do a better job of getting in front of the narrative and denouncing those events early based on available facts, but he’s made it clear that he prefers to take his time and craft his message before saying anything in a knee-jerk reaction like his predecessor did.

    We all just have to accept the fact that Trump is going to tell us what he wants to, when he wants to. That’s obviously the way he’s going to do it. If he denounces those things that need to be denounced, it’s all I care about. I’m not going to participate in any counterproductive quibbling about him not saying it soon enough or saying it like he meant it or whatever.

    So what is it then? I’ll probably catch hell from some people on the Right for saying this, but here goes.

    Trump DOES overlap with white nationalists. They do speak the same language that he does and I think he does have sympathy for them. These are everything from your Kekistanis on /pol/ to a significant chunk of the militia movement and even a swath of mainstream conservatives.

    Keep in mind that unlike Nazis or the Klan or other extremists, they’re not violent. Or at least they don’t necessarily need to include violence to achieve their goals. They aren’t going to lynch blacks or put Jews in ovens. That’s not what they want.

    Instead, these are people who believe that predominately white, Christian males and their concepts and traditions and ideals are what have made America exceptional. They may or may not think that blacks, and Latinos, and Asians, and Muslims can live in the US and contribute to it, but they flatly reject multiculturalism and political correctness.

    Their perspective is that these other cultures are supplanting America’s culture and that it will fundamentally change America for the worse. It’s not so much about hating other people, it’s about not wanting “your” own people to become marginalized. They were even chanting in Charlottesville, “You will not replace us!” They’re not all hate-filled monsters. They’re scared. They see their country turning into something it’s not and they don’t like it.

    These are normal people who turn on the television and see traditional white males being constantly vilified. They hear about college campuses running amok with terms like “white privilege” and see police officers being attacked in riots and they don’t understand it. Somebody mentioned in this thread that he hates it when BLM is compared to these people. I think that’s a mistake. They’re reacting to BLM. It’s not exactly BLM’s fault and that everything BLM wants is evil, but it’s happening as a counter to them, partially.

    Trump either genuinely agrees with these people that America’s traditional culture is being supplanted or at the minimum, he is cynically tapping into it for political gain. His stance on immigration, crime, terrorism, and even the politically incorrect things he tweets are all consistent with a rejection of multiculturalism in favor of traditional white America. For my part, I think he sincerely believes in it.

    Either way, whether he believes in it or is just exploiting these sentiments, these sentiments have existed among many white Americans for a long time. Trump didn’t create them out of thin air and if he didn’t exist, somebody else would be voicing them from somewhere on the Right. Trump is just really, really good at articulating them openly. No other Republican ever has, but many do agree with him in their hearts. That’s why I called it “ballsy.” He said what a lot of Republicans think but don’t say out loud. They don’t even like to think it because they’re afraid it means they’re racist.

    You must understand how perfectly Trump addressed these people at that press conference. It was sublime. If you’re all wrapped up in “NAZI!”, you miss it. He spoke about how not wanting statues removed was because we don’t our traditions eliminated from memory. Then he asked if we were supposed to start pulling statues of George Washington since he owned slaves. I’m telling you: THAT reasonated with mainstream Americans, not just conservatives. The reason is that many of us believe that the far Left will eventually do it.

    I agree with everything Trump said. I also don’t think a statue of Lee should be removed simply because he fought for the Confederacy. Anyone who knows anything about him knows that he freed his own slaves, was very reluctant to take up arms against the United States, he fought honorably, and—importantly—he played a major role in national healing after the war was over. He’s a part of our shared history and our struggle and he shouldn’t be erased. I can say that Trump was right to point that out and it doesn’t make me a Nazi or a white supremacist, does it?

    To get to the meat of your question, no, Nazism is not on the rise but a more outspoken and “woke” traditional white culture movement is and Trump is its leader. I’m not entirely sure how much more powerful it can get or what it will eventually morph into, but that’s what it is.

  24. he’s made it clear that he prefers to take his time and craft his message before saying anything in a knee-jerk reaction like his predecessor did.

    Unless he’s got a quippy tweet to send out.

  25. No, not even then. His tweets are calculated. Every now and then he misfires, but he does in fact put out the message he means to put out.

  26. Then he asked if we were supposed to start pulling statues of George Washington since he owned slaves. I’m telling you: THAT resonated with mainstream Americans, not just conservatives. The reason is that many of us believe that the far Left will eventually do it.

    THIS

  27. For the most part I would agree with that. But considering how his administration has had to respond multiple times as a result of his tweets…I don’t think he thinks all of them through as much as you might think. They just consistently fit the narrative he wants portrayed, so even if they have to backtrack on his tweets, they are able to obfuscate, or put the blame elsewhere.

  28. His messaging is what he means. I don’t think that many within the Administration really get him though, particularly the establishment politicians and appointees.

    Your typical Beltway Republican is a spineless pussy who cares too much about what the media wants them to be. Trump’s communications consistently jibe with his base–with the GOP establishment’s base too even if they won’t acknowledge it–and the minute he says things that prompt a media backlash, the Beltway types piss their pants.

    Trump’s instincts about the GOP base and how to address them are correct. It’s because his messaging is so effective that the media flips out over it, particularly when he is turning the base on them.

  29. After reading through this shit show all I’d really like to add is that the president has reaffirmed what a weak and powerless waif he is by cucking himself over the admonishment of the neo-nazi terrorist attack. He isn’t “wise” for holding off his responses, he was fighting his advisers and improved the “violence on all sides” statement right on the microphone. Then he cucked himself again by reversing his first statement only to then reverse it again because he wasn’t finished cycling himself.

    Here was an instance where all he had to do was denounce the act singularly, and he could’ve then moved on to defend the white separatists, treasonous nazis, kkk, kekistanis, pols and whatever other repugnant sub culture he’s nurtured under his wing in a separate distinct statement.

    No. He was too weak to do this. It’s not about apologizing long or hard enough it’s about the lack of decisiveness and cowardly sucker punching this president is known for. Which sincere statement are we supposed to believe? The first, second or third? Two of the three? That indecision and waffling is the slinky cowardly behavior that epitomizes how he handles his business and why he is not a fit leader.

    He’s losing his ceos, which I will remind you that they were o oh there to do nothing and simply lend their name to his agenda. An easy gig that through the consequences of his cowardly and indecisive actions they’ve all told him to (rightly) fuck off.

    Donald trump is not a nazi, white nationalist, or anything of the sort. He’s a spineless cuckold and the most ineffective leader of the 21st century, and possibly the weakest and most ineffective leader to ever enter the White House.

    This latest gaffe might very well be his Custer’s last stand of cowardly leadership moves, as social progression is something baby boomers, the largest block of voting suckers the last election cycle who took his side are going to take personal offense to this weak kneed micro penis president shitting all over the civil rights movement with his indecisiveness and there is a martyr to trot out for the next round of elections.

    The rats in congress and the senate have already abandoned the ship. In a hundred years maybe we’ll find the boots of some idiotic republicans that insisted to go down with the ship like some eerie exploration of the titanic wreckage.

  30. I just shake my head when people who hate Trump and have refused to ever support him tell me that “THIS TIME HE HAS GONE TOO FAR AND NOW HE’S FINISHED!” Hell, I thought he was going to go down any day now because of Russia. Now he’s going to be imminently impeached because he says violence is bad. This is High Silliness, man.

    I have news for you: he isn’t going down.

    If you don’t understand what he was saying or why he said it, you don’t get why he won in the first place and why he’ll win again. You NeverTrump guys have never really tried to understand not just Trump, but the people who voted for him. I keep repeating it because it clearly hasn’t registered.

    Bitch and rant about what a bad guy Trump is as much as you like, I don’t care, but at least entertain the possibility for five minutes that he occasionally knows what he’s doing and is right about a topic now and then. The fact that we have a guy on this thread who can’t even acknowledge that politically-motivated terroristic violence is wrong because he’s afraid that he’ll end up agreeing with Trump on something is stunning.

    We get it. You guys think Trump’s an asshole. You want Trump out of the White House? Then start figuring out why people voted for him and maybe you’ll figure out how to convince people to not vote for him.

    Honestly, I think the hysterics people have been engaging over his statements shows just how accurately he hit the mark. Call it the Great Triggering.

  31. the most ineffective leader of the 21st century

    Not a very high bar you’re setting there when all you’ve got is Obama and Bush to go by.

  32. Considering that this “weak and ineffective” leader just successfully persuaded Kim Jong Un to put his missiles away and pee sitting down for the rest of his life, I have to wonder what the news cycle would look like this week if we didn’t have an utterly corrupt partisan media bleating about 500 lousy unemployed white people in a park.

  33. The fact that we have a guy on this thread who can’t even acknowledge that politically-motivated terroristic violence is wrong because he’s afraid that he’ll end up agreeing with Trump on something is stunning.

    Of course politically-motivated violence is wrong. That should go without saying, FFS. I’ve spoken out many times on this, just not here because this place is new and I’ve had a hard time letting go of the the last place. But, yes, I know you have to pretend I support it as part of your bullshit racist-enabling narrative.

  34. I’m still not seeing the denunciation of fascist tactics that the Alt Left is using though.

    I gladly give you that redundant denunciation. I’m still not seeing the denunciation of the emboldenment, enablement, and promotion of racist fucks form you though. Just measly-mouthed justifications for Trump’s woeful leadership. You’re basing a lot of this on a evidence-free narrative of “but they started it” (while at the same time trying to claim you didn’t say that). You’re effectively become a Trump mouth-piece, even taking on his exact language, while at the same time trying really hard to pretend you’re not. Trump makes me look like a disgrace? If that’s really how far down the rabbit-hole you’ve gone, there really is little hope.

  35. Hey, ilovecress definitively said out of the gate that political violence is wrong no matter who does it. I thanked him and opened up (what I think is) a good discussion with him.

    You, on the other hand, made me go digging for links to prove that violent extremists are violent.

    You’re being unfair to me. Go back through my comments and note that I thought you were putting yourself in a bad box and I was trying to give you an honorable way out of it before really laying into you. I don’t believe that you’re a violent person and I wanted to give you a chance to clear the record. Which you now have.

    I promise not to use you as a punching bag at this blog, but you have to meet me halfway. You know, I don’t want to destroy or humiliate you. Instead, I want the same thing from you I want from everyone else: thoughtful, funny, and enlightening discussion. If you start by keeping that in mind when you first start to argue with me on something, I’ll read what you have to say and offer the best counterpoints I can.

    You dick.

  36. I’m still not seeing the denunciation of the emboldenment, enablement, and promotion of racist fucks form you though.

    I’m opposed to racist fucks. I denounce neo-Nazis and white supremacists and anyone else who would harm, oppress, or mistreat any person simply because he or she is different.

    My oldest daughter is biracial. Her birth mother is black. Were the racist fucks ever to prevail, they would hang me from a lamp post for race mixing or diluting the bloodline or whatever they call it. I have no desire to see them prosper on personal grounds, beyond political ones.

    They are destructive. They would sink all of humanity into a twisted sewer of slavery and death in a single day if they ever took control. I wish them nothing but failure at every turn. White supremacists have no support from me. I condemn them and their stupid beliefs.

  37. Ok, I’l try again in a different way, as requested.
    I hold that your position gives racism the space and ability to grow and prosper. That most people who harbour racist tendencies actively fight against them, or simply don’t let them be known, because of the social pressure against discriminatory behaviour, which is never anything to be taken for granted (given the history of racism, not just in the US), and is always led from the top. I hold that when it comes to discrimination, groups need to be called out for what they are, and there just be no moral relativism, and certainly no attempt at evidence-free claims to make these people (who clearly come looking for a fight) poor innocent free-speech victims.

  38. And that your equivocating position (and Trumps win, with the inevitable rise in the promotion of discrimination) weakens that social pressure and produces a society that is more discriminatory and biased across the board. I think you are concentrating on the detailed narrative that suits your wider narrative, while ignoring a much more important wider narrative.

  39. Yes, this is what I was hoping for.

    Look, this is what Trump has had to say on the matter:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6PFZNruJes

    There is absolutely no daylight between my position, Trump’s, and yours on this, is there? You want racism called out from the top, there it is.

    The ONLY way you could have a problem with what he said there is if you simply don’t believe him. If you don’t, there’s nothing anyone can do to convince you otherwise. We have nowhere to go from there.

    I’ve never said that racists shouldn’t be subject to social pressure where their beliefs can be considered harmful. Only that they should not meet with violence. It’s much better for everyone to see who they really are and realize that they’re pathetic and inept. They are a tiny minority for a reason. Nobody wants to be like them.

    They’re failed little men and they try to compensate for their failures by latching on to what they think are greater causes. Let’s let them put themselves out in front of the world and show it. Discredit them.

    Don’t misinterpret anything I’ve said to be that they should be considered free speech victims. Do understand that I do not tolerate politics as war. Call it a slippery slope argument if you want to, but once we establish that it is acceptable to wage vigilante justice against people with unpopular opinions, there will be putting the cork back in that bottle.

    The rule of law is what I care most about, not anyone’s hurt feelings.

    Now since you’ve been a good sport today, CM, I’m going to give you a gift. Enjoy!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbkwH2XwC7E

  40. I’m not equivocating about anything. As zoom noted somewhere above, we are in a time dominated by identity politics. Discrimination already exists and some of it is against whites under the law or bias is in favor of minority groups.

    A Trump supporter can be totally non-racist and ask why this is. He can have absolutely no animus against black or brown people, while still thinking that they shouldn’t get preferences in hiring or college admissions.

  41. There is no ‘reply’ button under your response, so not sure where to put this….

    Look, this is what Trump has had to say on the matter:

    Unfortunately this is just not credible as it’s clearly Trump reading remarks prepared by his aides off the screen. Contrast his entire body language with when he’s talking like he means it. He’s not someone who has had to bother with moderating the way he delivers, that’s (apparently) a ‘feature’, not a ‘bug’.

    And also because it’s inconsistent (contrary even) with the way Trump dealt with race (and to some extent violence) through his entire public life (including right back with his old man).

    Just not credible, and I think anyone paying attention should be able to clearly see that. And it seems there are plenty of people on the right who agree, so this isn’t just a partisan or ideological or party or tribal thing.

    If you don’t, there’s nothing anyone can do to convince you otherwise. We have nowhere to go from there.

    His consistent history gives him nowhere to go. I honestly don’t know how anyone could believe him. It makes it blindingly obvious that he’s just phoning this one in. And then, presumably as part of the 11-dimensional chess game, he gives a surreal press conference where he reverts back to who he is.

    I’m still not sure where you’ve got this ‘fact’ that it was the anti-facist / anti-racist protesters that were responsible for the violence from. You seem to be maintaining this definitive basic position that everything would have been fine if the Nazis hadn’t been attacked.

    Thanks for the video.

  42. Hey, you finally get it. No it’s not a high bar to hurdle and this monumentally morally bankrupt dipshit can crawl over it.

  43. Eh. Like I said before. If you already think Trump is Literally Hitler, then it doesn’t matter what he says or when he says it. Still, it’s disingenuous for anyone to claim that he hasn’t renounced white supremacists when he has.

    Like I said, there’s nowhere else to go on that line of conversation.

    I’m still not sure where you’ve got this ‘fact’ that it was the anti-facist / anti-racist protesters that were responsible for the violence from. You seem to be maintaining this definitive basic position that everything would have been fine if the Nazis hadn’t been attacked.

    I said clearly that BOTH sides committed acts of violence. Been really clear about this. However, I have provided evidence of Antifa attacking people who were absolutely not Nazis. Three links already and I have one more here.

    Can you produce any evidence of the Right Wing protesters attacking anyone who wasn’t directly confronting them?

  44. I’ve been throwing the word “Nazis” around on this thread for the sake of simplicity, but that’s only because I didn’t want to dig in to the larger issue.

    Agreed – Terminology here might lead us astray, so let’s just use ‘alt-right’ to describe the coalition of White Supremacists/Racists/Nationalists/Neo Nazis etc? I know they aren’t the same, but for ease…

    No, I’m not terribly worried about Nazis. Their message isn’t selling now any more than it ever has and you shouldn’t simply say that what’s happening in America now is that it’s being swept up in Nazism.

    That’s because they’re not attacking you.

    In the past, say, year, I’ve been attacked online on a pretty much weekly basis by people identifying themselves as some flavour of alt-right. This happened possibly once or twice before. Most of the time it’s just online abuse, but they have also gone after my wife, and some of my friends. They even posted abuse on the wall of one of my recently deceased friends.

    Lots of my friends have been physically attacked. Just last month in London, a friend of mine was blinded in one eye by a gang of fascists who attacked him for being a black gay man.

    This isn’t meant to be a ‘poor me’ plea – and I definitely don’t have it that bad. It’s just to demonstrate that ‘dealing with harassment by Nazis’ is something that is now part of life – when it wasn’t a year ago. I guess the question is what’s changed in the past year?

    He doesn’t have any affinity for their beliefs that I’ve ever been able to detect nor does he speak their language. Not German, I mean he doesn’t use the same jargon or echo any of their concepts I’m familiar with.

    The alt-right seem to think so. And they say so explicitly. If Trump is only accidentally showing affinity for their beliefs or speaking their language, then he’d better clarify pretty quickly.

    I mean, you can see where they’re coming from. He was a leader of the birther movement. He called his platform ‘America First’. He didn’t disavow David Dukes endorsement. He hired the CEO of Breitbart (the declared home of the Alt-Right) as his chief strategist. There have been more than a few anti-Semitic snafus.

    IF this is all coincidence, then you’d expect the Trump administration to clarify. The fact that he doesn’t gives these people cover, and courage to do more than simply gather in online forums. That’s my theory as to why I have to deal with legit Nazis most weeks, when a couple of years ago I didn’t.

    They were even chanting in Charlottesville, “You will not replace us!”

    Also they were chanting ‘Jews will not replace us”.

    But you’re absolutely right. That’s the central tenet of the alt-right, that fear of being replaced. The fear that the traditional white culture is being supplanted by a multicultural one.

    But you know what? Civil Rights happened and it’s the law of the land. That’s going to change the culture. So you can’t have it both ways, you either accept all men are created equal and live in a culture that reflects that, or you say that some races aren’t equal, and play for a culture where ‘traditional’ (i.e. before Civil Rights) white culture rules.

    but he’s made it clear that he prefers to take his time and craft his message before saying anything in a knee-jerk reaction like his predecessor did

    I’m sorry, but, what? Is this what we really think now? Covefe anyone? Remember the story about how awful it was that Hillary took 24 hours and 15 aides to craft a tweet, and Trump was great because he tells it like it is? Sorry, can’t let you pivot to this talking point mate…

  45. Eh. Like I said before. If you already think Trump is Literally Hitler, then it doesn’t matter what he says or when he says it.

    And like I’ve said, you’d have to ignore a huge and consistent amount of counter evidence to pick one hostage-style statement and decide to hold that up as ‘the truth of what he thinks’. This isn’t matter of needing to think that Trump is Hitler, or even close to Hitler. It’s about taking into account the preponderance of evidence about who Trump is when considering that statement (again, which is sandwiched between entirely different language). And it’s disingenuous to try and suggest that it’s the person pointing this out that has the issue here.

    Still, it’s disingenuous for anyone to claim that he hasn’t renounced white supremacists when he has.

    And I say you are the one being disingenuous.

    I said clearly that BOTH sides committed acts of violence.

    But you’ve also said:

    The way Antifa behaved was terroristic. That should be clear. To me, it’s far less clear that Fields was out to commit an act of terrorism. I’m not saying it wasn’t, I’m just saying it’s not clear based on the circumstances or what evidence we know of so far.

    Antifa had been brutally beating everyone who was trying to leave the rally. They were also blocking roads. If Fields were placed into the situation where he panicked and tried to force his way past the blockade–even with a reckless disregard for life–then it isn’t terrorism and the behavior of Antifa is completely relevant.

    It’s not about “scorecard of violence”. It’s about how Antifa directly provoked violence and got violence in return. They showed up at what was a lawful and peaceful rally with the intention of causing mass violence. That they did that is what got Heyer killed.

    I.e. they started it, they are who got her killed. The Nazis were simply defending themselves from unprovoked attacks by those who are simply struggling cope with electoral defeats.

    I say those sort of definitive narrative claims need clear evidence. You’ve not provided any. You’ve posted links that don’t remotely provide clear evidence of what your actual claims are.

    Consistent with this, you also said:

    Instead, your Antifa heroes showed up and started beating people up. Then they blocked the roads and got themselves hit by a car.

    And

    What is noteworthy is that the rightwing crowd was there lawfully to attend a demonstration. Antifas DID show up armed and attack the rightwing protestors. They continued roaming the area and assaulting rightwing protestors after the police ordered the area cleared.

    Again, the Nazis are just there to attend a rally (so that apparently must be what happened), whereas the other side were there for violence (and so that apparently must be what happened).

  46. Nice one ilovecress, so much more articulate than what I’m producing.
    Yeah the claim that “he’s made it clear that he prefers to take his time and craft his message before saying anything in a knee-jerk reaction like his predecessor did” resulted in coffee being spat all over my keyboard because it’s so patently ridiculous and absurd. Thrill, you can’t possibly have typed that without a big grin on your face?!
    It’s the same thing again, the overwhelming weight of evidence strongly suggests the opposite.
    But then the same people who just don’t care about the fact that lying is like breathing to Trump, are not actually going to care, they’ll incorporate it into their ‘truth’.

  47. It also ignores the fact that he only has to put his missiles away and revoke his threats because Trump’s hawkish rhetoric made him pull them out and make threats in the first place. “Hey look, I might set your house on fire but I then put it out and you only lost two rooms at most, yeah I know, I’m amazing”

  48. Also, did he really ‘craft his message’ when in the last day he’s retweeted a guy who turned up at an anti-Trump protest with a ‘Rape Melania’ sign in an effort to discredit the protestors, and ALSO retweeted a carton showing a CNN reporter being run down by a train? Or were those retweets actually revealing knee-jerk reactions?

  49. Terminology here might lead us astray, so let’s just use ‘alt-right’ to describe the coalition of White Supremacists/Racists/Nationalists/Neo Nazis etc?

    No, I can’t do that. I distinguish between White Supremacists/Nazis AND Nationalists. The term Alt-Right comes from the Left specifically to lump the violent elements in with the rest and discredit them. It’s how you can paint Bannon as pretty much the same thing as a Nazi. He isn’t.

    For the purposes of this conversation, I won’t use Alt Right. Instead, I’ll try to be specific about which group of losers I’m talking about.

    Lots of my friends have been physically attacked. Just last month in London, a friend of mine was blinded in one eye by a gang of fascists who attacked him for being a black gay man.

    Ah, see, in your original comment, you referred to Nazism in America. I can’t say how prevalent Nazism is in other countries. In the US, they’ve always been a tiny fringe for the reasons I described and I don’t see that changing.

    I mean, you can see where they’re coming from. He was a leader of the birther movement.

    Not racist and originally started by one of Hillary Clinton’s surrogates during the 2008 campaign.

    He called his platform ‘America First’.

    Not racist. Originally, it was actually centered on American isolationism in the 1940’s, before Pearl Harbor.

    He didn’t disavow David Dukes endorsement.

    He denounced David Duke in 2000 and multiple times during the 2016 campaign

    As I keep saying, you can believe him or not, but I’m not playing the mind reader game. He has made the denunciations and anyone who says he hasn’t is being dishonest.

    He hired the CEO of Breitbart (the declared home of the Alt-Right) as his chief strategist.

    Again, you’re conflating the Leftist-created term “Alt Right” with “racist”. I dispute it.

    There have been more than a few anti-Semitic snafus.

    And yet he seems genuinely happy that his wife married a Jewish man and converted to Judaism. He’s also very pro-Israel. Those are things that would get you kicked out of the KKK.

    But you know what? Civil Rights happened and it’s the law of the land. That’s going to change the culture. So you can’t have it both ways, you either accept all men are created equal and live in a culture that reflects that, or you say that some races aren’t equal, and play for a culture where ‘traditional’ (i.e. before Civil Rights) white culture rules.

    Nothing in the Civil Rights Act is intended to establish a multicultural society. It makes discrimination illegal, but there’s no reason why we can’t have a monocultural society while still protecting the rights of minorities.

    I’m sorry, but, what? Is this what we really think now? Covefe anyone?

    Yeah, and I pointed out in a subsequent comment that when he misfires, it’s spectacular. The feud he ended up with against the Khan’s is a better example. Covefe was a typo that he decided to let go. When he attacked the Khan family, he was trying to make a point that Democrats couldn’t seriously entertain fundamentalist Islam AND women’s equality. It backfired and he spent two weeks digging the hole deeper before he went to the next crisis.

    However, I still maintain that he looks for the most appropriate words and tries to frame issues in a way that will benefit him and it works for him more often than not. There’s a ton of stuff on YouTube about the way he does this that provides proof that it’s deliberate.

    I would even suggest that he’s doing it now with “Alt Left”. As there are more violent rallies and disruptions, he’s going to use that term to lump all Democrats in with those elements.

    Feel free to dismiss it, but it would be astounding if he were influencing the debate simply by banging away on his keyboard like a monkey.

  50. Discrimination already exists and some of it is against whites under the law or bias is in favor of minority groups.

    This is only because the complete dominance of the white American male is under the greatest threat it’s ever been under, and previously the dominance was so great that ‘identity’ wasn’t even considered.

    Positive discrimination hasn’t occurred in a vacuum, it’s the result of something. Positive and negative discrimination aren’t the same thing.

  51. I know our thread format is weird, but please try to consolidate your comments into as few as possible if you can manage it. Not saying you have to do one comment for everything, just be mindful that I’m apt to miss stuff when you have many responses to me all spread out.

    It’s tricky for me to have to jump all over the page.

  52. Apologies, still trying to come to terms with the threading, as sometimes there isn’t a ‘reply’ button after the response I want to reply to, even though it’s the last comment in that thread.

  53. It’s screwy. Even I can’t keep track of which comments are attached where. The principle is to allow for multiple threads in a thread, I guess like reddit, but it can get messy.

  54. Fuck. His DAUGHTER married a Jewish man. I denounce myself.

    I didn’t catch it, if it makes you feel better. I think we all knew what you meant and our brains just did the translation.

  55. (Hoping I’m replying in the right place..)

    No, I can’t do that. I distinguish between White Supremacists/Nazis AND Nationalists. The term Alt-Right comes from the Left specifically to lump the violent elements in with the rest and discredit them.

    Firstly, the Alt-Right tag came from Richard Spencer (alternativeright.com) – so I don’t think it’s correct to insinuate the label is some sort of leftist plan to discredit anyone.

    Secondly, you missed the word ‘white’ before the word nationalist. And if we’re talking about ideology, rather than tactics, then there’s not a huge amount of difference between the two. I’d grant you that Nazis’ might be a separate category because of the anti-semitism.

    Ah, see, in your original comment, you referred to Nazism in America.

    I wasn’t clear – the vast majority of the hate I get is from US based White Supremacists, and a lot of my US based friends have been attacked. (I’m in the US quite a bit, so most of the time the online trolls think I’m American) – but yes, Britain was there a bit before you what with Brexit and all that.

    birther movement.
    Not racist and originally started by one of Hillary Clinton’s surrogates during the 2008 campaign.

    Yep. The conspiracy gained traction because of the size of his feet.

    Not racist. Originally, it was actually centered on American isolationism in the 1940’s, before Pearl Harbor.

    And was widely seen as anti-Semitic and Nazi sympathisers. Now we can argue the finer points of whether they technically were or not – but that fact that the phrase has ties to anti Semitism/Nazism at all means it can be seen as a signal to those sympathetic to those views.

    Again, you’re conflating the Leftist-created term “Alt Right” with “racist”. I dispute it.

    I’m interested to see where you’re getting this ‘left created’ thing from. I can find the Richard Spencer thing, and Paul Gottfried.

    Nothing in the Civil Rights Act is intended to establish a multicultural society. It makes discrimination illegal, but there’s no reason why we can’t have a monocultural society while still protecting the rights of minorities.

    It may not be intended, but it’s an outcome. And what does a monocultural society look like whilst still being constitutional?

    Fuck. His DAUGHTER

    Thank God for punctuation!

  56. We’re both wrong, apparently, though you’re less wrong:

    Paul Gottfried is the first person to use the term “alternative right”, when referring specifically to developments within American right-wing politics, in 2008.[5]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

    So I’ll acknowledge that instead of being Left Wing label used to lump the right wing into the Neo-Nazi fold that’s not correct. Instead, I’ll say that it was coined as a label by a neo-Nazi to legitimize his movement. Either way, I’d rather be specific. It’s a loaded term for the purposes of this conversation and bound to cause a lot of hair-splitting.

    Secondly, you missed the word ‘white’ before the word nationalist.

    I thought it was a given. You listed the options as “White Supremacists/Racists/Nationalists/Neo Nazis” so I just followed that. Not an attempt to mislead.

    And if we’re talking about ideology, rather than tactics, then there’s not a huge amount of difference between the two.

    Between Nazis and White Nationalists? I don’t agree on that. WN do overlap with White Supremacists to a large degree, but I still don’t agree that another guy who has some associations with WN like say, Ron Paul, is in any way an ideological Nazi.

    The key differences are that a Nazi believes in some kind of national socialist government structure and violent ends. WN can run the gamut from libertarian to conservative to anything from there.

    Now we can argue the finer points of whether they technically were or not – but that fact that the phrase has ties to anti Semitism/Nazism at all means it can be seen as a signal to those sympathetic to those views.

    Right. Just like how George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are now villains because they owned slaves.

    And what does a monocultural society look like whilst still being constitutional?

    I can’t say. I don’t think the Constitution speaks to culture, just law. For example, I think a cultural requirement for living in America is that one speak English. However, there’s nothing in the Constitution that mandates it.

    Thank God for punctuation!

    Yeah, I was careful enough to not compound my fail.

  57. You’re suggesting that any sort of confrontation (which is pretty much the definition of a counter-protest) is the start of the ‘violence’, and so anything in ‘reponse’ is defensive? Really? That seems rather convenient.

    How about all the people that were driven into, for a start? Are you still suggesting that was possibly a defensive move?

  58. Between Nazis and White Nationalists?

    Nope I meant between White Supremacists and White Nationalists. As I said, Nazis might be a seperate group due to the anti-semitism.

    The key differences are that a Nazi believes in some kind of national socialist government structure and violent ends

    Yep. And the similarities are the whole ‘master Aryan race’ thing.

    Right. Just like how George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are now villains because they owned slaves.

    I’m not sure I follow. My point is that the ‘America First’ thing was seen by White Nationalists as a specific appeal to them. Now either Trump didn’t know this, or he did and didn’t care. Or it was a specific appeal to them.

    As for the Jefferson/Washington thing – no one has more experience of wrestling with what history to revere, and which not to than us Brits. In my opinion, it depends on what the monument is commemorating. If the Jefferson monument was of how great it was that he owned slaves, then, yeah it should go. But that’s not what it’s commemorating. A great example of how the left can completely ruin a winning hand……

  59. Ugh. If it’ll make you quit bugging me on Twitter, I’ll see if we can get this resolved tonight.

    Unite the Right guys: Bunch of antagonistic thugs. Been having brawls at protests in San Jose, Berkely, and other areas with Antifa. Like to fight Antifa much.

    Unite the Right guys get permit to have rally at Charlottesville park with statue. They not want statue taken down. They know Charlottesville liberal town with lots of students and much Antifa they can fight. They like to fight Antifa much. Some bring weapons to fight Antifa good.

    Antifa guys like fight Unite the Right. They organize and some show up with weapons so they can fight good. Don’t bother get permit.

    Many Unite the Right guys show up knowing they will get to fight Antifa guys they hate. Antifa predictably show up. They fight.

    Antifa attack two journalists and a black conservative student and a bunch of other people who not with Unite the Right. They really like fight and can’t tell Nazi from normie. I provide links proving this. You not provide any links show Unite the Right attack anyone not actually confronting them. I sad.

    Police decide they not able to control demonstration. Order Unite the Right to leave park. Enact state of emergency. Antifa not leave area as ordered by police. Instead remain in area and assault Unite the Right guys whether they are trying to leave or fighting.

    Antifa guys block traffic. This illegal and dangerous. One Unite the Right guy leaving area. He sees Antifa and counter-protesters standing in road. Not know why, but he drive car into Antifa guys and counter-protesters.

    Antifa guys who have weapons immediately attack Unite the Right sports car. Get run over by Unite the Right guy. He flees area and gets arrested. One lady who get hit died.

    Reason why Unite the Right sports car driver ram into Antifa and counter-protesters not known by me. Charges are two degree murder. That mean they don’t think he deliberately plan to do it.

    I concluding that Unite the Right guys thugs who have lawful right to protest show up and some guys want to have fight with Antifa. Because thugs. Antifa guys also showed up to fight Unite the Right guys and hurt other people even if not Unite the Right thugs. Therefores, I say both sides violent assholes. Both bad and wrong.

    I say repeatedly both sides bad and cause violence. You big time triggered that I say this and call it outrageous I say Antifa also cause violence because show up for illegal protest and block street lead to big fight and people get hit by car.

    There you go. I really have no idea what your point is in disputing anything I’ve said unless you’re being ruthlessly pedantic.

    Once again in plain and relatively non-condescending English.

    I said in the top post: “No, I’m sorry to say that it was pretty imaginable. Predictable even, considering how these Antifa/BLM and White Nationalist/Alt-Right/Whatever fools both keep escalating their mutual hatred with relish at every new opportunity.”

    Got that? I said both sides hate each other and have been escalating.

    “Nazis are and always have been thugs. If street violence is what Antifa and its ilk wants, they’ll find plenty of it and more people will die in the course of whatever it is they think they’re trying to accomplish.”

    That’s really clear. I note that Nazis like to fight and that if e showed up looking for a fight they’d get one. They did. That’s indisputable but we’re somehow still arguing about it.

    “The Right sees the Left’s calls for violence not only as a challenge, but also a dream come true. ”

    Again, this emphasizes that when Antifa shows up to where right-wingers are holding rallies, BOTH of them know and expect that there will be violence. Get it? Obviously there were participants in Unite the Right who wanted violence.

    “Inevitably, whenever left-wing protesters start punching “Nazis”, they end up punching perfectly normal white people who aren’t involved in the Alt-Right nor do they agree with anything it stands for.”

    This did happen and I provided you with four links as proof. It happened because Antifa showed up looking for a fight and they ended up attacking normal people because there weren’t enough Nazis to fight.

    Some of my comments:

    “If this is about terrorism, the terroristic violence of Antifa was exactly what led to this happening.”

    This was in response to someone calling the ramming attack “terrorism”. For clarity, I define terrorism as the use of premeditated violence to advance political or ideological goals. It is unknown it Fields had premeditation. The Antifas who showed up armed and attacked both Unite the Right protesters AND NORMAL PEOPLE were engaging in terroristic acts.

    Note that I DO NOT include peaceful counterprotesters under the Antifa umbrella. But if you’re claiming that Antifa wasn’t there to fight as much as many of the Unite the Right guys were, you’re deluded.

    “The White Nationalists had a legal right to assemble and to be where they were. Antifa and the rest showed up with no permit and armed with baseball bats and other weapons. Once the WN were kicked out of the park by the police, they were attacked by Antifa.”

    This is unquestionably true. All of it.

    “It’s about how Antifa directly provoked violence and got violence in return. They showed up at what was a lawful and peaceful rally with the intention of causing mass violence.”

    There are no reports of violence against any people by any attendee of Unite the Right except where they were directly confronted by Antifa or counter-protestors. I have given you all day to prove otherwise and you’ve given me NOTHING. Had Antifa not shown up and given Unite the Right the fight they wanted, there would have been no violence.

    Again: you have provided no proof that Unite the Right engaged in any violence except with the people who illegally showed up to confront them. The only exception was the murder of Heyer, but we still don’t know if that was a deliberate act of violence or a reckless attempt to escape. On the other hand, Antifa absolutely deliberately attacked people who were not involved with Unite the Right.

    Now here’s what and I’m NOT saying. Before you go digging around trying to find something that contradicts me and wasting your time, I’m going to say that this is my big takeaway from the matter.

    The Unite the Right protest was intentionally provocative. Antifa shouldn’t have shown up. Counter protesters should have gotten a permit. Police should have kept the peace.

    But let’s face it: Unite the Right KNEW Antifa was going to show up, knew there was going to be a fight, and they fought.

    I am not in any way saying that the Unite the Right guys were having a cheerful soiree in the park when the mean old Antifas showed up and suddenly started beating them up for no reason. They don’t get to claim self-defense. I don’t believe that, I’m not saying that.

    What I am saying is that had Antifa not shown up to a legal protest to have the fight that BOTH SIDES WANTED VERY MUCH TO HAVE, Heyer would still be alive.

    No, Unite the Right are not the victims. I am fully acknowledging that and I’m making sure you have no basis to misinterpret anything else I’ve said.

    You should acknowledge that Antifa did show up, many of them with weapons, with the intention of violence. They knew that Unite the Right would be violent, so Antifa showed up to be violent. They were both violent and they both had elements that showed up planning to be violent. Violence ensued and at least one death.

    In my post above, I concluded that law enforcement needs to control these situations because BOTH SIDES “cannot be trusted to restrain themselves.” Right Wingers are going to hold protests in urban areas because they know they’ll get to have fights with the Antifas who will also show up wanting to fight.

    That’s it. That’s all there is.

  60. I’m saying that “America First” is now suddenly considered racist by the same people who are now suddenly starting to claim that revering Washington and Jefferson is racist too.

    People who look for racism everywhere will certainly find an abundance of it if they dig in history.

  61. FYI I’m going to look into how to improve the comments. Right now they are limited to 5 deep and for some reason with a recent update the reply button isn’t showing once you hit that level.

  62. Your view is an entirely fair and legitimate one shared by many, but there are a lot of others who also legitimately don’t see it that way.

    I, for one, think that to make race less of an issue, we should probably make race less of an issue. Discrimination based on race is unfair, whether its directed against or in favor of minorities. Creating and sustaining political divisions based on racial identity is corrosive to our culture, alienating each other and countering goals of equality.

    Forces on the left are far more culpable for these racial divisions than the right, because they are the ones who benefit. Chaos is a ladder.

  63. Given what I have read and heard from news sources, there are way more racist and white supremacist people in the country than most people realize. Trying to affix blame on “the right” or “the left” is hopelessly naive. These racial divisions have long roots that go back for centuries. It has nothing to do with a statue or flag or monument. Those are props to project an emotional reaction onto so that they can defend it as it comes under attack, and it always does. This back and forth has been at play for a very long time; it is just now it is on open display. Thrill will probably agree with me that this has more to do with it being a Fourth Turning. Trump-“ism” is merely a symptom of a larger problem with an utter meltdown in our ability to communicate and solve problems. These problems will continue for another 10-15 years.

    Most people here know that I have lived my adult life in the deep south, Atlanta itself is a melting pot but once you leave the area inside I-285 and enter the suburbs things get blurry. Leave the suburbs and you will find all the racism you can stand and more again. It isn’t because of Trump or Obama or other public figure, it is because they were raised that way. Throwing off the racist shackles and calling it out for its evil is akin to dishonoring their parent, grandparents, etc. We aren’t going to fix these problems today, next week or next election. In time we will cork the genie in the bottle until the next uprising as people are again shocked that their are racists among us.

  64. Whatever we are and were, it’s changing fast. I can’t believe how fast events are moving now.

    We won’t recognize this country by the end of this decade. I don’t know if it’ll be for better or for worse, but it’s happening and we can’t stop it.

  65. He didn’t disavow David Dukes endorsement.

    What???

    https://youtu.be/da9rV5Qb3F0?t=7m22s

    IF this is all coincidence, then you’d expect the Trump administration to clarify.

    They have…repeatedly.

    The fact that he doesn’t gives these people cover, and courage to do more than simply gather in online forums.

    The fact that the media doesn’t talk about his response to things when they don’t jive with the narrative they are trying to paint is more the point. The fact that you haven’t heard those clarifications in the media sources you watch/read just points more towards the bias of those sources than anything else.

    So the media only covers the parts that are negative of Trump, and don’t cover his clarifications or repudiations (hell, you just said he didn’t disavow Duke’s endorsement when he did multiple times, making this point for me), ergo the media is responsible for the resurgence of white supremacists.

  66. CNN is so far off the deep end.

    CNN host Wolf Blitzer said Thursday there would be questions if the Barcelona terror attack involving a van crashing into a group of people was a “copycat” of what happened in Charlottesville, Va.

    Yeah, they must have gotten the idea from this idiot white guy, not the plethora of previous deadly attacks all over Europe that have involved driving cars into crowds by terrorist whackjobs. smh

  67. It also ignores the fact that he only has to put his missiles away and revoke his threats because Trump’s hawkish rhetoric made him pull them out and make threats in the first place.

    Sometimes I wonder if you just like to make shit up to see if anyone notices. Even that parody of a news organization, CNN, outlines a more accurate history than your bullshit statement. No, no, clearly NK didn’t do anything to provoke the world since Trump’s inauguration. Trump’s hairpiece is clearly to blame.

  68. I live outside the 285 beltway and your comment is horseshit. I find much more racism within concentrated cities than out here in the country. In my little town all colors go to the same church. We all eat together. We all help each other.

    Your opinion on racism belies your bias against country folk. We must be simpletons and therefore racists. Just like you comment about Obama only kidding around with Fox News all the while he was wiretapping one of their journalists only goes to show you can’t see beyond your own biases.

    Believe me, most major cities would agree that racial distrust there is much higher than out here in the sticks outside of 285. Geez I can’t believe some things people write. Just look at the news and see which cities have high racial incidents, riots and bigotry.

    Since we’re just going to use personal opinions, my minority brothers and sisters that have moved from the city to join us neanderthals out here in the country love the fact of personally knowing people and seeing much mess racial strife.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: