Amid the controversy over who was to blame, whether it was 'one side' or 'both sides' (or if, indeed, there were more than two sides!), I thought it would be useful to say what we should be for rather than just what we ought to be against.
1) Upholding the Constitution
2) Opposing Racism
3) Opposing Violence Against Innocents
4) Defending a Public Space for all Americans
The scorecard on this list for C'ville:
White Nationalists / KKK / Nazis: Wrong on points 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Antifa / Communists: Wrong on points 1 and 4. (Communists also have a bad history on 3, but we're just talking about this weekend.)
Nonviolent Peaceful Counterprotesters: Not in violation of any points, but ineffective on 4.
Government/Police: Complete abdication of duty on 3 and 4 at all levels until it was too late. Democratic mayor/governor opposed 1st Amendment on allowing the rally to happen at all; Republican President seems weak on 2 at times, though at other times he says appropriate things. If our government is taken as a whole, it failed on all four principles.
III% Militias: The only ones who did the right thing at every level, opposed radicals committed to destroying the Constitution or effecting racism, stopped attacks in real time while the police stood aside, and did so without resorting to significant force.
That ought to be a significant finding. It's not just 'both sides' of the protesters who did at least some things wrong, it's both sides of the government, too. The only good citizens were the nonviolent protesters and the III%ers.
9 comments:
I had not heard of the III% militias until I read this post. When I went looking for them, I found a number of different sites. Could you post a link, especially to what you mean when you say that they stopped attacks? Apparently my search skills are failing me today. Thanks.
There's an excerpt from an interview a few posts down.
"Yingling called both sides protesting in Charlottesville “jackasses” and said his group was there only to guard the First Amendment, which protects the right to free speech. He said that the response to his call to attend the rally was small, because other members feared being associated with white supremacists.
"Another militia whose members were reportedly present in Charlottesville as well, the “Three Percenters,” issued a “stand down” order in response to the protests, and denounced any members that chose to attend a neo-Nazi or white supremacy demonstrations, The Trace reported....
"Local law enforcement came under fire for its lackluster response to the violence. According to reporters from ProPublica, militia members from New York state played a more active role in breaking up altercations than the police."
Here's the full thing. I've heard the same thing through a left-leaning friend who knows a transgender activist who was on the scene; the activist reports that the III%ers encountered were just breaking up attacks on protesters and getting in between them and the Nazis.
Ah, thanks. I saw your original post but never saw the updates. And thanks for this list of what we should be for - it's easy for that to get lost in all the shouting.
I don't agree that Antifa was not wrong on Point 2. They're as racist as the skinhead gang (I'm using that older term loosely) who usurped the Confederate flag protesters' protest by presuming to participate. Antifa's racism flows from their manufacturing racist beefs where none exist, as they did in Charlottesville by dishonestly attributing the interlopers' racism to the legitimate protesters as a group.
I also don't agree with Antifa's innocence on Point 3. They wielded their screw-laden 2x4s against anyone and everyone in that fiasco who disagreed with them and their behavior; they weren't only focused on the skinheads. Although even had they been, their violence still would have been unwarranted.
Eric Hines
Also: there's no "right" or "left" for hate groups, regardless of which side they claim to be on. Hate groups don't have any side except their own, flat un-American side. I'd almost ask where HUAC is when we need it, but....
Eric Hines
I wouldn't use the term "skinhead" in this context. Skinheads are often anti-racist; one of my oldest friends is a long-time SHARP guy (Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice). There certainly are racist skins (here in Georgia, we have the Confederate Hammerskins), but the oldest and most well-rooted part of the movement isn't racist and in fact grew out of an alliance between British blue-collar workers and Jamaican immigrants working in the same jobs. That's why there is this tight connection between skinhead culture and Ska music.
You must have been raised in a different culture than I was--the Midwest, and my post-USAF years in the Southwest. My experience has never seen a skinhead who wasn't a neo-Nazi or a Nazi wannabe.
Eric Hines
I would say that the South is very plausibly a different culture from the ones you were raised in. But it may just also be that you never got close enough to the subculture to see the differences. They all wear shaved heads, boots, and bracers.
Until I was about 16, I'd never heard of Ska. I spent a number of my later teen and 20-something years hanging out with anti-racist skins in Atlanta, and punk rockers, and the like. I was surprised that those subcultures still existed at that time, but they certainly did, and still do.
Notice how so many people love the "Walking Dead" series. I got to thinking. The left is a handicapped race of beings like the undead, that continues its blind unreasoning march; heading for oblivion but hurting many real people along their way.
Post a Comment