Challenge yourself, New York Times. Ask first whether what you are doing is more Nazi-like.
You are amplifying violence, giving voice to the justification of violence, pointing at people as targets and amplifying the argument that they deserve violence, and seeming to preen at some delusion of being on the cutting edge. (And it's just sad that you think it's cool to see an internet meme and that there's something cool about Bruce Springsteen.)
There's also the irony of making a despicable character sympathetic.
The NYT article has a single author, Liam Stack:
Liam Stack covers breaking news and social and political issues for the New York Times express desk. An Arabic speaker, he worked for seven years as a Middle East correspondent, covering authoritarianism and revolution in the Arab world.Interestingly, given the internet-savvy posing, the NYT does not have comments enabled for this article. I wanted to blog about the reaction of NYT readers, but there's nothing there. Why?
Posts
135 comments:
Why?
Really???
The Red Front are no better than the Nazis.
It is NOT okay to punch a Nazi.
"“He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” (Thomas Paine)
The above axiom also clarifies why we should never torture anyone, (aside, of course, from the fact that torture is abhorrent and ethically grotesque).
I'm so old I remember when the ACLU and the left defended the right of Nazis to march in Skokie.
Richard Spencer is an idiot. I don't care whether he gets punched or not. It seems silly to make an article out of a bunch of Twitter snark and navel gazing. This is far more interesting. Apparently, even being a woman at the Women's March won't protect you if you're on the wrong side of history.
How about Feminazis. We need to hate something, don't we?
We can name them the AltGender. Then all rules are off.
No. Let's stick to hating the real Nazis. Soros and his private SS.
The left is always worrying about the right devolving into Nazis. They never consider the possibility that they themselves might be devolving into Red Guards or Jacobins. There's rather more evidence of that than of Nazism among Trump supporters. But thank God they were able to harass Scott Biao. That's how you fight Fascism in America.
Punching Nazis because of their beliefs is not OK. People enjoy punching Nazis because, when doing so, it is Indiana Jones or Captain America punching Nazi soldiers (or Super Soldiers).
Also, considering ROMNEY was considered a Nazi when he ran, and Scott Walker was made to look like Hitler, telling the left it is OK to punch Nazis is pretty much a carte blanche to assault anyone to the right of them.
"Is it ok to punch a Commie? Because Communists killed many times more people than the Nazis ever did." Just asking for a friend.
Given the loose definition of "Nazi" used by the left ("Nazi" = someone who disagrees with you), one man's Nazi is another man's patriot.
Much of what passes as discourse on the left is rendered meaningless by their (intentional?) abuse of the meaning of words.
Nobody should be assaulted for exercising their free speech rights.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion even if it doesn't make any sense.
Etc. Etc. I get that.
But you'd have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at that cork soaker taking a big shot to the face then running away.
A "Nazi" was a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party. We had this thing called World War II that was started by that party, and which resulted in the destruction of that party and a good part of Germany. The guy who got sucker-punched was not a Nazi. He was somebody whose politics the Times doesn't like. The more accurate way of formulating the issue is: Is it OK to punch someone if you strongly disagree with his/her politics?
I'd like to know what the Times's answer to that question is, because I have strong disagreements with some of the Times's political positions.
I'm still waiting to hear more details on the shooting outside the Milo speech in Seattle. Shooter claims self-defense ( which the police appear to find credible enough that he has been released pending further investigation. ) The shooter claims that the person shot was some sort of white supremacist.
The person shot appears to belong to an "anti-fascist" group that behaves an awful lot like a group of fascists.
"Richard Spencer is an idiot. I don't care whether he gets punched or not."
And thus, freedom dies.
The [class] diversitists are desperately trying to project their denial of individual dignity and their ambitions to claim monopoly power on the right. The female chauvinist faction enthusiastically embraces denying life unworthy in abortion chambers, and promoting the belief that women (men, and babies, too) are little more than the sum of their colorful parts.
"Attack on Alt-Right Leader Has Internet Asking: Is It O.K. to Punch a Nazi?"
Is it O.K. to punch a Nazi? That is not a brainteaser or a hypothetical question posed by a magazine on Twitter.
Actually, it is called a smear when you notice how the NYT carefully avoids calling Spencer a Nazi.
People shouldn't get punched on the street.
I'm not upset that Spencer got punched on the street -- but people shouldn't get punched on the street. As a general principle.
The more concerning part is that people who read the NYT don't see any difference between Richard Spencer and Trump, Bannon, Trump's cabinet, Trump voters, etc.
And I appreciate the media adopting the term "alt right" that Spencer likes to use to legitimize neo-Nazi beliefs, for no other reason than it helps them blur the distinction between actual Nazis like Spencer and people they just happen to dislike such as Trump, Bannon, Trump's cabinet, Trump voters, etc.
Another baby hunt.
"There's also the irony of making a despicable character sympathetic."
"For the record, Richard Spencer says he is not a Nazi. In an interview on Saturday, he said he was a member of the alt-right, which he calls “identity politics for white Americans and for Europeans around the world.”"
Althouse, what gives you, an admitted Obama voter, the right to call Richard Spencer despicable? I suppose you also think he is deplorable.
Nazi's aren't the only example of the left's support for violence. They won't be quite as vocal about the one identified by Birches since it doesn't have the right facts. But note the marchers' instinct to impede the attacked woman's effort to identify her attacker. The simple truth is these people support anything if it furthers their cause, including violence.
Far as I'm concerned if it's ok to punch Spencer (who far as I can tell has only said and written objectionable things, but has not been violent or incited violence himself) then it's ok to punch anyone you disagree with. How much you hate what he has to say is not the measuring stick--would these people cheering this take the same tack if someone sucker punched a BLM leader while he was being interviewed?
And that's what it was--a sucker punch. If that's how you "fight" then you're a cheap coward. And shame on you putting me in a position where I have to defend the Richard Spencers of the world!
Liam Stack should punch the fire-starter kid for obvious reasons, and then the kid should punch Liam for having a name I dislike.
Too bad FEMA didn't build all those concentration camps we heard tell of. There are plenty of Progressives who could use a stint in a camp.
Bob Boyd said...
"But you'd have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at that cork soaker taking a big shot to the face then running away."
Hmmm.... Worse than a Nazi, then. A "cork soaker". I assume that means someone who doesn't have a gun handy, right Uncle Bob? That was pretty stupid of Spencer, trying to give an interview on a public street in the nation's capital without carrying a gun.
Jupiter said...
Worse than a Nazi, then. A "cork soaker". I assume that means someone who doesn't have a gun handy,
I hadda look it up: "cork soaker" means homosexual.
Nazis fighting Nazis? There's a precedent for that.
Rick said . . . But note the marchers' instinct to impede the attacked woman's effort to identify her attacker.
What struck me about that bit was that the protester gals covered him up protectively and led him away, just as I suppose many an enabling girlfriend has done for a violent boyfriend. Calm him down, get him out of here before he gets his ass kicked or he gets arrested . . .
Cookie! You wrote something right for a change!
Of course it's OK to punch Nazis. Just so long as I am the one getting to define who is a Nazi.....
The German socialists started as a movement to improve German lives, which suffered corruption with the establishment of monopolies and practices, and progressed as [class] diversitists, social justice adventurists, abortionists (in chambers) and even Planners (e.g. clinical cannibals).
The Nazis were secular leftists run amuck, denying individual dignity, debasing human life, and consolidating power. They were social justice adventurists removing competing individuals, groups, and regimes, initially as a reaction to their treatment after World War I, but, unchecked, progressed to confront competing interests, notably other left-wing powers that impinged on their horizon.
I apologize if I offended anyone with my use of the term "cork soaker."
If I had it to do over again I would substitute the words, "particular individual."
But if I watched the video again, I'd probably still laugh.
i really don't know how to phrase what I want to say.
All those hand-wringing articles about how Germany followed Hitler, turned to fascism, yada yada.
You want to know how it was done - how it could happen?
I'm not saying the guy isn't vile.
There it is, but you nut jobs are being encouraged to punch out Trump supporters just because you don't like how 1/2 the country voted.
The NYT, the "paper of record" is escalating.
This will not end well.
If you were a Jew in a concentration camp, punching a Nazi would be self-defense. Inadvisable, and not in the minds of the regime, but still self-defense.
So, the question is, are you a Jew in a concentration camp?
When Ashley Judd (at least I think it was her) said she smells a whiff of Nazis in the streets I presume she was talking about herself and others like her. After all this is just what the Brown Shirts did in Germany.
In Seattle yesterday, a "protestor" shot a man he believed to the a white supremacist. The provocation for the shooting, if any, is unclear. The victim suffered a serious abdominal wound. Police released the shooter without charges or bail pending "investigation."
The victim, it turned out, was a Bernie Sanders supporter.
The NYT is doing more than extending an invitation to hate and exult in violence. They are attempting to form class associations, not based on character, but based on "color of their skin", in order to marginalize and defeat competing interests. The logical associations have been reversed and inverted. Principles matter.
This is a really great post, Althouse.
I am particularly shocked to see Jon Favreau show up as someone Tweeting approval of the attack. Favreau was the man, in the election of Obama in 2008, and in the first term. One of the most amazing speechwriters of a generation.
His Tweet was unforgiveable.
I agree with you, that I'd want to see comments to the article, which was mostly an article about noteworthy Tweets on the topic. Lots of Twitter pictures, as far as that goes.
What about the "protester" in Seattle who shot the "Nazi" who turned out to be a Bernie supporter? Is that OK because he thought the Asian man was a Nazi? Chuck will probably agree with the times.
In Nazi ideology, Every human thing was valid only if the Nazis believed that it contributed to the fighting of the eternal race war. Every human thing.
Labor. Capital. Religion. Marriage. love. Sympathy. Friendship. Everything.
"Favreau was the man, in the election of Obama in 2008, and in the first term. One of the most amazing speechwriters of a generation."
-- The guy who wrote things for Obama that included phrasing that suggested escalating violence when people disagreed with him and pushed for language like "punish our enemies" -- and you're SURPRISED he wants to see violence done to the people he disagrees with?
The Seattle business is far more disturbing. This will certainly lead to a crackdown on "right" or non-left speech on campus as the threat of violence by the left will be used to justify further measures against free speech.
David said...
The victim, it turned out, was a Bernie Sanders supporter.
I would recommend holding off on assigning the label victim until the facts are known. The shooter claimed self-defense. If it truly was justifiable self-defense, then the person shot was the perpetrator, not the victim.
Favreau, the guy who took a picture of himself molesting a cardboard cut out of Clinton -- is good at writing clap trap we've heard a hundred times before and giving it to a guy who can say it in the way we've heard a hundred times before.
And a few hundred miles to the east, you had Stalin's USSR, where every human thing was valid only if it contributed to the revolution. It wasn't that nazism meant you were being struck with a closed fist, and socialism meant that you were being struck with an open fist. Both fists were closed.
The crime of Winston Smith in Nineteen Eighty-Four was to imagine a private, shared mental space occupied by himself and Julia that excluded Big Brother.
Richard Spencer deserves to get punched. But obviously when the NYTs set up the "ok to punch a Nazi" narrative, the definition of who is and who isn't a Nazi becomes vital.
Sounds to me like they will soon be labeling the 62 Million Americans who voted for Trump as Nazi's. They're already racists, deplorable, irredeemable, blah blah blah.
But the downplaying of the violence of protesters at Trump rallies already stamped the approval; San Diego was the worst.
And according to fat ass Michael Moore the women who voted for Trump are victims of misogyny and sexism. Nazis. That's a majority of white women voters. Women like my extremely smart mother, and she's never had her opinions controlled by anyone.
This is a fight, and I'm not interested in unity if it means placating Ashley Judd and Madonna.
This is what happens when a Scientific Progressive is allowed to cover breaking news and social and political issues for the New York Times express desk
"Because it's okay if they're a Nazi."
You do realize, of course, that the Liberal Left/Democrats believe EVERYONE who voted for Trump is a Nazi, right..?
David said...
"The victim, it turned out, was a Bernie Sanders supporter."
Talk about making a despicable character sympathetic.
bwebster said...
"Is it ok to punch a Commie? Because Communists killed many times more people than the Nazis ever did." Just asking for a friend.
1/23/17, 9:34 AM
No, you must wait for a clean head shot with nothing before or behind the target.
(Hanging is also OK, or drowning in a toilet or septic tank, if subjected to gun control.)
This is a fight, and I'm not interested in unity if it means placating Ashley Judd and Madonna.
Do you think sunsong will be along soon? I'm curious how she'll be adapting to the left's new slogan Love Means Bombs.
I described to a friend one of my motives for supporting Trump as hoping that it would, if not avert, postpone the upcoming civil war in America so that my parents would not live to see it.
The Left is determined to deny me that one satisfaction, it seems.
Just imagine the whining when they reap what they sow!
I rewrewad the comments at Popehat's post about the ethics if punching Nazis last night. Depressing. The twitter comments and response from the Left is on the one hand disheartening (from thee perspective of America) and on the other hand educational--these people so gleefully embrace and excuse violence against people they dislike it's almost funny.
I hate Nazis. I am proud that members of my family fought against Nazis and helped America and the Allies defeat the Nazis. That is one reason I get so mad when Lefty jerks call me a Nazi.
But they do, they do call me a Nazi. So when they say, proudly, "it is OK to sucker punch a Nazi" they are giving themselves permission to assault me. That is something that's difficult to forget.
No matter how repulsive the some think the alt right is, it's never alright to punch him/her.
Jupiter: Althouse, what gives you, an admitted Obama voter, the right to call Richard Spencer despicable? I suppose you also think he is deplorable.
I was wondering that myself. I think Spencer, the soi-disant (and media-disant) "leader of the alt-right" is an annoying attention whore, but why is he "despicable"?
As the guy who followed the puncher said, "you are a criminal" goes for anyone who sucker punches anyone no matter on the right or the left.
As I recall, attacking their opponents in the street was a specialty of the Nazis. They didn't stop at a single punch, they wanted to kill or maim. Knock you down, kick your ribs in. Kick your face in.
Those who have seen the movie Cabaret may recall the scene in which a man who insulted a Nazi was held from behind and beaten bloody and unconscious. Fifteen or twenty solid blows to the face and belly, blood everywhere. You should check it out, Bob, you'll laugh yourself sick. Or I should say sicker.
What the NYT is really asking is: Is it OK to punch people LABELED as Nazis?
Spencer was LABELED as a Nazi - so maybe punching him is OK. Trump supporters have also been LABELED as Nazis. So, maybe its OK to punch them. And as Scott Adams has pointed out, if you label Trump as Hitler, then maybe its OK to shoot him, because who wouldn't want to shoot Hitler?
Conservatives had better be aware of what is going on.
Spencer is a white supremacist. But does he refer to himself as "Alt-right"?
Or is that the media trying, once again, to paint anyone who isn't on board with Hillary Corruption Clinton or not progressive as a white supremacist?
The LEFT has done the same thing with "Hate crimes" and "Racism". Get everyone to buy in and then expand the definition so that any opposition of the Left on certain issues is "Hate" or "Racism".
Technically Spenser is White Nationalist not a White Supremacist. But that's just quibbling over words that no one cares about.
Its obvious that is Spenser didn't exist, the media would spotlight another person just like him. Not just Left, but lots of people, want to have some Hate figure they can give their two minutes of hate to. Spenser seems to fill the bill in 2017.
And me, why no one hates Nazis more than me. Boy, I really hate 'em. (pats self on back).
The thugs have started bringing a new sign to their riots. It says "Make Racists Afraid Again". Get it? It's a play on "Make America Great Again! Except they don't want America to be great. They want racists to be afraid.
I wouldn't worry about it if you're not white. The people who display that sign say that only white people can be racists.
NYT treads a slippery slope. Some may view their owners, editors, and reporters as way more dangerous than Richard Spencer.
"Cookie! You wrote something right for a change!"
EVERYTHING I write is right--er, correct.
One of the reasons, Althouse is so good, is because she has a fixed standard.
One of the reasons, the NYT is so bad, is because it has no fixed standard.
Sucker-punching a guy, because you don't like his opinion, and then casually adopting the justification, that, well, he's a Nazi (when he's not), is just double-downing on the problem.
There are many Leftists I would like to punch out; but I don't because I know it's wrong to commit battery.
By the way, here's a substantive point:
There once were real life Nazis. Guys with swaztikas invading European countries with tanks. There were 30-40 Million of them. They caused a war that killed about 60-70 Million people. My Grampa fought against them.
If 70 years later the only "Nazi" you can find is some obscure doofus named Richard Spencer, who's claim to fame, is not invading Poland, but creating the term, "Alt-Right", well, you really should declare victory and go home.
Anglelyne said...
'I was wondering that myself. I think Spencer, the soi-disant (and media-disant) "leader of the alt-right" is an annoying attention whore, but why is he "despicable"?'
He's white, isn't he? He should be ashamed. But apparently he isn't. Despicable.
I don't condone the punching of Spencer or anyone else. I think I made that clear in my initial comment.
For the sake of publicity, Spencer is allowing himself to be used by the media in their narrative that Trump supporters are motivated by race. He's not helping. I don't want the guy on my side.
"The Nazis were secular leftists run amuck, denying individual dignity, debasing human life, and consolidating power. They were social justice adventurists...."
They were neither leftists nor social justice adventurists.
This is how "Love Trumps Hate."
The Love side gets to sucker punch the Trump side.
This will not end well.
Look at the video of the old hippie verbally attacking the young guy on the plane, then plays victim.
And embarrasses her husband in the process. It was more important to attack the Trump voter than go to her Mother-in-Law's funeral.
Their only priority is political.
Cork soaker is an inelegant way of saying cocksucker.
Anywho, sucker punches are a coward's game. The man should've challenged Spencer to a duel.
This might be the wrong place to ask, but when exactly is Jews On Trains day in the United States? The administration should be a bit more communicative.
I mean, that's what we all voted for!*
* - I voted for Gary "No Aleppo" Johnson.
AprilApple said...
"Spencer is a white supremacist. But does he refer to himself as "Alt-right"?
Or is that the media trying, once again, to paint anyone who isn't on board with Hillary Corruption Clinton or not progressive as a white supremacist?"
April, Spencer is not a white supremacist, but he claims to have invented the term alt-right. So, in answer to your second question, yes, the media are trying to paint anyone who is not ashamed to be white as a white supremacist. Rather successfully, it would appear.
What the Hell is a white supremacist? Do they actually exist, outside the fevered imaginings of the SPLC?
"Richard Spencer deserves to get punched."
No, he doesn't. No one deserves to get punched who hasn't already initiated physical violence.
Is Mike Flynn a Nazi?
Is Jefferson Sessions a Nazi?
Is Trump a Nazi?
Is Althouse a Nazi?
Are you a Nazi?
They were neither leftists nor social justice adventurists.
Social justice adventurists? No.
Leftists? Most certainly Yes.
I recall a video of a Trump supporter punching an old lady on oxygen in the face and knocking her over on the street. It's never OK.
69 year old woman punched in the face by Trump supporter
Jupiter said...
The thugs have started bringing a new sign to their riots. It says "Make Racists Afraid Again"
Pretty much the entire left believes large groups of people are racist. The least offensive group believes everyone is racist. More extreme types believe all whites are racist, while others believe anyone who disagrees with conventional leftism is racist.
People should consider who the kind of extremist who would bring that sign thinks is racist, not who the average person thinks is racist.
"Richard Spencer is an idiot. I don't care whether he gets punched or not."
And thus, freedom dies.
See? This is why I like Cook here. I may disagree, but the man is really consistent in his stances.
No, it is never OK to punch a person for expressing a view, no matter how "abhorrent". If you are unable to restrain yourself from doing so, then you are the problem, not them.
It's like Milo's college tour. He isn't MAKING anybody do anything. Those morons are attacking him and now shooting one another all on their own.
Making violence normal isn't going to work out well for the current perpetrators.
Rick said...
"Pretty much the entire left believes large groups of people are racist. The least offensive group believes everyone is racist."
Rick, everyone *is* racist. Two-year-old babies recognize their own kind, and react differently to those who are not their own kind. That is why the charge is so effective. Everyone is racist, and anyone who gives it any thought knows he is racist. So, when someone calls you a racist, you immediately think of whatever it is that symbolizes your own racism to you, and you are ashamed and paralyzed. And afraid you will be found out. It's a fucking death ray.
I believe in free speech, the more the better, even for Nazis.
I believe sucker punching someone is a cowardly act, even if he's a Nazi.
Jupiter:
Bias is a quality of nature. Racism is a quality of nurture. Racism is a prejudice in the [class] diversity spectrum. It is a judgment of people by "color of their skin" in order to selectively, opportunistically discriminate.
This is an old NYT trick--they want to convey something but want deniability, so they write it as "People are saying ..."
In this case it's crystal clear they want to get out the meme that it is OK to physically assault certain people, but they don't want to actually say it and take responsibility, so they write it up as a legitimate controversy on which they are merely reporting.
They've been doing this for DECADES, and people still fall fro it, which is truly amazing--and discouraging.
The NYT as a global sponsor of [class] diversity and abortion rites needs to look to itself to discover the Nazis hiding in the not so hidden spaces of twilight. The so-called "alt-right" is a projection of the mainstream left to obscure their call to prejudice and violence.
More proof (as if any more was needed) that the left _owns_ political violence in this country.
Ann sees the beginning swell of war and doesn't understand what she's looking at.
Known Unknown said...
Cork soaker is an inelegant way of saying cocksucker.
Also "sock tucker." See The Thin Red Line, the WWII novel by James Jones.
Anywho, sucker punches are a coward's game. The man should've challenged Spencer to a duel.
1/23/17, 11:05 AM
Please, for Jeebus' sake, it's "anyhoo." See the works of William S. Burroughs.
Jack Wayne:
It's Pro-Choice doctrine, selective, opportunistic, and unprincipled. It's not limited to abortion rites, but has broad consequences for political, social, economic, scientific, and religious/moral concerns, including [class] diversity that denies individual dignity (i.e. character) and judges people by the "color of their skin".
"Blogger Robert Cook said...
"Richard Spencer is an idiot. I don't care whether he gets punched or not."
And thus, freedom dies."
Yes, plus a real Nazi would have had an StG 44 submachine gun.
"I recall a video of a Trump supporter punching an old lady on oxygen in the face and knocking her over on the street. It's never OK. "
That was a setup, as you may know and ignore. The man was severely handicapped being led by his wife. I believe he is blind. The woman with the oxygen tank as a prop grabbed him from behind. He elbowed her away and she very dramatically fell down and loudly complained.
Later there were photos of her happily participating in the harassment of Trump supporters. It was fake all the way.
Thus we see how the pacifist Left's "Moral Equivalent of War" naturally devolves into...War.
Nazi is as Nazi does. The Left needs to consider whether they are asking to be punched.
Mike said...
What about the "protester" in Seattle who shot the "Nazi" who turned out to be a Bernie supporter? Is that OK because he thought the Asian man was a Nazi? Chuck will probably agree with the times.
...He wrote, at the very same time that I was agreeing with the criticism of the Times...
"Has Internet Asking..."
The Internet asks some pretty stupid things sometimes.
Can't be right all the time now, can I Chuck? My apologies for the false assertion.
My dad, who never committed a violent or mean act in his life (that I am aware of), once told me that "It's okay to want to beat your kids, but it's not okay to do it."
Words of wisdom, and a perfect example of German humor (dad was German). You don't really get the humor if you can't see the twinkle in his blue, downturned German eyes when he said that.
Regeln sind Regeln!
Mike:
Now, if you had asserted that Chuck, who supports anything anti-Trump, would be praising Obama's speechwriter and expressing dismay that said speechwriter supports violence against people with whom said speechwriter disagrees politically, you wouldn't have to apologize.
Hitting a moving target is hard, sometimes.
Why stop at a punch? It appears you can shoot somebody you think is white supremacist and avoid arrest.
Christopher B said...
It appears you can shoot somebody you think is white supremacist and avoid arrest.
To be fair, the man who was shot clearly assaulted the shooter, with such fact caught on video. It is still to be determined if the level of assault justified the shooting, so the shooter may still face charges.
Ignorance is Bliss said...To be fair, the man who was shot clearly assaulted the shooter, with such fact caught on video.
I haven't seen this yet, which site did you see it on?
When I said I don't care,it doesn't mean I agree with it, it means that I will let the law or Richard Spencer handle it the way any other person would handle it. I don't think a meta discussion needs to happen about when it's ok to punch a Nazi.
The protesters claim that Trump and supporters are Nazis based on their assumptions about Trump being a racist which is only justified by his statements about ILLEGAL aliens and criminal illegal aliens. Any other country boots you immediately if they find out you are there illegally.
But let's look at actions. The Nazi regime began with brown shirt crowd violence against Jews and others, violence in the streets. The Left has sent thugs to target Trump rallies for almost a year now and praises and pays for BLM riots including assaults on innocent bystanders. Real Nazis were violently hateful of certain groups of people, and so is the Left--it is just different groups that are the objects of hatred. The real Nazis were enthralled with nature, wanted to get back to the land, and hated Christianity. ditto the Left. These people seem so ignorant of history it would be sad if it wasn't scary.
Rick said...
I haven't seen this yet, which site did you see it on?
friendly-fire-bernie-sanders-supporter-shot-outside-uw
What if they're not truly Nazis, yet are found to be deplorable? What do the NYT editors allow decent people to do then?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Birkel, you nasty fucking lying hypocrite.
I said Jon Favreau was a great speechwriter. He is that. I didn't say anything else about agreeing with him; and I said that I condemned his Tweet about the attack.
You get all literal, with the people whom you oppose politically, and then when it comes to Trump, it is suddenly all about meta-messaging. If words mean nothing to the Trumpkins, that's fine. Just don't get literal with Trump's opponents.
Apparently it's OK in Seattle to shoot someone as long as you thought you were shooting at a Nazi racist.
IB:
Thanks. From the link:
I can’t make out the gun during the shooting, and thanks to the crowd movement between the two men and the camera, I can’t tell if the man who was shot was assaulting the man in the yellow hat in such a way as to justify armed self-defense. He certainly rushed him and got in his face and appears to have been pushing him at the very least, but I can’t tell if the level of violence rose to the point justifying deadly force. It will be interesting to see how the police investigation plays out.
I said Jon Favreau was a great speechwriter. He is that. I didn't say anything else about agreeing with him; and I said that I condemned his Tweet about the attack.
I would dispute great speech writer. Obama's speeches were all flowery and said nothing, but who is going to quote an Obama speech next year or ever again? They tended to have the depth of a Frisbee.
Mingus Jerry said, "I'm so old I remember when the ACLU and the left defended the right of Nazis to march in Skokie."
You know I remember that too.
It's tempting to think the underlying story might be that the ACLU had changed. That once they had supported civil rights and freedom of speech and now there's dramatic shift where they've shifted to advocating something like criminalization of all speech that is not left-wing.
But then I wondered if I was being naive. That maybe that the people that make up the ACLU are essentially the same and all that has really changed is that current circumstances allow different strategies.
I believe the left had a lot of people in its ranks who had supported the Nazis in the 1930s, many of whom were still alive at the time of Skokie marches. Possibly even the majority of the American left who were active in the 1930s.
So the real point of turning Nazis marchers into a free-speech issue was not actually a belief in free-speech but rather a need to protect the left from its own prior history, which many people back then would have remembered.
But 1930s left is dead now and they no longer need protection and the modern left is free to hate and label all of its enemies as Nazis and in fact rediscover their Nazi past and redo the sort of thing they did before without, as far as I can perceive, any trace of self-awareness.
Except that this person is, undeniably, not a NAZI. The Nazis were a German political party and there is no existing Nazi party in America.
Alternative facts from the NT Times, used to justify violence against their political opponents. Just like, well, the Nazis did.
Conservatives in America are non-violent. The left, the true Fascists, are the brown shirts. They all seem to have one thing in common, being funded by someone who has real experience with real Nazis, George Soros.
I'm assuming no comments on article because the Times would be embarrassed by their readers.
The NYT is begging the question. Whatever you think of Spencer's political views, he's not a Nazi. To believe attacking him is okay, first you'd have to believe attacking someone who belonged to a political party you didn't like is okay. And second, you'd have to award yourself the power of putting him in that political party even though he's expressly stated he isn't.
These people are not understanding who the fascists are.
"The Nazis were a German political party and there is no existing Nazi party in America."
Oh no?
"The Nazis were a German political party and there is no existing Nazi party in America."
Oh no?
Cookie thinks Communism is going to make a comeback any day. Just those are real Nazis.
Maybe because there are so few people remaining who actually fought the Nazis, the word has lost its meaning. I'll be in Europe this Summer and am thinking of taking my kids to Auschwitz so they can see that Nazis were more than just people you disagree with.
The alt-right, self identified ones in any case, are not Nazi's, the shortened form of National Socialists. If you peruse any of their blogs and scroll through the comments, concentrating on their supporters, you'll note there's no Socialists among them at all. Pretty much a bunch of unbridled free market (within the U.S) capitalists. Nationalists, yes, socialists, no.
They'll even follow advice from Obama when it fits the situation. For example “If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard.” And pretty soon I imagine we're going to see a lot of people, not just alt-right, following his other advice- “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” Even in gun controlled areas like D.C. All the assaults in D.C. on Trump supporters during the inauguration weren't countered with violent reaction. Do you think if Democrats, and they are Democrat, continue their violent ways that everyone else is going to lay back and take it? There are a lot of potential George Zimmerman's in the United States.
come back in style
The NYT isn't getting the whole freedom of speech thing right. Not to mention the concept of assault.
Especially dangerous given how loosely Leftists define "Nazis" and "fascists:" i.e., anyone who disagrees with us. I'm an individualist-libertarian, but they'll be punching me next. "First they came to punch the alt-Right, then . . ."
Careful what you wish for, leftists.
You just might get it.
It is not ok to punch someone who is not physically assaulting you. That's assault, also known as a FELONY.
I find it interesting that the same leftists who casually throw out 'Nazi' would gladly see Israel nuked by Iran. Think about that for a moment.
Identity politics is only ok when practiced by certain groups.
Sub in "abortion doc" or "abortion supporter" and run the same arguments for preemptive violence based on beliefs, smart people.
If you haven't noticed, progressives and the left call anyone/everyone they disagree with a Nazi, then a racist, then publically humiliate them on social media. In other words, if they disagree with you, it's not about whether you're a Nazi or not, it's simply a precursor before actively taking you out.
We live in a time when the media, SJWs, non-profits, and the attack arm of foundations have no shame in using scorched-earth tactics while dealing with their enemies.
As a matter of fact, this is exactly how the southern poverty law center operates.
Liberals have successfully identified 989,586 out of the last five actual Nazis.
As a matter of fact, this is exactly how the southern poverty law center operates.
For the American left there are never bad tactics, only bad targets. Organizations like the SPLC are there to codify the list of targets.
"It is not ok to punch someone who is not physically assaulting you. That's assault, also known as a FELONY.'
Actually, it's a battery. It's a misdemeanor in any jurisdiction of which I'm aware. Not that that mitigates what occurred here.
Heh heh. I didn't think that would stand on a blog frequented by a fair number of lawyers.
Apparently the Times is incapable of the most basic extrapolation: who would most likely prevail if violence, not words, became the preferred mode of left-right interaction?
...Then they came for the nazis, but since I was not a nazi, I did not speak out...
Bob Loblaw said...
"For the American left there are never bad tactics, only bad targets. Organizations like the SPLC are there to codify the list of targets."
I think we have reached a tipping point, where the Left no longer cares much about the identity of the target. Their long march through the universities has paid off, and they think the time is ripe for the long march through the rest of society. Any victim will do, as an example to display their power and terrorize those who might stand against them. Look what they did to that little old lady law professor at the University of Oregon. She is about as liberal as a pasty-faced idiot can be, the fucking fool, but they burned her at the stake as a "racist". And the good, honest, liberal professors of law all shouted "Burn The Witch" as loudly as they could, while thinking "Please, eat me last!".
As for the SPLC, that's just how Morris Dees pays for his collection of Rolls Royce automobiles. The societal impact is nice, but he does it for the money.
The discussion about whether Spencer is a Nazi and how to define Nazi is missing the point.
If Hitler turned up in Times Square tomorrow, it wouldn't be okay to punch him. It would take self-defense, due process, or a declaration of war to justify using violence against him.
The same people who want to punch the Nazi were celebrating MLK Day just a week ago.
Post a Comment