A Giant Step Toward Civil War

The Nation has given its seal of approval to violence against the Alt-Right:

“The Nation does not support violence directed at individuals for their speech, however reprehensible that speech may be. Not everyone shares that view or interprets it in the same way, as was clear in the reaction—from left, right and center—to the video of neo-Nazi Richard Spencer getting punched in the face by a masked demonstrator. We published one article, by Natasha Lennard that reported, approvingly, on the black bloc organizing behind that incident and other actions taken at the Disrupt J20 Inauguration Day protests. We’ve since published another article, by Peter Van Buren, that condemns such tactics. Editorially, The Nation is committed to nonviolence. But it is also committed to airing differences of opinion, as well as candidly reporting on the strategies different movements choose to take at this time. …”

Wow.

Suppose for a moment that Richard Spencer was to release a statement that said, “Editorially, AltRight.com is committed to nonviolence. But it is also committed to airing differences of opinion, as well as candidly reporting on the strategies different movements choose to take at this time.”

Is initiating violence against the Left a legitimate difference of opinion?

Ari Paul writes in The Observer:

“A viral video of a masked protester socking white supremacist and anti-Semite Richard Spencer in the jaw as he was being interviewed about protests at the presidential inauguration prompted an increasingly common question: when it is acceptable to use non-lethal violence against those who advocate ethnic cleansing?

It’s difficult for many to say out loud, but the violent attack against Spencer does not deserve condemnation. …”

I’ve been writing for years now about how the Left has been inching toward this explicit embrace of anti-White political violence. It can be seen in the rise of the racial snuff film genre: Inglourious Basterds, Machete, Django Unchained, The Hateful Eight and most recently The Birth of a Nation. It is no coincidence that I have been arguing with a Twitter character who goes by the nickname “Lt. Aldo Raine.”

Hollywood movies have been normalizing the idea that political violence is legitimate when it promotes the cause of social justice. This is why, for example, it is commonplace now to be treated to movies that glorify mass murderers like Nat Turner. What is more *woke* than the slave rioting against his master or the Jew who hunts Nazis or the Hispanic illegal alien who kills border vigilantes?

All of that is being taken out of the realm of fantasy and into the real world now. Inevitably, the consequences are going to be significantly more far reaching than identity politics and social justice. What is the argument against vanguardist violence now? If the Left treats political violence as just another difference of opinion or a strategy that some are pursuing and that translates into blood in the streets, where does this go except straight back to the battlefields of Bleeding Kansas?

It is worth recalling the story of John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859. More than any other single polarizing event, John Brown’s actions destroyed the Union. It pushed the average conservative to moderate Southerner off the fence and into the radical camp in key states. The secessionist vanguard had languished for twenty years in the Deep South until abolitionist violence – and this is key, the Northern reaction and celebration of that violence – demolished trust in the federal government.

Richard Spencer getting sucker punched is a very small story, but the principle that is being established here is a big story. We’re seeing the mainstreaming of political violence on the Left. It is going to have a big impact on our community and eventually the nation at large.

18 Comments

  1. You missed that the Left has said that words themselves – free expression ARE acts of violence, so therefore they can hit back.

    They will not like getting burned by the fire they, themselves started.

  2. The Left has turn from boycotts, sit-ins, and other forms of protest to just one insane circus of violence, not saying they have never been violent or crazy but these next four years I believe the Left will go through some radical transformation. I myself have always been a southern nationalist with far right principles but I don’t need to really worry about someone coming at me just too sock me in the face seeing how I keep a really low profile and I am never around any fellow people in the alt-right, still better safe than sorry. Always good to stay armed and ready in case things really go down.

  3. They’ll expect the government to protect them in recognition of their good intentions and of the social justice in their cause.

  4. Hunter, you wrote a piece some months back about an even more polarizing America if Clinton had been elected. Trump, on the other hand will by any means try to ”unite” (yeah quotes are needed here) the US.

    Now whether another civil war or Rahowa, not under Trump 4 years tenure anyway. But things will probably ‘warm up’ a bit in the ghettos, and the sanctuary cities.

  5. “A viral video of a masked protester socking white supremacist and anti-Semite Richard Spencer in the jaw as he was being interviewed about protests at the presidential inauguration prompted an increasingly common question: when it is acceptable to use non-lethal violence against those who advocate ethnic cleansing?”

    How quickly the goalposts move, (((Ari)))—from “violence” to “non-lethal violence.”

  6. Aja Romano ?@ajaromano

    NYC councilwoman Rosenthal: NYC is “prepared to run this city without federal dollars if that’s what it takes” to protect immigrants.

  7. Fusion ?@Fusion 3h3 hours ago
    More
    “You are safe…you are supported.”

    Mayor Rahm Emanuel explains why Chicago will always be a #SanctuaryCity:

  8. Chuck Schumer ?@SenSchumer

    Pres. Trump’s deportation force & fearmongering have no place in America. @SenateDems stand with immigrants. #NoBanNoWall

  9. To the clueless among us. Guess which group is leading the fight against common sense immigration proposals?

    Over a year ago it was 1,000 rabbis who had written a letter.

    Now, even more.

    January 18, 2017 2:18pm

    (JTA) — More than 1,500 U.S. rabbis signed a letter calling on the incoming Trump administration to maintain the federal refugee resettlement program. –snip–

    “As rabbis, we take seriously the biblical mandate to ‘welcome the stranger.’ Grounded in our history and values, we will continue to raise our voices in support of refugees and call on our great nation to uphold a legacy of welcome.”

  10. Paul Kersey ?@sbpdl
    Important to remember 25-35% of US population wants mass nonwhite immigration as PUNISHMENT against white Americans and their history.

  11. This trend will escalate during this Administration. As someone who gets paid to prepare for and react to this type of behavior may I offer a little advice?
    Cancel your cable/satellite and use the money instead to take Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu or Krav Maga type classes. Your money will be well spent in addition to unplugging from the (((Matrix))). Buy firearms (Rifle/Pistol/Shotgun) in similar calibers and become proficient in their use and upkeep. You’ll have plenty of time to do this when you stop watching TV. Range memberships are cheap and the over 40 shooters are just that, proficient and willing to teach you how to become an excellent marksman. Lastly, put away a few extra cans of tuna fish, some rice & beans each week… Grow a vegetable garden. Put away a case (or ten) of your favorite ammunition. Over time, it’ll add up. I’m trying to learn all this new drone technology from one of my sons. Future applications of that, when weaponized will be a game changer.
    Get busy, time is short. Deo Vindice!

Comments are closed.