Saturday, January 21, 2017

- Lefty Bubble Bursts: Violence Ensues

Richard Spenser got punched in the head at the Trump Inauguration protests, or so I learned from the celebratory headlines. There are no enemies to the right for most of the alt-right, and I subscribe to that. Although there are gaps between my views and Richard’s, I see him as a primarily like-minded fellow traveler. So operating under the assumption that this wasn’t staged by him, then I have an obvious problem with his assault.

Richard knew this was a risk, and for him that risk may have been the point. Liberals are only brave enough for violence in a mob scenario and Richard knows this. It could be he was willing to take the chance of giving in an interview in the middle of a riot because he thought if some violence toward him did occur then he could highlight it as a bit of hypocrisy for the far left. If that’s so, then it was a miscalculation on his part – and not his first. The MSM articles I read practically call his violent assaulter “heroic”.

Liberals are immune to hypocrisy because it requires shame, and liberals have no shame. They’ll use that tool to bludgeon others whenever it’s convenient, but it cannot be turned on them because they utterly lack the necessary introspection to recognize it. So instead of making a point, Richard, who is being set up as the face of the Alt-Right by the mainstream media only so they can use him as a personal target to delegitimize the movement, accomplished nothing for the cause. All he did was generate a few headlines sympathetic to the leftist mob, and weaken his personal ‘brand’ a little further.

After his little “Hail Trump” faux pas at the NPI conference a few weeks ago, Richard Spenser is a very unsympathetic figure in the mainstream media, regardless of his actual views. I’m sure he’s painfully aware of this, and this interview might have been some effort to try to turn that around. And although the headlines are all deeply unfair and distortive – “Neo-Nazi punched by student activist at Trump Inaugural, placing himself in scenarios like this one won’t redeem him to the MSM. You don’t get your cred back that way Richard.

The inaugural riots and Richard’s incident (along with a shooting at the Milo speech in Washington which I'll get to in a sec) have got Vox Day thinking a bit more practically – which is to say offensively instead of defensively. Vox is less interested in trying to manage his public image through mainstream channels than Richard, and this has let him think about it all more clearly in my opinion. At any rate, I’m much more sympathetic to his take on things:

That being said, it's long past time for the Right to be prepared for these petty attacks at public events, with at least four martial arts-trained bodyguards armed with street-legal melee weapons, and, in states with carry laws, two or more concealed-carry licensees. I always anticipate the possibility of street violence from the Left at public events; when we hosted GGinParis, I hired a number of martial artists to cover all entries and patrol the immediate vicinity. I also had a reasonable supply of legal weaponry on hand and made contact with the police station one block away so that they would know who we were and that we were minding our own business.

And when doing an interview in public, be sure to have at least one spotter keeping an eye out for potential trouble approaching. Two is better. Also, don't ever leave your back exposed. The reporter is going to distract you from people moving around you, so first position yourself with your back to a wall if possible, or a car if not.

Vox also mentions an article called “Days of Rage” which you shouldn’t read unless you’re willing to lose some sleep over it. It details the violence that went along with the last leftist bubble collapse in the 70’s, and how the true believers became increasingly radicalized. This was not only pre 9-11, it was pre-Reagan shooting, so law enforcement is much better prepared to cope with domestic terrorist groups than they have been. But it’s still the kind of thing that gives me a chill.

In one respect Vox is absolutely correct though. His attitude of being prepared to punch back twice as hard is precisely the right response in my opinion. Had Spenser seen the punch coming, ducked it, and delivered a little violence in return, then there still would have been an unsympathetic headline: “Neo-Nazi Resorts to Violence Against Student Activist at Trump Inaugural.” But at least there would have been one less highly motivated lefty. Pain is the only thing the left will ever respond to and we must be prepared to deliver that pain to them. In a perfect world the emotional pain of widespread disagreement should be enough. But when it isn’t, physical pain should be on the menu for them as well.

And… the law can fix much of this in a heartbeat. Concealed Carry Reciprocity will have the effect of arming a large contingent of the political right immediately. Knowing that “Pepe’s got a gun” will discourage the vast majority of leftists who are really just spoiled rich kids looking to break some stuff because mommy and daddy bought them the Malibu Barbie when the wanted the Ballerina Barbie. The problem is that the most radical leftists who believe that violence is the right response to their imaginary problems, will then also be armed.

But it hasn’t happened just yet. While the inaugural celebrations were proceeding in Washington there was a massive and violent protest on the other side of the country at Milo’s “Dangerous Faggot” speech at University of Washington. Mainstream media details are still sparse (probably because it doesn’t fit the narrative very well) but from what I can tell, a 5 foot 7 inch tall, 50 year old Asian man shot a 25 year old protester who was threatening him, at about the time that the protests became violent. Several other pro-Trump citizens who were minding their own business were being assaulted as well. Here’s the kicker on the events though, the shooter has subsequently turned himself in to police, claiming the shooting was in self defense.

No leftist has ever turned themselves in to police for anything, and 50 year old Asian men aren’t exactly known for their predisposition to violence. The shooting victim (a young man) fits the generalized profile of a violent crime perpetrator and the alleged shooter (a middle aged Asian man) fits the generalized profile of a victim. But neither fits the liberal narrative so it will take a very sharp eye to learn the truth in coming weeks. The media knows this very well, so most of the articles are long on details of how offensive and dangerous Milo’s ideas are, and are short on details alleged regarding the shooting.

If I’m reading between the mainstream lines correctly on this one, I’ll be happy to donate to the shooter’s legal defense fund. This is the kind of thing that will back off the left from further violence in the vast majority of cases. So too will Vox’s mantra of hitting back twice as hard. It’s the only alternative we’re left with, and since the left has more in common with a violent religious cult than a political ideology, more violence should be expected.

But when I was thinking about all this a question came to mind. For 15 years or so the academy has been doing all it can to radicalize the left and indoctrinate supporters. An entire generation of College students has been trained this way instead of being taught to reason and think. And I have to wonder if, after being given such elaborate and careful constructed rhetoric to wrap around their feelings, if they can ever be trained to think of the world any other way.

Look at the example of that “primal scream” leftist a few posts back. We don’t know that person’s actual sex but we do know they’re deeply unattractive regardless of which binary group they fall into. A person like that “NEEDS” Feminism because it promises them a new set of rules they can use to overturn the uncomfortable realities of nature. Sure, it’s easier for them to self delude when there is a huge crowd of equally deluded people around. Leftists are deeply influenced by popular opinion and if the popular reaction in the vicinity of [his/her] scream was ridicule, then that’s one lefty who would probably keep their next scream to themselves.

But if this person decided that it was a good idea in this case to scream at the heavens like that when Trump’s inevitable (and perfectly predictable) Inauguration was announced, what makes any of us think we can ever train that person to ‘think’ rationally about anything?

Bringing more individual responsibly back into our political and economic systems will probably convert many who are only on the fringes of the left. But if a person like the screamer is such a devoted believer, what do we ever do on a policy level, about them? And I confess, I’m deeply concerned that no matter what Trump does, the religious fervor of people like that will outlast him.

Food for thought I guess.

In the meantime, if you disagree in any way with the leftist zealots, acquaint yourself with local laws concerning self defense. Avoid mobs if you can, and if you can’t, then be properly prepared to be assaulted and to use violence against other in your own defense. Ours is a movement of ideas, and those ideas should always be presented peacefully when the opposition allows it. But one of the first ideas of the alt-right is that you have a right to remain peacefully unmolested. And if the left and the media feel differently, we should be prepared to make that their problem.


If I read between the lines correctly on the shooting story, either the NRA, someone from team Trump, or both should find a way to persuade that man to go big and public and they should do all they can to get him in front of the media portrayed as a national hero for having the courage to defend himself against the forces of anarchy and the rule of the mob. If the networks start complaining that this might provide incentive for other to shoot protesters, then it's going right. Because that idea will also incentivize the would be protesters as well.


Muzzlethemuz said...

My only question is how violent does this/can this get when a key tenant of liberal ideology is, "guns are evil." I've gotta say I did not see it going this way a few years ago, never thought the Prius set would go for violence. Globally speaking Leftist political groups historically go for violence, clearly that is the case. The cocoon-wrapped latte crowd I saw start up during the Bush II administration, never saw it going this way. Of course, that was pre-Obama.
I can see a subtle hardening of the movement has occurred since the rise of Anonymous and BLM. As the militancy has risen so has the willingness to revive the old maxim, 'By any means necessary." Even the snowflakes on the campuses have backed themselves into a corner where in short order, if they haven't seen it already, it will soon dawn on them that their speech codes will require active enforcement, not merely passive peer pressure, to attain the level of compliance they seek.
Conversely I foresee a Trump DOJ giving local and state LE a green light to step up their tactics in response to marches, riots and the sort of quasi-anarchy we saw becoming the norm under BHO. However reciprocal CCW goes both ways. Will lefties figure this out and start, quite suddenly, exercising their 2A rights?
Maybe it's time we have a RFNJ discussion on the merits of body armor.

Hell_Is_Like_Newark said...

I thought the Left lost its collective mind when Reagan was President (I am old enough to remember). The insanity has been completely eclipsed with Trump taking office.