The Left and Political Violence

[CdnFox]

7 hours ago, Fluffypants said:

Yep its the right that is violent

Newsweek

Person on ATV Targeting Trump Supporters Sends 80-Year-Old to Hospital

1 day ago

Yeah  it's pretty bad actually 

One dead, one critical after Upper Peninsula attack on Trump supporter (detroitnews.com)

Lara Trump: No Family Should Fear for Their Safety for Wearing MAGA Hats - Newsweek

Viral video: Women caught who tore up MAGA hat sentenced in Delaware court (delawareonline.com)

Teen 'attacked' for wearing 'Make America Great Again' hat (bbc.com)

Man faces 4 years in assault of man wearing hat with 'Make America Great Again' in Russian (nbcnews.com)

 

I could go on for a few hours

[Matthew]

I think this is an important topic, despite everyone's best efforts here to trivialize it with nonsense examples. 

All political movements and parties and nations have the capacity for huge levels of actual political violence.

I think there are two things to look for:

1. Political rhetoric that encourages popular violence or mobilizes for it.

2. Acceptance of popular political violence when it does occur.

In history, left wing, right wing,  centrist, and traditionalist movements have all done this.

In the US right now the level of political violence is extremely low. Though fringe right wing terrorists in recent decades have done some attacks, those were not accepted by leaders on the right.

Trump has come close to vaguely enouraging low level violence, but he's not a very serious person and even his own followers are accustomed too not taking what he he says seriously.

Moderate left-leaning liberal and moderste right-leaning conservatives overwhelmingly denounce violence.

There are far left wing socialists who like to use rhetoric about guillotines and promote gun ownership. Though leftists currently do not mobilize for actual violence in the way that the far right militia groups do. But again neither of these extremes enjoy much popular appeal though the far right nationalism is by far more prevalent.

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Matthew said:

I think this is an important topic, despite everyone's best efforts here to trivialize it with nonsense examples. 

All political movements and parties and nations have the capacity for huge levels of actual political violence.

I think there are two things to look for:

1. Political rhetoric that encourages popular violence or mobilizes for it.

2. Acceptance of popular political violence when it does occur.

In history, left wing, right wing,  centrist, and traditionalist movements have all done this.

In the US right now the level of political violence is extremely low. Though fringe right wing terrorists in recent decades have done some attacks, those were not accepted by leaders on the right.

Trump has come close to vaguely enouraging low level violence, but he's not a very serious person and even his own followers are accustomed too not taking what he he says seriously.

Moderate left-leaning liberal and moderste right-leaning conservatives overwhelmingly denounce violence.

There are far left wing socialists who like to use rhetoric about guillotines and promote gun ownership. Though leftists currently do not mobilize for actual violence in the way that the far right militia groups do. But again neither of these extremes enjoy much popular appeal though the far right nationalism is by far more prevalent.

Uh huh. 

So - you've never heard of groups like blm or antifa?  You were unaware of the 4 billion dollars in damages along with hundreds of wounded officers and dozens of dead people that came about from the democrat supported "mostly peaceful' protests?  

The leftists mobilize on a VASTLY VASTLY larger scale than the right. They cause more violence and damage on an order of magnitude. It's not even close. 

And the rhetoric on the left is much higher in boht intensity and frequency. Mitt romney will put you all back in chains.  If trump wins it'll be the last election in the USA "unless he's stopped" . etc etc. 

Not to mention actually weaponizing the courts to target political opponents. 

Historically both parties do it but the left these days is completely over the top and out of control 

 

 

[WestCanMan]

On 7/25/2024 at 10:08 AM, CdnFox said:

Uh huh. 

So - you've never heard of groups like blm or antifa?  You were unaware of the 4 billion dollars in damages along with hundreds of wounded officers and dozens of dead people that came about from the democrat supported "mostly peaceful' protests?  

The leftists mobilize on a VASTLY VASTLY larger scale than the right. They cause more violence and damage on an order of magnitude. It's not even close. 

And the rhetoric on the left is much higher in boht intensity and frequency. Mitt romney will put you all back in chains.  If trump wins it'll be the last election in the USA "unless he's stopped" . etc etc. 

Not to mention actually weaponizing the courts to target political opponents. 

Historically both parties do it but the left these days is completely over the top and out of control 

The left has been out of control since their constant stream of vitriol and lies against a SCJ nominee resulted in the coining of the term "Borked". 

I mean, you could even go further back from there, to the time when the KKK was a Dem militia. And although unofficial, it's plain to see that Antifa and BLM operate as Dem militias to this very day. 

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

The left has been out of control since their constant stream of vitriol and lies against a SCJ nominee resulted in the coining of the term "Borked". 

 

THAT"S where that came from?  (swear to god i thought it was a reference to the swedish chef from the muppets)

Quote

I mean, you could even go further back from there, to the time when the KKK was a Dem militia. And although unofficial, it's plain to see that Antifa and BLM operate as Dem militias to this very day. 

For sure, the changes in the dems are largely cosmetic.  They still use racial divison to try to get votes, they still have their strong arm groups that they release to suppress people, etc etc.  The more things change.... 

[WestCanMan]

41 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

THAT"S where that came from?  (swear to god i thought it was a reference to the swedish chef from the muppets)

If you google "borked" a whole host of definitions come up, without referencing the origin of the word. 

Google is very protective of leftists, right?

Here is the real deal: 

• The verb "Bork" has its origin in another Supreme Court battle from 1987—the failed confirmation of Robert Bork. Nominated by President Ronald Regan, Bork entered a confirmation process that remains controversial to this day. 

Kavanaugh was "Borked". 

[Rebound]

On 7/19/2024 at 9:40 AM, West said:

In watching some of the speeches last night

-Tucker Carlson alluded to his wife being forced to lock herself in her pantry while crazy people tried breaking into her home

-Donnie got shot in the ear

-Don Jr's kids and wife had white powder sent to their home

 -Melania and Baron had their underwear drawers raided by an illegal FBI raid

 

Look for them to slap lawsuits on the Democrats and their propagandists in the coming days

Fact Check: Registered Republican shot at Trump

[User]

23 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Fact Check: Registered Republican shot at Trump

And?

FACT CHECK: He donated to a left-wing progressive organization. 

 

 

[CdnFox]

28 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Fact Check: Registered Republican shot at Trump

FACT CHECK: DEMOCRAT DONOR SHOT AT TRUMP

[West]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Fact Check: Registered Republican shot at Trump

Fact check: leftists encouraged their radicals to register Republican for the primaries to vote against Trump

[BeaverFever]

Trump Backers Are Talking Up Possible Civil War
 

Last week, at J.D. Vance’s first rally as the GOP’s vice-presidential nominee, Ohio state Sen. George Lang said that civil war would be necessary if former president Donald Trump does not win the 2024 presidential election.

“I believe wholeheartedly Donald Trump and Butler County’s J.D. Vance are the last chance to save our country politically. I’m afraid if we lose this one, it’s going to take a civil war to save the country, and it will be saved,” Lang said, as the crowd erupted in raucous applause.
 

…
 

Shelby Busch, Arizona Republican National Convention Chair

In June, a video dropped revealing Shelby Busch, Arizona’s RNC chair, asserting that she’d lynch Stephen Richer, a fellow Republican who helped oversee the 2020 presidential election in Georgia’s Maricopa County.

“Let’s pretend that this gentleman over here was running for county recorder,” Busch said, according to the Washington Post. “And he’s a good Christian man that believes what we believe. We can work with that, right? That, that’s unity.”

She continued: “But if Stephen Richer walked in this room, I would lynch him. I don’t unify with people who don’t believe the principles we believe in and the American cause that founded this country. And so, I want to make that clear when we talk about what it means to unify.”
 

…

 

Georgia State Sen. Colton Moore

In August of last year, State Senator Colton Moore, who was banned from the House floor in March for calling another legislator “corrupt” in a speech, suggested a civil war would break out if Trump wasn’t reelected.

“Do you want a civil war? I don’t want a civil war,” saidMoore in a video. “I don’t want to have to draw my rifle. I want to make this problem go away with my legislative means of doing so.”

…

 

Kandiss Taylor, Host of Jesus, Guns, and Babies

Right-wing podcast host Kandiss Taylor has been aboard the Trump Train for quite some time. In 2022, after losing the Georgia GOP gubernatorial primary to Brian Kemp by 70 points, she refused to concede the results, following in Trump’s footsteps. So it should come as no surprise that she said, in 2023, that her side was prepared to “use guns” against Trump’s perceived enemies.

“This is war, and I hope and pray it gets resolved before we use guns…we’re at war right now, a war for our freedom,” said Taylor on a podcast in 2023.
 

…

 

Michigan State Rep. Matt Maddock

In August 2023, Michigan state Rep. Matt Maddock was caught on tape saying Democrats’ opponents would “shoot someone,” and the country would descend into civil war, if the government continued to charge Trump’s followers with election crimes.

“The goal is communism, right?” Maddock said during a fundraiser in his Michigan home, according to the Michigan Advance. “Or Marxism, the Democrats’ dream, right? But what’s going to happen before that? Someone’s going to get so pissed off, they’re going to shoot someone.”

Maddock continued: “That’s what’s going to happen. Or we’re going to have a civil war or some sort of revolution. That’s where this is going. And when that happens, we’re going to get squashed. The people here are going to be the first ones to go.”

He later compared the prosecution of January 6 protesters to Nazis leading Jewish people to the gas chambers during the Holocaust.

 

…

 

North Carolina Lieutenant Gov. Mark Robinson

North Carolina’s lieutenant governor is known for his wild statements, but this one takes the cake. On June 30, Robinson went on a screed about “wicked people” on the left, wrapping up his rant by appearing to endorse deadly force on those who oppose him.

“Some folks need killing!” Robinson said, according to the New Republic. “It’s time for somebody to say it. It’s not a matter of vengeance. It’s not a matter of being mean or spiteful. It’s a matter of necessity!”

“We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be,” he added.

 

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/07/trump-vance-civil-war-gop-political-violence/

[Nationalist]

On 7/25/2024 at 12:58 PM, Matthew said:

I think this is an important topic, despite everyone's best efforts here to trivialize it with nonsense examples. 

All political movements and parties and nations have the capacity for huge levels of actual political violence.

I think there are two things to look for:

1. Political rhetoric that encourages popular violence or mobilizes for it.

2. Acceptance of popular political violence when it does occur.

In history, left wing, right wing,  centrist, and traditionalist movements have all done this.

In the US right now the level of political violence is extremely low. Though fringe right wing terrorists in recent decades have done some attacks, those were not accepted by leaders on the right.

Trump has come close to vaguely enouraging low level violence, but he's not a very serious person and even his own followers are accustomed too not taking what he he says seriously.

Moderate left-leaning liberal and moderste right-leaning conservatives overwhelmingly denounce violence.

There are far left wing socialists who like to use rhetoric about guillotines and promote gun ownership. Though leftists currently do not mobilize for actual violence in the way that the far right militia groups do. But again neither of these extremes enjoy much popular appeal though the far right nationalism is by far more prevalent.

Really?

Gee...guess you're full o' sh1t.

 

[Michael Hardner]

Unfortunately, it's up to the public to lead in terms of decorum.  

But there's no way to practically assess who owns the worst rhetoric, unfortunately.

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Unfortunately, it's up to the public to lead in terms of decorum.  

But there's no way to practically assess who owns the worst rhetoric, unfortunately.

Both of those statements are untrue. 

While it's accurate to say that politics is downstream of culture, the politicians tend to set the music and the people tend to dance to what's playing.  That's what was so aggregious about what trudeau did, turning one against another for political points. 

And it is absolutely possible to practically assess who's worse. 

[BeaverFever]

Meanwhile back in reality UK is struggling with an ongoing wave of violent anti-immigrant far right riots that have broken out across the country sparked by fake news spread on social media by right wing groups and Neo Nazis.  After a British-born CHRISTIAN teenager with mental illness stabbed children at a dance studio, the right wing liars (including many who were previously banned from twitter for fake news and hate speech before Musk reinstated them) continue to falsely spread that the attacker was a Muslim asylum seeker 

 

Who Are the Far-Right Groups Behind the U.K. Riots?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/03/world/europe/uk-stabbing-riots-far-right-protesters-explained.html

 

UK police face far-right rioters seeking to enter hotel thought to be housing asylum seekers

Police in the north of England town of Rotherham were struggling to hold back a mob of far-right activists who were seeking to break into a hotel believed to be housing asylum seekers, in the latest bout of rioting following a stabbing rampage at a dance class last week that left three girls dead and several wounded showed few signs of abating

https://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/uk-police-face-far-right-rioters-seeking-to-enter-hotel-thought-to-be-housing-asylum-seekers/IRZBE3RM5RF4RDBCWFJ5BSFBQE/

 

Edited August 4, 2024 by BeaverFever

[User]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

Meanwhile back in reality UK

Almost as dumb as the last decade of violence pushed by Democrats lies about police violence against Black people. 

Who can forget the classic Big Lie that started most all of it: Hands up Don't Shoot!

 

[Nationalist]

On 7/26/2024 at 3:18 PM, Rebound said:

Fact Check: Registered Republican shot at Trump

Ahhh...the peanut gallery speaks.

[Rebound]

21 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Ahhh...the peanut gallery speaks.

Ahhh… the inconvenient facts show up.  

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Ahhh… the inconvenient facts show up.  

Not inconvenient at all sonny.

What's inconvenient is that the Democrat led justice and enforcement system is once again showcasing their ineptitude. 

[BeaverFever]

31 minutes ago, User said:

Almost as dumb as the last decade of violence pushed by Democrats lies about police violence against Black people. 

Who can forget the classic Big Lie that started most all of it: Hands up Don't Shoot!

 

Wrong those were caused by ACTUAL people protesting ACTUAL police violence against black people, not by Democrats. 

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

Not inconvenient at all sonny.

What's inconvenient is that the Democrat led justice and enforcement system is once again showcasing their ineptitude. 

Don’t you right wing kooks ever get tired of squealing “conspiracy” whenever reality is inconvenient?

[User]

2 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Wrong those were caused by ACTUAL people protesting ACTUAL police violence against black people, not by Democrats. 

Wrong?

Wait, are you still a believer of the phony "Hands up, Don't Shoot" narrative?

Time after time, there were phony narratives pushed where the black guy was on film running at a cop with a knife to stab him or was refusing lawful orders with a deadly weapon... 

Democrats pushed these phony narratives and drove a decade of violence culminating in the summer of violence by BLM after George Floyd, time and time again pushing phony narratives that caused riots and inciting violence. 

 

[Nationalist]

27 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Don’t you right wing kooks ever get tired of squealing “conspiracy” whenever reality is inconvenient?

No. We just keep a tally of reasons.

Do you ever get tired of being a dweeb?

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

Wrong those were caused by ACTUAL people protesting ACTUAL police violence against black people, not by Democrats. 

Don’t you right wing kooks ever get tired of squealing “conspiracy” whenever reality is inconvenient?

Ahhh - so any riots caused by  people you like are  "ACTUAL" riots  protesting ACTUAL things and aren't democrats, 

But any riots you DON"T like are 'FAKE riots organized by FAKE  people who are ultra right wing about FAKE  things and have no validity. 

Sheash.