Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Violence

Anti-Fascists 'Very Proud' of White Nationalist Counter-Protest That Led to Multiple Stabbing Victims

"Beat the fascists. Beat them."

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 6.26.2016 8:35 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | @ABC10Frances/Twitter
(@ABC10Frances/Twitter)

@ABC10Frances/Twitter

At least five people were stabbed in a statehouse skirmish between members of the white-nationalist Traditionalist Workers Party (TWP) and "anti-fascist" activists from a group called By Any Means Necessary (BAMN). The white-power group had gotten a permit and was demonstrating in front of the California capitol. BAMN members came brandishing wooden bats and shouting "fuck fascists. Beat the fascists. Beat them." One member Yvette Felarca told CNN she was "very, very proud" of the counter-protest that had produced such violence. 

"We've got to build a movement in this nation," said Felarca, noting that her group was full of people of many races and sexual orientations "standing together saying we will not accept or allow racist, genocide organizing to take place on the front steps of the capitol of California. And we would do it again." 

Insane video. Crowd sees any signs of "Nazis" and they run&attack. A lot of people bleeding/getting maced. @ABC10 pic.twitter.com/PoFhILfZ95

— Frances Wang (@ABC10Frances) June 26, 2016

According to the Sacramento Fire Department, five people were hospitalized with stab wounds and several more suffered cuts and bruises that didn't warrant hospitalization. "It was quite a bit of a melee," Chris Harvey, the department's public information officer, told CNN. He did not know which of the groups stabbing victims were from.

Matthew Heimbach, a chairman of the Traditionalist Worker Party who helped organized but did not attend the statehouse rally, said that one of his people had been stabbed in the artery, "but we got six of them." Heimbach blamed "leftist radicals" for instigating at a non-violent demonstration and said TWP members had been acting in self defense. 

Meanwhile, the anti-facists "came ready to fight," as California Assemblyman Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove) put it. They arrived wearing plastic shields and carrying wooden batons. They got physical with reporters that had come to cover the white nationalist rally. 

"The Nazis are dangerous, and that's why we need to take them on directly," a bandage-wearing Felarca told reporters. "Take them on head-on."

Mass casualty incident, multiple stabbing victims at State Capitol during rally. SFD crews triaging patients now. pic.twitter.com/0jGU3hpMXs

— SacFire PIO (@SacFirePIO) June 26, 2016

Sunday's statehouse rally, according to TWP's website, was designed "to protest against globalization and in defense of the right to free expression." The group bills itself as anti-globalist, but its ideology is old-fashioned white supremacy. Yet while the group's views may be racist and reactionary, it doesn't—at least in writing—advocate violence or destruction. The group's mission, according to its website, is to defend America against "economic exploitation, federal tyranny, and anti-Christian degeneracy." It encourages members to lobby lawmakers and go canvassing in their communities. It get permits for statehouse demonstrations. 

I'm not suggesting each and every member is a paragon of propriety in their personal interactions with people of color, but there's no evidence TWP members were in any way threatening the lives, livelihoods, or property of those whom they disdain. They were just standing around the statehouse wearing Nazi-themed t-shirts. 

Moral considerations aside, initiating violence against people protesting peacefully—no matter how odious their ideas—will never be a winning step strategically. And especially not in this case. It becomes clear in about five minutes of perusing the TWP website that what these "race realists" want more than anything is to be taken seriously—not just in the realm of politics but also (perhaps more so) in the realm of ideas. They want people to see what their view as common-sense Christian/conservative traditionalism, rooted in science—not promoters of violence or a fringe, hate ideology. And we live in a time where that's increasingly plausible. As one white-nationalist leader put it, "For many, many years, when I would say [certain 'racialist'] things, other white people would call me names: 'Oh, you're a hatemonger, you're a Nazi, you're like Hitler. Now they come in and say, 'Oh, you're like Donald Trump.'"

What white supremacists and the "alt-right" thrive on is is portraying their cause as a righteous and necessary response to moral degeneracy and/or "social justice warrior" illiberalism. They pine for credibility, culturally and intellectually. I'm not some sort of crusader for "civility" or purely passive resistence, but behaving like these sorts of groups merit this much attention and counter-action certainly doesn't work against them or their ideas. It doesn't actually benefit the cause of anti-fascism, racism, or bigotry. 

Even if BAMN is a fringe group itself, not condoned by most on the broad-spectrum U.S. left, its own ideology and tactics seem only shades, not substantive principles, away from the bizarre authoritarian bent in progressive activism on college campuses today. And even if initiating physical threats and violence to stop some perceived rhetorical "violence" could be ethically justified (I don't think it can), reacting this way only gives the white-identity-politics brigade what they want: a legitimate claim to victimhood and an excuse for escalation, whether that means actually physically attacking back or using this toward political and public-relations agendas. 

"We knew we were outnumbered. We stood our ground," said Traditionalist Workers Party chairman Heimbach said after the incident. "We will be back." 

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Don't Believe Any Headline Showing Hillary Clinton with a 12-Point Lead over Donald Trump

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

ViolenceCaliforniaRacismRacial JusticeProtestsActivismFree Speech
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (347)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Libertarian   9 years ago

    You know who else had fascist parades?

    1. Juvenile Bluster   9 years ago

      Illinois Nazis?

      1. MelissaHarper   9 years ago

        My Co-Worker's step-sister made $13285 the previous week. She gets paid on the laptop and moved in a $557000 condo. All she did was get blessed and apply the guide leaked on this web site. Browse this site....
        This is what I do________ http://www.Trends88.com

    2. Jimbo   9 years ago

      Hillary's village?

    3. Trigger Hippie   9 years ago

      Philip II of Macedon?

    4. DenverJ   9 years ago

      Macy's?

    5. Robert   9 years ago

      Mel Brooks?

    6. Uncle Jay   9 years ago

      Johnny Fuckerfaster?

    7. Billiamo   9 years ago

      The League of Extraordinary Armadillos?

  2. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

    Do words mean anything anymore?

    If everyone is at this rally is a fascist, how do they tell themselves apart?

    1. Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair   9 years ago

      +1 People's Liberation Front

      1. UCrawford   9 years ago

        "Oh, I thought we were the Popular Front."

        1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

          No No No, we are the Liberated Front of Peoples.

          1. Haybob   9 years ago

            I heard to join your group one has to really hate the Romans

    2. Quo Usque Tandem   9 years ago

      The only official definition of Fascism comes from Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, in which he outlines three principles of a fascist philosophy.

      1."Everything in the state". The Government is supreme and the country is all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator.
      2."Nothing outside the state". The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government.
      3."Nothing against the state". Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.

      So, given this definition by it's founder, which of the groups described above are the fascists?

      1. josh   9 years ago

        the reporters?

  3. hpearce   9 years ago

    I bet the press will cover which people got stabbed only if they were the anti-fascist "protesters"

    1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

      I bet the press will cover which people got stabbed only if they were the anti-fascist "protesters"

      So 6 out of the 7?

  4. Palin's Buttplug   9 years ago

    I hear the far-right is now referring to Trump as "Hair Furor".

    1. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

      Your supply always dries up by Sunday.

      I could set my watch to this shit.

    2. Jimbo   9 years ago

      I hear Hillary is Cunt in Chief.

      1. Palin's Buttplug   9 years ago

        What a zinger.

        1. Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair   9 years ago

          What a shit stopper.

  5. Fist of Etiquette   9 years ago

    Social justice warriors have their fear personified and you expect them to retreat to their safe space? Well, yeah, normally, but for some this is just too good to be true. Getting to initiate violence and be self-righteous about it on social media? Oh, baby, let's get some muscle over here!

  6. Lee G   9 years ago

    It's gonna be a long year.

    1. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

      Year? Someone's bring optimistic

  7. Palin's Buttplug   9 years ago

    common-sense Christian/conservative traditionalism, rooted in science

    No such thing. Their bullshit is thick.

    1. Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair   9 years ago

      Only because the bullshit plug knows where it is.

    2. Bodica Slayer of Woodchip   9 years ago

      You always can tell thick bullshit from the runny kind, can't you?

  8. Juvenile Bluster   9 years ago

    Even if BAMN is a fringe group itself, not condoned by most on the broad-spectrum U.S. left,

    ::checks Twitter and Facebook::

    Yeah, it's pretty well condoned on the broad-spectrum US left.

    1. ThomasD   9 years ago

      Yep, you had to know that such a vague, overly broad denial from ENB wasn't going to be worth the pixels displaying it.

  9. esteve7   9 years ago

    Fascists attacking Fascists?

  10. The Fusionist   9 years ago

    "Wow, we found some actual racists, with neo-nazi imagery and everything! So what can we do to make them into free-expression martyrs and get them mainstream media coverage?"

    1. Libertarian   9 years ago

      As with protesters waving Mexican flags, will this increase support for Trump? I look forward to hearing Hillary's take tomorrow when she wakes up around 10 a.m.

    2. Bra Ket   9 years ago

      Mainstream media coverage for white supremacists is what the left wants more than anything. They are critical evidence that "proves" the left's narrative about the entire right wing, via confirmation bias.

  11. You Sound Like a Prog (MJG)   9 years ago

    Since I'm not seeing protestations to the contrary, I have to assume that ENB agrees with the Traditional Worker Party and their fight for white justice. Spread the word!

    1. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

      Well, how else is she going to find a husband?

      1. Hamster of Doom   9 years ago

        I hope he lets her keep working after the wedding.

        1. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

          Having white babies is a lot of work.

          1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

            That's because y'all don't beat your kids like you're supposed to.

            1. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

              *pulls out notepad*

              1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

                "not the notepad!!!"

                (runs, locks self in closet)

      2. Ted S.   9 years ago

        She could marry Robby.

  12. The Fusionist   9 years ago

    The fact is that people at H&R, ie, people with at least a facsimile of sanity who know what words mean, get to call these racists and neo-nazis what they are.

    But what about the poor leftists who have already used up their vocabulary of "fascist" and "racist" on Donald Trump, people who say "on the other hand," and people who think the ladies' room is for ladies?

    What will they say when a *real* racist or fascist shows up? "Forget all those times we said someone else was a fascist, this time it's different, we're serious!"

    And what happens if they actually manage to persuade lots of people that waving a nazi flag and advocating white supremacy is just the same as voting for Trump or keeping men out of the ladies' room? Well, you'll get more people waving nazi flags and advocating white supremacy!

    1. Lee G   9 years ago

      They don't care if they conflate the two, in fact it's part of their tactics.

    2. Libertarian   9 years ago

      + '64 moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue

    3. Palin's Buttplug   9 years ago

      Trump's positions are all rooted in racism/bigotry. Otherwise he is raising taxes and cutting taxes, cutting health care and adding statist healthcare, etc.

      He really isn't running on anything else other than he can do "awesome deals" that he can't point to having done in the past.

      Trump says what stupid people want to hear.

      1. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

        I want to hear more about what you think about everything.

        1. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

          You'd like to subscribe?

      2. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

        Trump's positions are all rooted in racism/bigotry.

        No one ever bothers to actually make an argument to this effect.

        They just shriek "racist".

        And to be fair, it has always worked before. But it didn't work with Brexit. Could be it never works again. You may want to find a new tactic.

    4. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

      The racists who cry racism.
      The fascists who cry fascism.

      When I hear the media call someone "far right racist fascists", I just assume they're the good guys. Works 9 times out of 10.

  13. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

    *sigh*

    Nazis do not have the right to free speech.

    1. Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair   9 years ago

      They have to charge admission?

  14. Libertarian   9 years ago

    WHERE WERE THE COPS?

    1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

      More importantly, WHO WAS PHONE?

  15. Illocust   9 years ago

    So all the anti-protesters will be held on charges that result in jail time right? They showed up armed without a permit and loudly announced their goal to assault people. Surely that's warranting jail time for anyone they can get a picture of.

    1. Episteme   9 years ago

      Another report that I read noted that there weren't arrests. So the "counter-protestors" were allowed to break up a legal rally (however odious the message) and stab/bash folks with whom they disagreed without any comeuppance!

      1. VG Zaytsev   9 years ago

        Democrats have a long track record of using mob violence, unpunished by authorities, to suppress political activity of repressed minority groups, it's why the love gun control so much.

        1. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

          The initiation of force is a crime.
          The Left is a criminal enterprise.

      2. invisible finger   9 years ago

        Arrests? This was a recruitment opportunity.

    2. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

      So all the anti-protesters thugs who used violence to stop a peaceful protest

      FTFY

    3. ThomasD   9 years ago

      " They showed up armed without a permit and loudly announced their goal to assault people."

      That sort of behavior got the Aryan Nation sued into bankruptcy.

  16. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

    Jim Cooper wanted to require all cells phones that are sold in California to be capable of being encrypted.

    1. Rhywun   9 years ago

      It's almost like they want to crater the economy.

  17. GILMORE?   9 years ago

    re: "Anti-Fascists vs. White Nationalists"...

    do both these groups call *themselves* this?

    or is just just journalistic license based on the fashion-choices of each respective groups of Uber-Douchebags?

    signed
    Gilmore
    President of the American Society of Charming & Well-Endowed Ninjas

    1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

      The Ninjas may be well-endowed but [the remainder of this joke has been deleted on grounds of taste]

    2. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

      You never heard of "Antifa?"

      1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

        yeah, they're an afrobeat band full of jewish NYU kids

        1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

          A good point and sorely needed context is that for almost 30 years there has been a musical sub-genre(s), Rock Against Racism, Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice, etc. that has been explicitly anti-Neo Nazi, etc. Especially in Europe, the "antifa" punk movement has always been as radical as their racist/nationalist punk counterparts in its rhetoric, if not actions, against its opposition.

          1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

            Yeah, but these guys can play

            1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

              Speaking of Daptone, waiting for Charles Bradley's latest album to arrive in the mail.

    3. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

      Pics or GTFO

      1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

        If you insist

        1. Rhywun   9 years ago

          I'm not even going to ask how you knew where to find that.

          1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

            Oh, that's easy, just google "ninja pornography" and click on all the links.

            Then get a new computer.

            1. Rhywun   9 years ago

              Yeah, with a bigger hard drive.

              1. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

                Always trying to upgrade, eh?

          2. GILMORE?   9 years ago

            Bing image search is a blessing.

        2. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

          That isn't a photo of Joe Armstrong.

        3. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

          😐

  18. GILMORE?   9 years ago

    Holy *#&$@

    Did you watch the video linked in the tweet there?

    @0:12, this dude who started off just laying on the ground in pain, is struggling to his feet, and as he does so, one of these bandanna faced "anti-fascists" comes around behind him and brains him with a 2x4.

    its in the center of the screen so just watch the guy on the ground during the melee

    1. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

      Shortly after that another dude breaks a board over a guy in a white shirt directly behind that. It's like Where's Waldo meets a G20 meeting.

      1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

        Yeah, but the thing @ 12 seconds is =

        "a guy being hit from behind while already still dazed, giving the attacker opportunity to play Human T-Ball with his skull, and hitting him squarely in the skull without any awareness it was coming"

        Anyone who's been cold-cocked from behind knows that's concussion-material.

        Its one thing to get into fights with peopl you hate; its another thing to brain dudes with clubs who are basically already out of the fight and are struggling to even stand.

        1. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

          Pretty much. It appears that unconscious longhair gets dragged off. I also notice the club guy has the standard black face bandanna for extra chickenshit flair.

          1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

            standard black face bandanna

            Its white actually. You can decode the meaning of that here

            1. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

              😐

    2. Chipwooder   9 years ago

      It's OK though, because Nazis or something.

      If violence against Nazis is fine, and leftist scum frequently call libertarians fascists, how long before they attack us too?

      1. Chip Woodier   9 years ago

        Any libertarian that goes unarmed to a gathering like this is just asking for it.

      2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   9 years ago

        We own guns and we're not really joiners.

        1. Cloudbuster   9 years ago

          "Radical loner extremist shoots community activist"

          "He lived alone next to me for year. I never really knew him well, but I can't say I'm surprised. He had something like twenty copies of Atlas Shrugged."

    3. Rhywun   9 years ago

      Trump sure has a lot to answer for.

  19. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

    Oh. Violent leftists. How surprising.

    1. Sevo   9 years ago

      Lenin claims surprise! As do Stalin and Hitler.
      Didn't see it coming at all.

  20. Trigger Hippie   9 years ago

    Sunday Night Nazi Thread!!!

    *grabs popcorn and unzips

    1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

      Even TMZ thinks that's TMI.

    2. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

      The fake butter makes for great lube

      1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

        Been watching Brando's greatest hits, I see.

      2. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

        😐

    3. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

      Unrelated, but I actually do want popcorn right now.

  21. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

    I really don't see violence as being the worst possible outcome of any and every situation.

    In my day, scuffles with Nazi skinheads were pretty common at shows, etc.

    We certainly shouldn't conflate individuals indulging in violence with government suppression of free speech.

    Those are two separate issues.

    Sometimes violence can be the answer. Just understand that if you're a Nazi, and you want to demonstrate at the state capitol, some people think kicking you in the teeth and 90 days in jail is an even split. And I have a certain amount of respect for people who are willing to stand up for what they believe in that way. I'd hate to think totalitarian shitheads of whatever persuasion could come in and take over the place just because too many Americans were so afraid of violence that they couldn't even imagine standing up for themselves.

    The government shouldn't interfere with a Nazi's right to free speech, but sometimes when an individual follows his conscience, it really can lead him or her to punch someone in the face. And if you don't want to get punched in the face by some conscientious individual for standing on the capitol steps dressed up like a Nazi, then there's a really easy way to avoid that. Can you guess what it is?

    1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

      I really don't see violence as being the worst possible outcome of any and every situation.

      Neither do i.

      I think the "rationalizations for violence" are what should concern people.

    2. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

      Private individuals should respect each other's rights just as much as government should.

      1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

        It's sort of like in basketball, where there "fouls to give".

        Once there's a rule against something, it's part of the game.

        There should be penalties for fouls, of course. But just because there are laws against me sticking up for myself in various ways, doesn't necessarily mean it can't be in both my and society's interests for me to . . . give a foul and take the penalty.

        1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

          The heck with that, it's not a game, rights don't simply apply against government officials, they are good as against the whole world.

          1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

            Violating people's rights should be punished.

            I'm not saying they shouldn't be.

            But there are higher laws than the government, and sometimes the government gets in the way of people's conscience.

            If I were the juror in a trial against a kid who punched some Nazis in parade as they were going by the house of his grandmother who survived the holocaust, I might vote to convict the kid.

            Even if I voted to convict, I'd have a ton of respect for what he did. Maybe his grandmother saw what happened when nobody did anything. Maybe he decided she's never going to see that again. I'm not saying he shouldn't be tried. Maybe he should be convicted.

            I still got a ton of respect for people who stand up for themselves.

            1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

              OK, but there ought to be lawful channels for standing up for yourself, like you and your friends standing guard, with guns, in front of grandma's house, in case of trouble. And if they don't mess with you, you don't mess with them. Doesn't make you a wimp. Or an enemy of the rule of law.

              1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                Yeah, maybe they'll just leave us alone time, Grandma?

                I don't necessarily hold it against people if they're a little more proactive in that situation.

                1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                  Soon it will be July 12 in Belfast, we get to see how some of these principles apply in practice.

                  1. End Child Unemployment   9 years ago

                    Um, britons don't have rights, because they are not people. Irish are completely within their rights to murder any occupying brit on sight.

                2. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

                  Except in this hypothetical, they aren't coming for grandma, they are walking down the street. The kid isn't defending his grandmother, he's satisfying an urge to kick the assess of the bad guys. Which is totally understandable but not how we usually recommend people deal with those with whom they disagree

                  1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

                    So what you're saying is no one wants to be defeated, showin' how funky or strong is your fight; it doesn't matter who's wrong or who's right?

                    1. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

                      Beat it, HM.

                    2. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

                      Crusty, are you ok?

                      Are you are ok, Crusty?

                    3. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

                      *Are you

                    4. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

                      You've been hit by

                    5. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

                      You've been struck by

                    6. Greater Questions of Carl   9 years ago

                      You've been struck by

                      Ooh, my favorite Alien Ant Farm song!

                    7. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

                      Now I have a hankering to listen to some Adam Ant. What in the pluperfect hell?

                    8. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

                      You don't drink, don't smoke?

                    9. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

                      I'm an idiot. However, Adam Ant happened. This happened. The 80s, man.

                    10. Rhywun   9 years ago

                      Stand and Deliver makes up for that, though.

                    11. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

                      When people will still trying to figure out how music videos worked.

                    12. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

                      ::applause::

                  2. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                    That's what happened in Skokie, right?

                    Frank Collin, the leader of National Socialist Party of America, announced the party's intention to march through Skokie, Illinois. In the predominantly Jewish community, one in six residents was a Holocaust survivor or was directly related to one.[2]

                    http://tinyurl.com/jxxw9ad

                    "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out?
                    Because I was not a Socialist.

                    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out?
                    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

                    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out?
                    Because I was not a Jew.

                    Then they came for me?and there was no one left to speak for me."

                    At some point in that progression, somebody may have thought to pick up a gun and fight the Nazis. Presumably, there must have been some point between speaking out and shooting where punching someone in the face was the right thing to do.

                    Illegal? Yeah, and rightly so--but maybe also the right thing to do.

                    So, where was that point? I wouldn't want the Nazis to speak out and just think that no one cares. We should remind them periodically, at least, that they are unappreciated.

                    1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                      "Coming for the socialists/communists" meant dissolving their parties, beating them up, killing them, putting them in concentration camps, the whole bit.

                      "Coming for them" doesn't mean criticizing socialists - under that definition you could beat up Bastiat.

                    2. Bra Ket   9 years ago

                      "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out...."

                      This isn't about speaking out.

                    3. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                      "This isn't about speaking out."

                      Did you read the rest of what I wrote?

                      "At some point in that progression, somebody may have thought to pick up a gun and fight the Nazis. Presumably, there must have been some point between speaking out and shooting where punching someone in the face was the right thing to do."

              2. GamerFromJump   9 years ago

                Bring back dueling!

            2. techgump   9 years ago

              Ug. And some have mass respect for killing in the name of Islam's law, or burning children with Napalm in the name of imperialism. People like you, and there are many, find a way to not only justify the initiation of violence, but respect it. That's just sad, barbaric, and not something to admire.

              1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                Violence isn't necessarily evil or wrong--especially when it's used for a just cause.

                Violence should be generally avoided. No doubt about that. Unless it's purely recreational.

                But sometimes violence is necessary.

                Thank God for the Second Amendment, right?

                1. techgump   9 years ago

                  Defending and attacking are two very different things. Nobody has a right to be an attacker, to be the aggressor, nor is that ever right or just.

                  1. SIV   9 years ago

                    Maybe in fucking hippieland.

                    Retributive violence is often right and just.

                    1. techgump   9 years ago

                      Like throwing men off 10 story buildings while blindfolded... for being gay.
                      Or equally as 'right and just' violent retribution, stoning women for adultery. Right?
                      Seems you, like others, easily find righteousness in initiating violence for your beliefs.

                    2. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                      Are you suggesting that because some acts of violence are unjustified, that means all acts of violence are unjustified?

                      Because the logic thingy doesn't work that way.

                    3. techgump   9 years ago

                      First, I never said violence isn't justified. I stated INITIATING it is. Defending yourself (violence) from aggressors is indeed justified.
                      As for my point, it's clear. Don't think for a second others initiating violence via the acts I've listed for the reasons I've listed don't believe they aren't justified. They do, just as you've convinced yourself initiating violence for your 'just' beliefs is right.

        2. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

          If you feel that compelled to follow your conscience, then you certainly *can* do so. But don't expect me to condone it.

          Violence certainly can be an appropriate response, but generally speaking, only in response to other acts of violence.

          1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

            Well, part of being a libertarian is understanding the difference between what's moral and what's legal.

            Sometimes things that are immoral should be legal.

            Sometimes things that are illegal really are immoral.

            Sometimes things are illegal that are moral.

            And sometimes just because it should be illegal and is illegal doesn't mean no one should do it.

            It's like Evel Knievel beating his ex-publicist senseless with a baseball bat for falsely accusing him of being a drug addict and a wife-beater in a tell-all book. Once the publisher realized it was all lies, they didn't publish it, but Evel Knievel needed something more for his publicist's betrayal than that. So he beat the shit out of his ex-publicist with an aluminum bat.

            At the arraignment, Evel Knievel plead guilty. The judge released him on his own recognizance pending sentencing. On the way out of court, a reporter asked him why he plead guilty. Evel Knievel replied, "Because I did it". He went on to sentencing and did his time.

            The government isn't always great at exacting justice.

            1. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

              Well, part of being a libertarian is understanding the difference between what's moral and what's legal.

              Being a libertarian means knowing the difference between the *initiation* of force and force used in self defense.

              But thanks for playing.

              1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                Actually, you're not in charge of what defines libertarianism. It's certainly not merely your preferred philosophical formulation--just because you say so.

                There are, however, certain things that most every libertarian buys into.

                If you're a small state libertarian, chances are you believe that if the existence of government has any legitimate justification at all, it's there to protect our rights. I don't really see how you get around that one.

                Also, if you're a libertarian, chances are you recognize the difference between morality and the law. It may be immoral to cheat on your spouse, but that doesn't mean the government needs to prosecute people for adultery. Meanwhile, just because it's legal for the government to imprison adults for possessing cannabis, doesn't mean it's moral for the government to do so.

                I can see how some libertarians might justify acting aggressively in defense of their freedom in certain situations, but I don't see how anybody can be a libertarian and think that there isn't an important difference between morality and the law.

                On the other hand, anybody who thinks individuals shouldn't stand up for themselves as they see fit--independent of government--isn't being much of an anarchist. I'm not an anarchist either, but I can do a pretty good job of taking care of myself without much help from the government.

                1. Velocett   9 years ago

                  First you define what being a libertarian is to someone...then when someone else defines what a libertarian is you say "You're not in charge of what defines libertarianism".

                  What a self-righteous hypocritical joke you are.

                  1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                    I know libertarians who believe that government has no legitimate purpose. So how could the idea that the legitimate purpose of government is to protect our rights be the definition of libertarianism?

                    Likewise, the observation that there's a difference between morality and law isn't the definition of libertarianism either. I just showed that it's a libertarian idea regardless of whether one believes in NAP.

                    Showing people that there are libertarian principles apart from the NAP, in response to being told that an idea isn't lbertarian unless it superficially complies with NAP, is not defining libertarianism any more than debunking one bad argument is necessarily insisting on another bad argument.

                    I.e., you say A is not B therefore it is not libertarian.

                    I point out that C is not B but is libertarian, that D is not B but is libertarian, . . .

                    Therefore there are libertarian things that are not B.

                    That doesn't mean C and D are the real definition of libertarianism. It just means that the real definition of libertarianism is not B.

    3. The Fusionist   9 years ago

      I don't know, think who you're empowering with talk like that?

      Once you've said that there are people whose views are so bad that they morally deserve an ass-kicking, who's going to take up your invitation and administer the ass-kickings?

      Not people for whom 90 days in jail would be shameful and would endanger their job. In other words, respectable people aren't going to say, "eh, 90 days in jail, sure, that's a price I want to pay!"

      It's people with little or nothing to lose - bums, liberal-arts students, professional activists, and the like - who will be in the position to take that "conscientious" choice.

      And bums, liberal-arts students and professional activists will attack anyone they *think* is a nazi, which of course would include anti-feminist speakers, Trump supporters, etc. This isn't hypothetical.

      1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

        "In other words, respectable people aren't going to say, "eh, 90 days in jail, sure, that's a price I want to pay!"

        I got to a certain age and a certain level of accomplishment, and I definitely started caring more about that than I used to.

        1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

          So you're effectively farming out all that ass-kicking to people who aren't going to make the fine distinctions you make.

          1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

            And since this whole thread simply invites Godwinning, yes, Hitler *did* come for the Commies first.

            1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

              They rarely start with the strongest target, they go for the people who are considered unsympathetic, then work up from there.

          2. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

            I don't run into Nazi skinheads all the time like I used to.

            I can't remember the last time I saw one.

            It wouldn't be an instant fight like it used to be. But I've got respect for people who will stand up against that sort of thing.

            I'm not willing to automatically assume that violence is worse than cowardice, and I think Nazis (and others) prey on the fact that a lot of people do think violence is worse than cowardice.

            1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

              Might I ask that you be more specific about what the skinheads were doing?

              1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                What Nazi skinhead gangs were doing at shows back in the '80s?

                They were beating the shit out of anyone that got in their range, and they were forming bash crews to cruise various places after the show to beat the shit out of people they caught on the street that they didn't like. You know what Nazi skinhead gangs used to do.

                They were looking for trouble. We were looking for trouble.

                1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                  OK, sounds like their behavior was actually, indisputably illegal and aggressive.

                  I'm not so sure about the guys with the permit in California. Maybe it will turn out they did something aggressive, too, I'm not ruling it out, but so far I haven't heard of anything like what those guys you're talking about did.

            2. Sevo   9 years ago

              "I'm not willing to automatically assume that violence is worse than cowardice"

              Pretty sure there's quite a bit of geography between those two poles.

            3. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

              Not resorting to violence is not the same thing as cowardice, though.

              1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                Here's a great example of righteous violence:

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKJIbydSiNU

                That the Dropkick Murphys covering TNT by AC/DC, an old skinhead anthem. The Dropkick Murphys used to be/still are a skinhead band--but not Nazi at all.

                They had a bunch of fans with them on stage, and one the guys (left side of the stage) starts throwing Nazi salutes instead of pumping his fist like a Trojan skin. The Dropkick Murphys really, really didn't appreciate being associated with Nazis by anybody in the crowd who didn't understand the difference--so they beat the shit out of the Nazi in front of everybody and announced that Nazis weren't welcome at their shows.

                If you don't want the Dropkick Murphys to beat the shit out of you for jumping up on stage with them and throwing Nazi salutes, there's an easy way to avoid that. Can you guess what it is?

                1. Rhywun   9 years ago

                  *googles*

                  Huh. And I thought they were Aussies.

                2. Sevo   9 years ago

                  Ken,
                  Yeah, someone busting into your performance is *exactly* like someone holding a protest meeting in a public space.
                  Don't do that.

                  1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                    It was just one example of violence that while illegal was probably also righteous (for want of a better word).

                    I didn't mean to suggest that situation was exactly equivalent to anything else--it was just meant as an example to show that violence is sometimes both as illegal as it should be and also called for.

                    1. Sevo   9 years ago

                      Ken Shultz|6.26.16 @ 11:22PM|#
                      "It was just one example of violence that while illegal was probably also righteous (for want of a better word)"

                      So were the nukes to end WWII, but I wouldn't bother mentioning them WRT this bunch of thugs.
                      Your effort look like, to me and others, and attempt to justify the Red Guard here; don't bother.

                3. egould310   9 years ago

                  Nazi skinheads were a nuisance at punk shows across the nation from the mid-80's into the early 90's. The way they were rooted out of the scene was through violence. Justified violence. Punks fighting nazi skins. It worked.

                  Since it's Reason, I didn't bother to rtfa, so I don't know if this violence was justified. But in my experience, what Ken Shultz is saying about nazi punk bullshit is correct.

                4. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                  "Can you guess what it is?"

                  Don't trespass on the venue's property?

                  Obey event security when they ask you to leave?

                  1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                    If you don't want the Dropkick Murphys to kick your ass for jumping up on stage with them and throwing Nazi salutes, you can avoid that by not jumping up on stage with them and throwing Nazi salutes.

                    1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                      I haven't looked it up, but I somehow don't think someone who jumps on stage with the performers is acting within his legal rights, and that he can be forcibly removed, and if he resists being forcibly removed he can get beaten up to the extent necessary to overcome his resistance.

                      In other words, he didn't get a permit to parade on public property, he was doing some other shit entirely.

                      I think you're citing cases where the neo-nazis were the aggressors and conflating them with cases where the at least appear to be complying with legal requirements regarding parades.

                    2. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                      "I haven't looked it up, but I somehow don't think someone who jumps on stage with the performers is acting within his legal rights"

                      1) You keep looking for legal justifications when none are intended.

                      They beat the crap out of the Nazi for their own reasons. I happen to think they had good reasons. Those reasons have nothing to do with the law or the Constitution. The Dropkick Murphys aren't the government. They're not responsible for protecting anyone's free speech rights. They're just obligated to respect them. They threw that obligation away in this case.

                      I think they had good reasons. I think they broke the law. I think they violated that Nazi's rights, and I applaud them for doing so. If they were tried for beating up that Nazi and I were on the jury, I might vote to convict them. And I would still applaud them for what they did.

                      Sometimes doing the wrong thing is the right thing to do.

                      I remember when Osama bin Laden was killed. Jacob Sullum wrote a column about all the Constitutional problems with the operation and how it was carried out. So many laws broken.

                      I'm glad. I'm glad they killed him--even if it was illegal and unconstitutional. If the brave soldiers who killed him are brought up on charges for breaking the law, they should be punished in accordance with the law. Even if they violated the Constitution, they should be punished severely and given a hero's parade.

                    3. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                      2) We're not talking about legal rights. The government isn't involved here. We're talking about individuals and how they justify their own actions, but they don't necessarily need to justify them to anyone else but themselves.

                      If I walk up to a Nazi and kick him in the ass, that's my business. You can arrest me for it, and maybe I'll plead guilty. But it isn't about the law. It isn't about legal rights. Maybe I take the penalty and commit the foul. Society's gotta do its job. I know that. The government has to do its job in protecting the rights of Nazis from getting kicked in the ass by people like me, too. But this isn't about the government. It's about me.

                      Sometimes, it may be necessary for me to stand up and defend myself. Sometimes, I may need to go on the offensive, too. George Orwell thought it was necessary to go to Spain, take up arms, and shoot fascists. Generally speaking, shooting people violates their rights. Whether Orwell was legally justified in shooting people for being Nazis is an absurd question. The interesting question is whether Orwell felt justified himself.

                    4. egould310   9 years ago

                      And talking and debating and gentle persuasion does not work on these assclowns. They were there to disrupt, disturb, divide, and destroy the Dropkick Murphys show.

                      It was an odd tactic the nazi skins took. There was a concentrated effort to disrupt and ruin shows. Was the nihilism of national socialism supposed to appeal to punks? Were they hoping violence against skins would create martyrs, thus inspiring other white kids? It never made much sense to me.

                    5. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                      I'm saying it's cool to throw them out when they disrupt shows, but not cool to beat on them simply because they have a parade permit and are saying stuff you don't like.

                    6. egould310   9 years ago

                      Re: Fusionist@ 11:40

                      You are correct.

            4. Azathoth!!   9 years ago

              What always interested me was how often 'Nazi skinhead' referred to the out group. The people who weren't part of the in crowd. The freaks among the freaks.

              What was always obvious is that there were only 'instant' fights when the uncool kids were vastly outnumbered. When the 'antifa' or 'Sharp' crowd knew they could do what they wanted without fear of getting hurt.

              Saw WAY too many instances at shows where the 'anti-fascist'/'Sharp' skins singled some guy out at a show who was just standing there, watching the band, to be their punching bag for the night.

              Who are the antifa/sharp groups today? SJW assholes, still looking for innocents to hurt--leftists attacking Jews(as always) and claiming that 'nazis' as still some kinda threat to throw people off.

              Fuck you, Ken--as soon as your crowd infected a scene the clock started ticking towards death--you fuckers even killed CBGBs.

              1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

                I wasn't a sharp or a skinhead--ever.

                So, up yours!

    4. Get To Da Chippah   9 years ago

      The government shouldn't interfere with a Nazi's right to free speech, but sometimes when an individual follows his conscience, it really can lead him or her to punch someone in the face. And if you don't want to get punched in the face by some conscientious individual for standing on the capitol steps dressed up like a Nazi, then there's a really easy way to avoid that. Can you guess what it is?

      If I follow my conscience by getting a permit and engaging in an act to which I have as much a right as anyone, then brandishing a gun I legally own seems to be both an easy and legal way to avoid getting punched in the face by someone who can't handle hearing what I might have to say.

      1. Get To Da Chippah   9 years ago

        Or if not brandishing, then merely openly carrying a firearm will probably keep any face-punchers at bay.

        1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

          And now, Grasshopper, you understand why some people want to "control" guns.

          1. Sevo   9 years ago

            Like, perhaps, the 'anti-fascists' in the story?

            1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

              11 years in the making:

              BAMN's major tactics center on extensive college and high school outreach via pamphleting, debate, speakers, film and rallies as well as social events. It has also been accused of using the methods of violence and intimidation. Critics of BAMN tactics state that the group creates 'mob' scenes where democratic processes have become overwhelmed and individuals threatened.[9][10] For example, in December 2005, BAMN disrupted a meeting of the Michigan State Board of Canvassers in which the Board voted to put a measure that would prohibit race-based preferential treatment in higher education on the November 2006 ballot. They did so by shouting down officials and overturning chairs and tables?a familiar tactic for the group.[11]
              Conflict with law enforcement

              In recent years, some actions by BAMN have been classified by the U.S Government to be terrorism.[12] The American Civil Liberties Union reported that the FBI placed BAMN on a terrorist list, despite "no mention of violent acts."[13][14][15] According to the FBI, the group's protests were discussed in a meeting about alleged links to terrorist organizations.[16] In response to the monitoring of BAMN and other nonviolent groups, the Executive Director of Michigan's ACLU Kary Moss said that the FBI "posed a 'threat to legitimate dissent.'"[17]

              1. Sevo   9 years ago

                So "Red Guards" isn't far off the mark. Thugs...

              2. See Double You   9 years ago

                In response to the monitoring of BAMN and other nonviolent groups

                Well now.

                1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

                  This seems appropriate.

                  1. Sevo   9 years ago

                    Well, sand they get a watch, too, right Alex?

              3. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

                The initiation of force is crime.
                The Left is organized crime.

    5. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

      some people think kicking you in the teeth and 90 days in jail is an even split.

      How many arrests? I haven't heard of any.

    6. ertdfg   9 years ago

      I'm guessing punch idiots like you in the face first so you don't punch me because you've decided your disagreement with me justifies you punching me.
      Aggressive self-defense as it were.

      Is that the correct answer?
      Or is your demand that you be permitted to initiate violence without legal or justifiable cause; but nobody else should be permitted to do that same?

      So the moral high ground of "It's only good when I do it'?
      Yeah. How could I possibly have guessed?

      For teh record; your plan leads to everyone going with my solution.
      If your goal is to have a lot more violence (including directed at you and yours specifically); congratulations.
      If your goal wasn't to have a lot more violence...
      Then maybe quit calling for more violence.

    7. Velocett   9 years ago

      I scuffled with plenty of nazi skins at plenty of shows. I fought friggin Hammerskins, because they're based in my city. I was a Redskin SHARP for many years. I also protested with ARANet many times against KKK and other racist groups.

      You send exactly like every poseur I ever heard who bragged about this stuff and never did it themselves. Always a few kids like you talking big talk at shows and never there in the fight. Kids sporting laces and braces with shiny new doc martins they're afraid to get scuffed in a fight. Yeah, reading your posts below that sounds exactly like who you were "back in your day".

  22. GILMORE?   9 years ago


    The similarities are noted

  23. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

    I'm reminded of Hayek's insight that communists and fascists hate each other so much because they are fighting for the same ideological ground.

    1. Ken Shultz   9 years ago

      Street violence doesn't necessarily need a rationale.

      Some people like to duke it out just because it's fun and exciting.

      1. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

        And yet they seemed to have had a pretty clear rationale in this case

      2. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

        And yet they seemed to have had a pretty clear rationale in this case

      3. Sevo   9 years ago

        "Street violence doesn't necessarily need a rationale.
        Some people like to duke it out just because it's fun and exciting."

        True enough, but when you've planned the mob to support a rationale and you're claiming the rationale while you're in the process of beating the crap out of someone, I think a rationale can be presumed.

  24. Sevo   9 years ago

    OT:
    Bremains really like democracy, unless it goes the other way:

    "Scotland's leader declared the Scottish parliament might try to block Britain's exit from the European Union and lawmakers in the opposition Labor Party revolted against their chief for his lackluster efforts to persuade British voters to stay in the bloc.
    [...]
    Sturgeon said she believes Scotland's consent is required for the move but conceded the British government would probably take "a very different view."
    http://www.sfgate.com/world/ar.....326117.php (or your fave AP reseller)

    So Scotland could have bailed from GB and wisely decided to stay, 'cause free shit. Now, Scotland wants to bail from GB, 'cause free shit:
    "Scotland Europa is a membership-based organisation that promotes Scotland's interests across the institutions of the European Union and to the representatives of Europe's regions and Member States.
    We help Scottish organisations foster successful European relationships, providing guidance on European policies and funding."
    https://www.scotlandeuropa.com/

    That's "funding" you see right there.

    1. See Double You   9 years ago

      I weep for modern Scotland. Such a wonderful Enlightenment history; all discarded in the name of freedom free shit.

      I've also seen these various, umm, explanations of why Brexit wasn't really democratic:

      - This kind of historical decision needs at least a 2/3 majority;

      - Most of the Remain people stayed home, so really only a minority of Brits actually voted;

      - Referendums aren't really democracy; and

      - Ignorant votes shouldn't count.

      1. Sevo   9 years ago

        And reading between the lines, most of the Bremains are smart people, so they should win even if they lose!

      2. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

        2/3 majority is majick democracy, you see.

      3. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

        Their negotiation tactic: "seriously, we make Scotch."

        1. See Double You   9 years ago

          Who needs tape?

        2. The Fusionist   9 years ago

          Does it come in a can?

          1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

            Another Scotch-in-a-can link

            1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

              "Hmmm, I got a Scotch in one hand, my remote in the other, now my balls itch. What do I do?"

          2. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

            best scotch in a can

            1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

              "It's an okay scotch ale, and likely the best scotch ale you can get from a can."

              1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

                Good scotch ale in a can is proof that the world is awesome. USA USA USA

    2. Sevo   9 years ago

      And you'll note that there is "DISARRAY!", probably something approximating the disarray after the D's had to get their asses off the floor after no one bothered listening to them

  25. Ken Hagler   9 years ago

    I first thought was that the leaders of the two organization no one ever heard of before staged the whole thing to get publicity.

  26. See Double You   9 years ago

    Wait, we fight the Brownshirts by acting like Brownshirts?

    1. Sevo   9 years ago

      Well, the "Red Guards" wasn't seen as a really popular moniker.

    2. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

      You're gonna have to turn a few tricks before you can work as a vice cop

  27. chemjeff   9 years ago

    "the bizarre authoritarian bent in progressive activism"

    What's so bizarre about it?

    1. Trigger Hippie   9 years ago

      Yeah, it's pretty much a prerequisite.

  28. GILMORE?   9 years ago

    Update =

    The guy i noted above @12 seconds in the video?

    He's one of the "White Nationalists".

    e.g.
    - Image from the video
    - Tweet from the leader of the Reich-du-jour

    I'm going to guess he's the guy standing third from the right based on height, hat color, etc.

    1. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

      Nice find. You're a bona fide hard boiled Dick, Gilmore.

      1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

        i don't have a hanky for that, so no thank you.

  29. wareagle   9 years ago

    and we move one step closer to the fatality everyone knows is coming. By the way, how often is it that a group makes the neo-Nazis look like the good guys?

    1. See Double You   9 years ago

      The Mencken quote comes to mind.

      1. Rich   9 years ago

        This one?

        "An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup."

        1. See Double You   9 years ago

          "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."

          1. Rich   9 years ago

            "To die for an idea; it is unquestionably noble. But how much nobler it would be if men died for ideas that were true!"

            1. Hamster of Doom   9 years ago

              "Every normal must, at times, be tempted to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and begin slitting throats."

              That's my final answer.

  30. Palin's Buttplug   9 years ago

    Bratfart talks the evils of free trade and how Trump protectionists are on the right side of history:

    http://www.breitbart.com/2016-.....ump-trade/

    1. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

      Bratfart? I laughed. You have a gift. Please, share moore.

      1. See Double You   9 years ago

        On par with "Block Yomama," eh?

        1. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

          I did not think that it would be possible to sink lower than Block Yomama, but I was sorely mistaken.

          1. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

            Hush your tender supple lips, nothing beats Block Yomomma a.k.a. Threadwinner.

          2. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

            Calm down. He's the guy you want to keep around to feel better about yourself.

      2. chemjeff   9 years ago

        Breitbart has degenerated into gibbering idiots knob-gobbling Trump.

        I think Andrew Breitbart would be embarrassed by what his eponymous website has turned into.

      3. See Double You   9 years ago

        share moore

        Did you mean Shemar Moore?

        1. egould310   9 years ago

          I clicked that expecting a chick.

          Fuck you.

          May as well have been rickrolled.

          1. See Double You   9 years ago

            Dude, never click a .jpeg link addressed to Crusty.

            1. egould310   9 years ago

              Salient point. My mistake.

              1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

                Haha. Finally clicked this. Shemar Moore really blew it by not being a total fuck up. He could have had a reality show on E!.

  31. Shit Pyrate   9 years ago

    This article should have been. "War Profiteers. Who Gives A Flying Fuck IF A Bunch Of Assholes Kill Each Other?"

    If a bunch of Statist Fucks want to kill each other than I am more than willing to sell them the tools to do it.

    1. wareagle   9 years ago

      one group showed up to exercise a constitutional right, the other group showed up to prevent that exercise through violence. These groups are not the same.

      1. Shit Pyrate   9 years ago

        I don't care. Buy my products, and murder each other.

        1. Shit Pyrate   9 years ago

          If you want an end to "Guns" then stop using state sanctioned violence against people. "Gun Control" is easy as that.

          1. wareagle   9 years ago

            when did I mention wanting "an end to guns"?

            1. Jimbo   9 years ago

              OMG, Look!! wareagle wants to take our guns away!

              1. See Double You   9 years ago

                *raises a wooden bat menacingly at wareagle*

                1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

                  *raises aBlind-sides See Double You with a wooden bat menacingly at wareagle*

      2. GILMORE?   9 years ago

        one group showed up to exercise a constitutional right, the other group showed up to prevent that exercise through violence. These groups are not the same.

        from everything i've seen, it looks like they both "came to fight". the most vicious attack witnessed in the above video was one of the charmers with the pitchfork-T-shirt

        1. wareagle   9 years ago

          one talked about attacking the other, blatantly it seems. Good to see the cops being so vigilant. Maybe if either group had brought along a dog or two. Either way, there is going to be a fatality before the last vote is cast this season .

          1. Rich   9 years ago

            Did you mean "the *first* vote"?

            1. wareagle   9 years ago

              maybe that's the over/under. With each violent protest in which cops seemingly do nothing, those willing to be violent will push the envelope a bit further. Eventually, they'll go the whole way and everyone will pretend to be outraged and appalled.

        2. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

          it looks like they both "came to fight".

          You can't fool me, Gilmore, that's a picture of a Vampire LARP group playing as modern Brujah.

  32. dajjal   9 years ago

    The problem is not 'hate'. The problem is these groups are just looking to provide each other with excuses for violence. Which is the end goal of both sides (their politics are confused and inconsistent). That's the problem when you breed entire classes of people as workers and warriors.

  33. HazelMeade   9 years ago

    Way to light up the Trumptard bat signal, Reason.

    1. chemjeff   9 years ago

      What does it say when an article about white nationalists beckons the Trump supporters to come in...

    2. Shit Pyrate   9 years ago

      The Reason Commenters should always stay the same, and never deviate decade, to decade.
      /Hazel
      GET OFF MY LAWN !!!!!

      1. chemjeff   9 years ago

        How exactly is Trumpism supposed to be appealing to libertarians?

        If it's not appealing, why do you expect Reason commenters to be effuse in praise?

        1. Shit Pyrate   9 years ago

          How is being a shrinking violet helpful ?

          1. Shit Pyrate   9 years ago

            Live until you Die

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf1p0Za-IFQ

        2. wareagle   9 years ago

          you're the one bringing up Trumpism. The story here seems that of one group happy to use violence against those it does not agree with.

          1. chemjeff   9 years ago

            Yes, you are right. Sorry I am just a bit touchy by all the Trumpbots insisting that anyone who is broadly right-of-center have some moral imperative to vote for Trump because HILLARY IS JUST THAT BAD. Yes she is bad but that doesn't require a vote for Trump, and I am just sick of people demanding that I get on the Trump Train based on some right-wing narrative that Hillary would represent THE END OF THE REPUBLIC.

            1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

              Why don't you want to make America great again, jeff?

              1. chemjeff   9 years ago

                Yeah, you caught me. I don't support Trump therefore I hate America.

                1. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

                  I don't support Trump therefore I hate America.

                  and Japan.

            2. GILMORE?   9 years ago

              all the Trumpbots insisting that anyone who is broadly right-of-center have some moral imperative to vote for Trump .... I am just sick of people demanding that I get on the Trump Train

              what?

              1. chemjeff   9 years ago

                Not here, elsewhere on the dextrosphere.

                1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

                  ah.

                  but where are all the trump-supporters that you mentioned above, drawn here like moths to any mention of their White Nationalist Heroes?

                  You don't mean Eddie do you? He's *constitutionalist party*, which supports Dave Chappelle for president.

                  1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                    Hardy har har.

                    I don't care if your skin is white so long as your robe, hood and mask *aren't.*

                    I don't care if your skin is brown so long as your shirt *isn't.*

                    1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

                      I meant no disrespect. I am a huge fan of Dave Chappelle, i just question his leadership qualifications.

                  2. chemjeff   9 years ago

                    Maybe nowhere. I don't know. I'm still PO'ed at them.

                2. SIV   9 years ago

                  Get on the Trump Train

                  Last one aboard is a cuckatarian

                  1. chemjeff   9 years ago

                    LOL evidently so.

                  2. HazelMeade   9 years ago

                    Last one aboard is a cuckatarian

                    Nothing is more amusing than the way Trumptards fear the black cock.

            3. Azathoth!!   9 years ago

              Holy crap!!

              People who support a candidate suggesting that other people support their candidate too or the world will end--why that's never been done before!!1..!!......//! what?

              Trump's eeevvviiilll genius at work.

            4. HazelMeade   9 years ago

              Hillary is inevitable. Your vote doesn't matter, so cast it for someone you actually support.
              If it were close, I might vote for Hillary just to stop Trump, but it's not going to be close.

  34. Rhywun   9 years ago

    Oh, Messi... you've chosen an unusual way to make this game all about you, don't you think.

  35. GILMORE?   9 years ago

    OT =

    Tommen, Rickon = No Game.... at All

    I think its a subtle dig at the impotence of modern youth.

  36. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

    The fun is only just beginning

  37. Sevo   9 years ago

    New AP hand-wringing, pants-shitting, forelock-pulling, undie-twisting, OMFGTWIET!"
    "British political turmoil deepens after EU referendum"
    [...]
    "Britain's shocking decision to remove itself from the European Union brought more political turmoil Sunday as Scotland's leader threatened to block the move and the opposition Labour Party's leader faced a coup attempt from his own legislators...."
    Number 5 will shock you! Scotland voted for free shit from GB a couple of years back, now they are threatened with losing the free shit from the EU; oh, the HORROR of choosing one free shit from the other!

    "The sense of unease spread..."
    Yep, that was measured by sampling the populations of.......
    The Brussels 'crats who are terrified that others might find them wortheless and so, they are very 'uneased' and trying to make this as difficult as possible. Remember how a 2% tax cut means you don't get parks, a fire department and cops? Why do you hate the children?
    Spam allowed; long comments denied; part 1

    1. Sevo   9 years ago

      Part 2:
      "The leaders of the successful campaign to leave the EU stayed largely out of the public eye, as opponents accused them of lacking a plan to calm the crisis the result has triggered."
      Uh, except...
      "In his first statement since Friday morning, "leave" leader and former London Mayor Boris Johnson used his column in the Daily Telegraph newspaper to urge unity and say "the negative consequences (of the vote) are being wildly overdone."
      http://www.sfgate.com/news/wor.....325630.php

      The 'media' and the bureaucrats who feed them stories they don't have to write are more than willing to shovel that pile of BS.

      1. chemjeff   9 years ago

        But you want to know what the most noteworthy thing is about this whole Brexit thing?

        There was a referendum, it was a nonbinding referendum, and nevertheless, everyone is reacting *seriously* to the result, as if it had been binding. The Prime Minister fucking resigned because of it. I cannot even fathom something similar happening here.

        1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

          Non binding.... But the left is wedded to the idea of democracy. And per democracy, this is binding. Don't you love democracy?

        2. GILMORE?   9 years ago

          The Prime Minister fucking resigned because of it.

          Politics is about creating the perception of legitimacy

          Once you've lost that, unless you step aside, you risk also bringing down the legitimacy of the process.

          I cannot even fathom something similar happening here.

          Similar things happen here all the time. Hell, someone like Trump or Clinton might actually become president.

          1. chemjeff   9 years ago

            "Politics is about creating the perception of legitimacy

            Once you've lost that, unless you step aside, you risk also bringing down the legitimacy of the process."

            The asshats that we have in charge now, I think they take it all for granted.

            "Similar things happen here all the time. Hell, someone like Trump or Clinton might actually become president."

            What if, for instance, Texas had a referendum for seceding, and it passed. Can you see anyone in charge anywhere resigning over it? Do you think Obama would resign? Anyone? No they would just berate Texans for being stupid.

            1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

              The asshats that we have in charge now, I think they take it all for granted.

              If you recall, the last time we had a "crisis of legitimacy", it was when Bush II won the election vs. Al Gore.

              They don't forget stuff like that.

            2. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

              Hi chemjeff

              Non binding.... But the left is wedded to the idea of democracy. And per democracy, this is binding. Don't you love democracy?

          2. chemjeff   9 years ago

            Or not even Obama resigning. Can you see any governor or senator or anyone even doing anything if the people voted against what they thought was the "correct" choice of action?

            1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

              Democracy. Do what even the slightest majority of people say or reap their wrath. Or whatever.

          3. Sevo   9 years ago

            "Politics is about creating the perception of legitimacy"

            In SF we have a proggie POS who, courtesy of district elections, managed to end up on the BoS by a 100-vote margin or something similar.
            His name is Arron Peskin; he is a true lefty econ-ignoramus. We have rent control for buildings older than '75, and he immediately, upon being seated, demanded rent control on all construction.
            Not long afterward, in a discussion with one of the Chron columnists, he saw no problem, as Peskin had made no regulation.
            I asked if was his millions of dollars it costs to 'pass muster' and build in SF, would he do so if all it took was one more proggy BoS vote with Peskin to deny him a profit? It seemed to regster.

            1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

              I just saw a headline about rent going from 1800/month to 8000/month. How fucked is SF real estate?

      2. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

        The predictable stories about financial companies leaving London, London positioning to leave the UK, regular citizens being generically scared, etc, are... predictable. The big difference is currency and border controls, I guess. Currency issues are hilarious to me because all currencies are worthless. Unless a country is deciding to open up currency to competition or peg it to a commodity, then what is the worry? Border stuff is a worry, only if you think the currency will appreciate(how much has changed in the western world in 20 yrs?) or if you identify with some other country as your homeland that has rules you think are better than the country you live in or something.

    2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   9 years ago

      This isn't that complicated. If you threaten to leave a club and the members of the club try to stop you from leaving or are angry about you leaving, then the club needed you more than you needed to Club.

  38. Cytotoxic   9 years ago

    This is why we need guns.

  39. The Fusionist   9 years ago

    Sorry, Ken, but envision the following scenario:

    Someone - let's call him Adolf - is explaining to you that there are some people who are so absolutely evil that it's OK to beat and stomp on them and kick their teeth in. And maybe it's technically illegal to do this, but there's a higher law of righteousness which justifies such violence.

    Would you trust Adolf to define who deserves to have righteous, extralegal violence inflicted on them?

    I know you wouldn't trust him, because at heart you're a good person, you simply encountered some actual nazis and you're rightly angry at them.

    But don't make me quote Robert Bolt at you.

    1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

      Not sure what Ken comment you are replying to. The tanglements of what ifs are too much. But, I agree with you here Eddie.

      1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

        Nevermind, I know what comment. If Nazis jump on stage at a concert, there's surely a no jumping on stage policy. So maybe you are both right?

        1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

          Hopefully, we're saying the same thing in different ways.

          1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

            It's just that I've encountered people who, based on what I will charitably call overactive imaginations, have concluded that I am an evil disgusting person - if those people thought that had a license for "righteous" violence against me they would probably have tried it, and they would have thought they were being holy and just.

            So naturally I get nervous when someone says "evil people, *as defined by me,* deserve to get physically attacked and beaten."

          2. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

            I think we are. I just look at this violence as simple human psychology. The violent left wants to prove that the right is violent. To prove this, they attack the right(trump supporters). If the right doesn't retaliate, there is still the police, who are told they are racist if the protect the right. The hope is that the right eventually capitulates and fights back. Or the police fight back. Ipso facto, the right is violent against the left. It works both ways, but where we are today, it is left being the aggressors. I'm not saying all left, just the faction that believes in violence as a valid tactic. Show me evidence of trump supporters in bandanas and throwing rocks at police at Sanders rallies and I'll recant.

            1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

              To hear leftists tell it, they're just skipping along the road, picking daisies, when WHAM, some rightists or cops start beating on them.

              1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                If there's video which disproves the daisy-picking hypothesis, then that means the other side was "overreacting."

                1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

                  Or if the video evidence shows them being *really* violent, then it's time for the friendly media to report that "violence breaks out at Trump rally."

                  1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

                    Tonight, ABC news was very clear that it was the white supremacist protestors vs the anti-protestors.

    2. HazelMeade   9 years ago

      Ken thinks that Hillary Clinton is so absolutely evil that it's OK to vote for Donald Trump. Who promises to actually round people up and force them to register in national databases.

      I don't trust any politician, or group of people who claims that I HAVE TO vote for a mentally ill fascist in order to stop the "other side" (in this case, Hillary Clinton).

      1. invisible finger   9 years ago

        Wha? If you think there's a difference between Trump and Clinton besides the party affiliation, you're delusional. Different words, same goals, same methods.

      2. GamerFromJump   9 years ago

        Who promises to actually round people up and force them to register in national databases.

        Like Hawaiian gun owners?

  40. Sevo   9 years ago

    OK, I have no idea if a Bing maps link works, but I was looking at France for a connection to a place wife and I had visited and found this:
    And it doesn't work
    Suffice to say that the EU subsidies have obvious incentives to keep French farmers 'small', and with the French opting for Germanic romanticism, why, that's just what the EU supports. Germans have yet to discover that moving people off dirt is a gain also.
    I was going to compare the Bing map image to the US but you're all capable of doing so; we waste our taxes supporting larger operations!

  41. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

    ENB, since it seems like you're trying here, I'll assume these were simply mistakes and oversights. But really, you should consciously try to remove leftist propaganda from your articles.

    Anti-Fascists "Anti-Fascists" 'Very Proud'...
    BAMN members came brandishing wooden bats and shouting "fuck fascists. Beat the fascists. Beat them." One member Yvette Felarca told CNN she was "very, very proud" of the counter-protest assault that had produced such violence.
    ... Meanwhile, the anti-facists "anti-facists"
    ...The group bills itself as anti-globalist, but its ideology is old-fashioned white supremacy.
    note there is no equivalent statement about the racism, fascism, and totalitarianism of BAMN
    ...
    initiating violence against people protesting peacefully?no matter how odious their ideas?will never be a winning step strategically.
    ...
    It doesn't actually benefit the cause of anti-fascism, racism, or bigotry.
    accepting the premise that they are against fascism, racism, and bigotry

    You spend the whole back end of the article treating racist, totalitarian thugs who *initiated violence* to stop a political protest as if *they* were just good hearted souls fighting for justice with bad "strategy".

    Why is BAMN's racism, bigotry, and totalitariansim given a pass, while their victims are maligned?

    This is why Liberty dies - the sanction of the victim.

  42. waffles   9 years ago

    I never thought I'd have to defend nazi scum, but if people had just ignored these 50 skinhead fucks there would be no news. This violence is cowardly bullshit. BAMN is a terrorist group, fucking commies, and the antics of these little shits will only ever cause harm to liberty. Liberty means skinhead fucks can freely assemble without another group of fucks showing up to start a melee brawl. I choose liberty and I still believe in this country. Fuck everything, especially hippies.

    1. The Fusionist   9 years ago

      Exactly, and fuck the commies for putting me in a position where I defend the rights of nazis.

    2. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

      cowardly bullshit

      This is how you provoke a violent response to prove the racism, etc against your side. It's simple human psychology.

  43. The Grinch   9 years ago

    The important thing is that the right people got knifed.

  44. Cdr Lytton   9 years ago

    Watched the national news tonight. FD spokesman was quoted as saying it was a rally by "the KKK and other right wing extremists", and a vague description of violence and how the FD declared a mass casualty event to put hospitals on alert for handling patients. Absolutely no mention that one side showed up with the intention of violence.

  45. Stormy Dragon   9 years ago

    Yet while the group's views may be racist and reactionary, it doesn't?at least in writing?advocate violence or destruction. The group's mission, according to its website, is to defend America against "economic exploitation, federal tyranny, and anti-Christian degeneracy.

    How is that not advocating violence? Does it not count as violence if the people suppressing the "anti-Chrisian degenerates" have shiny government badges on while they carry out the progrom?

    1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

      I see what you are saying. But, is there proof that their rally today was a violent one?

      1. Stormy Dragon   9 years ago

        The weren't being violent, they were just advocating it. Which is still legal given the lack of immediacy.

        But they were still advocating violence.

        1. GILMORE?   9 years ago

          Quote what you are suggesting constitutes "inciting others to commit violent acts"

          1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

            I would like to see what the group was saying today. It would clarify alot. I wonder if they were speculating about the use of woodchippers.

            1. buybuydandavis   9 years ago

              Vote Woodchipper 2016!

              1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

                Is someone positing on the Woodchipper running in 2016?

    2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   9 years ago

      The nice thing about BAMN, is they don't advocate for violence, they totally cut out the middle man.

      "A KCRA-TV reporter and his cameraman were caught in an altercation with protesters who shouted "no cameras" as they tried to grab their equipment and shove them away from the crowd."

      1. See Double You   9 years ago

        protesters who shouted "no cameras" as they tried to grab their equipment and shove them away from the crowd.

        So they're just like cops?

  46. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

    fun

  47. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

    Step 1: Label people Skinheads
    Step 2: Beat the fuck out of them
    Step 3: ???
    Step 4 Profit!!!

    1. Butts Wagner   9 years ago

      Isn't it:

      Step 1: Label people Skinheads
      Step 2: Beat the fuck out of them
      Step 3: ???Label people Skinheads
      Step 4 Profit!!!

  48. ertdfg   9 years ago

    Yvette Felarca, a member of the counter-protest group By Any Means Necessary, told CNN she came to prevent the spread of hate.

    Um, if your plan to "prevent the spread of hate" is to beat and possibly kill anyone who disagrees with you...
    Well, you can do that.
    You just need to kill approximately half of the world's population first so nobody is left who will disagree with you.

    So if killing 3.5 Billion people to "prevent the spread of hate" sounds like a good plan to you; keep going as you've started.
    Personally I can't think of a stupider and more counterproductive plan myself.

  49. Dogs_stole_things   9 years ago

    One extremist group beating another extremist group. News? Couldn't care less. Of course that's not how the media plays it but that's what I have come to expect. If you are a libertarian or anything right of that feel the brush stroke over your face as they paint you as the same as one of the "fascist" numb nuts.

  50. kidneycarecapsule   9 years ago

    http://www.istanagreenworld.co.....een-world/

  51. np   9 years ago

    Hey what's wrong with a melee?

    All I can say if folks want to fight, go for it!

    (this is assuming both parties agree)

    It is safe to say that anyone who throws a punch also agrees to receive one back.

  52. ThomasD   9 years ago

    Two totalitarian gangs fighting over control of the streetcorner.

    Shades of Germany in the '30s.

    1. SIV   9 years ago

      Only one of those gangs thinks "we're" members of the other

  53. Cynical Asshole   9 years ago

    When I saw the headline, I assumed this happened somewhere in Europe. I guess the proggies are getting their wish: we're becoming more and more like Europe. Congratulations, assholes.

  54. Quo Usque Tandem   9 years ago

    The only official definition of Fascism comes from Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, in which he outlines three principles of a fascist philosophy.

    1."Everything in the state". The Government is supreme and the country is all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator.
    2."Nothing outside the state". The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government.
    3."Nothing against the state". Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.

    So, given this definition by it's founder, which of the groups described above are the fascists?

    1. Long Woodchippers   9 years ago

      All these proggies I see on Facebook and Twitter throwign around "Fascist" who don't even know what it means.

      Also, gathering all the pillars of society around a national narrative. Today we have multiple ones - black lives matter, climate change, war on women...everything that proves that Progressives must rule the state that rules the world.

    2. SIV   9 years ago

      There's probably a sampler with that quote stitched into it at the McCuckerman household.

  55. Gilbert Martin   9 years ago

    While driving to work this morning, I heard this incident reported on NPR's top of the hour news segment.

    It was reported in a manner that completely obscured the fact that it was the "anti-fascist" protesters who came armed and ready to instigate the violence and deliberately did so. Par for the course for NPR.

  56. Spartacus   9 years ago

    The only thing leftists have against Bull Connor is that he wasn't working for their side.

    1. Azathoth!!   9 years ago

      ummm........yes, he was.

      Bull Connor was a Democrat in good standing.

      The left has always been for racism.

      1. SIV   9 years ago

        Connor was a lifelong member of the DNC.

  57. Azathoth!!   9 years ago

    "First they came for the neo-nazis and the racists, and I did not speak out?
    Because those people deserve what they get

    Then they came for the misogynists, the homo/transphobes and the microagressors, and I did not speak out?
    Because sometimes what is legal isn't moral

    Then they came for the creationists and climate deniers, and I did not speak out?
    Because I fucking love science

    Then they came for the gun owners and I did not speak out?
    Because sensible regulation doesn't mean gun grabbing..

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out?
    Because they always come for the Jews, sooner or later

    Then they came for the Libertarians, the Republicans, the right, and I did not speak out?
    Because by this time, I was one of them

    Then they came for the impure, the heterodox, the thinking, and I did not speak out?
    Because I no longer could.

    Then they came again, and again, for more and more and they always keep coming--as long as there's
    the faintest spark of hope--of something they don't control--or haven't destroyed, they will keep coming.

    Until liberty is dead.

  58. Long Woodchippers   9 years ago

    I'm outlining a dystopian novel, set around 2024 (the 8th year of Hillary's presidency.) I'm imagining ways society could have gone wrong, but then I only have to come here and read the news.

    Brown shirts attacking the free speech of anti-government types with lethal force (and not guns)? Check.

  59. Uncle Jay   9 years ago

    RE: Anti-Fascists 'Very Proud' of White Nationalist Counter-Protest That Led to Multiple Stabbing Victims
    "Beat the fascists. Beat them."

    How many times does it have to be said.
    Amerika cannot tolerate free speech.
    What next, a free press?

  60. SIV   9 years ago

    Found this on Dave Weigel's twitter

    Rand Paul, Koch and Cato are the alt-right

  61. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

    *sigh*

  62. SugarFree   9 years ago

    Oh, great... Another clueless lecture from Grandpa Oldballs.

  63. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

    ^^^This guy gets it. A real people person who can connect!!!

  64. galarant   9 years ago

    Whoa there's a lot of hate coming your way, for no particular reason as far as I can tell.

    I for one appreciate your civility, and your refusal to engage in ad-hom antics. We could use more of that around here.

  65. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

    Yeah.

  66. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

    It's a Tulpa sock impersonating the genuine article. LACKS INSANE USAGE OF BOLD TAGS and wildly comical accusations of bullying. (walks away laughing)

  67. Bodica Slayer of Woodchip   9 years ago

    And I thought Hihn was dead.

  68. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

    You sir, consider yourself bullied.

  69. Heroic Mulatto   9 years ago

    Or Hihn is finally taking his medication.

  70. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

    I'm on the fence. What does it taste like when it's mashed in with applesauce?

  71. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

    Either Hihn is mocking me or agreeing with me. Either way, I lose.

  72. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

    What if he's loving you. After all, it's easy cause you're beautiful. Doo-n-doo-n-fooLpRoof.

  73. Pompey (91% LOLLOLZ)   9 years ago

    Ok, wow. Bizarre autocorrect that is far superior to what I intended to write. Kindle Fire is the monolith to my ape at the opening of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

  74. Trigger Warning   9 years ago

    Like risperidone mixed with applesauce.

  75. Bodica Slayer of Woodchip   9 years ago

    You're not dead? How did that happen?

  76. Bodica Slayer of Woodchip   9 years ago

    You must have been busy (drunk, insane, hospitalized, working, hibernating) to bother with H&R.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Brickbat: Quick Work

Charles Oliver | 6.3.2025 4:00 AM

Nevada Becomes the 21st State To Strengthen Donor Privacy Protections

Autumn Billings | 6.2.2025 5:30 PM

Harvard International Student With a Private Instagram? You Might Not Get a Visa.

Emma Camp | 6.2.2025 4:57 PM

J.D. Vance Wants a Free Market for Crypto. What About Everything Else?

Eric Boehm | 6.2.2025 4:40 PM

Trump's Attack on the Federalist Society Is a Bad Omen for Originalism

Damon Root | 6.2.2025 3:12 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!