MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

'Antifa Attack Peaceful Right-Wing Demonstrators in Berkeley'

The thug's veto, this time from the far left.

WikimediaWikimediaAt least five people were attacked and 13 people were arrested during a "Rally Against Hate" held in Berkeley, California on Sunday. As the The Washington Post reports, the violence this time was due entirely due to left-wing anarchists or members of a loosely aggregated group grouped under the generic name antifa (short for "anti-fascist").

Shortly after, violence began to flare. A pepper-spray wielding Trump supporter was smacked to the ground with homemade shields. Another was attacked by five black-clad antifas, each windmilling kicks and punches into a man desperately trying to protect himself. A conservative group leader retreated for safety behind a line of riot police as marchers chucked water bottles, shot off pepper spray and screamed "fascist go home!"

All told, the Associated Press reported at least five individuals were attacked. An AP reporter witnessed the assaults. Berkeley Police's Lt. Joe Okies told The Washington Post the rally resulted in "13 arrests on a range of charges including assault with a deadly weapon, obstructing a police officer, and various Berkeley municipal code violations."

It's clear that Antifa is committed to stirring up violence at protests, creating a version of the thug's veto, especially in the absence of effective policing (the ACLU has archly criticized law enforcement's handling of the neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville that left dozens injured and one dead). If every event has the potential to become violent, fewer people are likely to gather. Unlike many groups on the right and left, antifa doesn't publicly eschew violence but instead sanctions it as self-defense against white supremacists and, in many cases, police trying to maintain order at rallies, marches, and protests. From an explainer at USA Today:

"We are unapologetic about the reality that fighting fascism at points requires physical militancy," Rose City Antifa's Facebook page reads. "Anti-fascism is, by nature, a form of self-defense: the goal of fascism is to exterminate the vast majority of human beings."

Antifa is at its core anti-liberal in that it dismisses freedom of speech and peaceful assembly as an instrument of Marcusian "repressive tolerance," or a means by which an unacceptable status quo is maintained through a belief in a supposedly disinterested belief in a marketplace of ideas.

That's the most-charitable explanation for antifa's readiness to commit violence in public, that its members want to deny racists a public forum (in fact, it's not exactly clear what the original organizers of yesterday's march in Berkeley were all about; in any case, it's clear from press reports that the vast majority of people assembled were against any sort of neo-Nazi or alt-right beliefs). Any group that claims "hate speech is not free speech" is going to become not just censorious but violent pretty quickly.

Indeed, a less-charitable explanation, that antifa is an inherently violent group, is far more compelling: Earlier this year in the Bay Area, members of antifa protested speeches at Berkeley by Milo Yiannopoulis and Ann Coulter by roughing up people, lighting fires, and damaging property. They were also responsible for violence and destruction at Donald Trump's inauguration in Washington, D.C. and various other events. Their "self-defense," which they invoke to justify due to what they claim is righteous action against a sick society, is simply a variation on American foreign policy's reliance on "pre-emptive war," which sanctions violence out of the box whenever the powers that be declare it valid.

As with white supremacists, getting a sense of the actual numbers of members of antifa is impossible, though the movement is clearly small. Provocatively, antifa needs the alt-right almost as much as the alt-right needs them. Each side wants to be able to point to its ideological opposite to legitimize its own extreme beliefs and actions, especially the recourse to violence (one need only compare white supremacist Chris Cantwell's romance of revolutionary violence against IRS agents, Jews, and the like to antifa's public statements to see a mirroring effect).

The rise of antifa, like the rise of ethno-nationalism, actually provides a common ground among conservatives, liberals, and libertarians who believe in the classical-liberal ideals of free speech and tolerance. If the proper answer to bad speech is more and better speech, the answer to violence that threatens the right of assembly is more and bigger assemblies dedicated to free speech and peaceful assembly. The rise of vocal and violent extremism is a sign of a political system that may be exhausted, but it is also an opportunity to revitalize core American beliefs.

Related: Andrew Sullivan in New York magazine, on the left's "intolerance of free speech" and why it's a big problem.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    In 2017, the end justifies the means.

  • MarkLastname||

    Or the means justify the ends. Some people just like to shout and destroy things and need politics to justify it.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    Or the means justify the ends. Some people CaliMarxists and LefTards just like to shout and destroy things and need politics to justify it.

    FTFY

  • esteve7||

    They are a terrorist organization, just fucking say it Reason. Using violence to promote political goals is terrorism.

    And they arnt anarchists, they are far left marxists.
    More cover for the left, how nice.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Blaming anarchists for the actions of just some assholes is sooo a century ago.

  • mortiscrum||

    Just pointing out, there are left anarchists and right anarchists. How those two visions of society differ I'm not all that sure about about (anarchist tend to be pretty light on details), but the most extreme versions of communism AND free-market-ism can bring someone to an anarchistic idea of how society should be.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    How does a "right anarchist" fit in with conservatives who rarely change things without massive support and who use government to further their social conservative agendas?

    Anarchism is an extreme left philosophy as there is not government to be conservative with.

  • mortiscrum||

    RE: Anarchism is an extreme left philosophy as there is not government to be conservative with.

    I thought the left relied on government to tell everyone what to do...

    Honestly the common use of left and right break down when one goes to the fringes. I'm pointing out though that people can arrive at a similar place, some version of anarchy, by walking in basically opposite directions on the American political spectrum. Leftward ends up in anarcho-communism, while rightward is anarcho-capitalism.

  • Hank Phillips||

    An anarchist is a communist who has just pulled the trigger of a gun or lit a bomb. It's kinda like the transubstantiation Catholic nuns tried to sell some of us... a miraculous transformation. Go back to the looters who shot Carnot, Garfield, McKinley, Whutzisname the Archduke, Cermak--old papeers are full of them. One second they're communists/socialists, the next second they are and always have been anarchists, just as Oceania was always at war with Eastasia. Fake "libertarian anarchists" were invented after 1972.

  • damikesc||

    Don't agree here. If conservatism is the goal for lower government (I know, it seems to hardly be the case), anarchy would be the extreme of that.

  • ThomasD||

    One could posit a hypothetical continuum of liberty, where totalitarianism was on one end and anarchy was on the other.

    It doesn't really matter which one you wish to call the right or left side, only one end is a purely utopian ideal (history having proved the other end all too real.)

    Better to say that these black shirts are anything but anarchists. They are the violent wing of the modern left.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    You're not an anarchist when you're working for more government control over things like speech.

  • mortiscrum||

    I'm just repeating what I've read elsewhere. Anarcho-communists make up a substantial number of Antifa members.

  • A Thinking Mind||

    To me it looks more like they're working toward less goverment PROTECTION of free speech so they can just use the heckler's/thug's veto to shut down speech themselves.

  • KerryW||

    Maybe their idea is that a Marxist society can arise from the people, not a government (hence the "anarchy"). Of course, how many people would actual go along with that without coercive force, which is either government or a pseudo-government.

  • dexter||

    Everything that has an army and a territory is de facto a government.

  • ThomasD||

    "Maybe their idea is that a Marxist society can arise from the people..."

    Yeah, maybe that is the idea. It is also a stupid idea that has never been borne out in history. It is the philosophical equivalent of alchemy, or perpetual motion machines.

    Not that that inhibits true believers.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Best comment in the thread thank you. And no nothing that has occurred repeatedly in history from the Communards to the Russian Revolution to Khmer Rouge is going to phase these assholes, because they're so different...

  • Mark22||

    Just like the 1920's. Democracy and liberty dies in the violent conflict between communists ("antifa") and fascists. That's how the Weimar Republic ended.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Yup. These two groups are fighting for control over who gets to control and murder the Liberty minded people.

  • A Thinking Mind||

    Do you want Nazis? Because this is how you get Nazis.

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    And ants, Lana.

  • Sevo||

    "Antifa is at its core anti-liberal..."

    Depends on how "liberal" is defined, but they are certainly NOT anti-left; they ARE the left.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    They're also domestic terrorists.

  • croaker||

    Nearly a quarter-million people signed a white-house petition to have antifa declared a terrorist organization in less than a week. That should tell you how many people are sick of their shit.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Quoth the mystical conservative sockpuppet...

  • Rhywun||

    antifa needs the alt-right almost as much as the alt-right needs them

    I don't think so. Ask the attendees at any economic summit or GOP convention.

  • JWatts||

    Agreed, this claim is specious. And it doesn't apply either way. Granted, I don't really know what the hell the phrase 'alt-right' really means, because it is used very loosely. But it's clear that there have been White Nationalists marching for decades. And they've mostly just been ignored for the past 2 or 3 decades with their numbers dwindling.

    I think Nick meant that both sides feed off the other. I don't see any evidence of that. The antifa came about to specifically to suppress free speech and prevent conservatives from giving public speeches. I see no evidence that conservatives wouldn't be giving the speeches if the anitfa movement wasn't there.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Are conservatives the alt right?

    They provide each other with a convenient villain that justifies their violent behavior.

  • JWatts||

    "Are conservatives the alt right?"

    I don't really know what the phrase 'alt-right' means? Is Ann Coulter a member of the alt-right? She seems to be a conservative commentator who likes to say provocative things? But she certainly isn't a White Nationalist.

    It's clear that the antifa doesn't restrict it's protests to White Nationalists, but is instead going after anyone they don't like.

    "They provide each other with a convenient villain that justifies their violent behavior."

    That seems a strange argument, since the conservative (alt-right and other) have been speaking out since long before the antifa existed. Furthermore, the violence seems mostly one sided.

  • Rhywun||

    I'm not sure if it was ever more than a catch-phrase for as you say provocative commentators, but now it is has morphed to mean "literally worse than Hitler" in exactly the same manner as "Tea Party".

  • Crusty Juggler||

    I don't really know what the phrase 'alt-right' means?

    Well, I think it is lazy to equate Milo and Ann Coulter with someone like George Will just because the antia-types do so. But, you are right in stating that that is what antifa does.

    It's clear that the antifa doesn't restrict it's protests to White Nationalists, but is instead going after anyone they don't like.

    I agree.

    That seems a strange argument, since the conservative (alt-right and other) have been speaking out since long before the antifa existed. Furthermore, the violence seems mostly one sided.

    Well, the violence is not really one-sided - they feed off of each other. Antifa doesn't have anyone to fight in Berkley if groups like the Proud Boys and their cohorts (who are not white supremacists) show up to fight against them.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Yes, then they're just left fighting the police, journalists, and the general public. Oh wait...

  • Azathoth!!||

    What kind of willfull blindness would allow someone to say this--

    Well, the violence is not really one-sided - they feed off of each other. Antifa doesn't have anyone to fight in Berkley if groups like the Proud Boys and their cohorts (who are not white supremacists) show up to fight against them.

    The 'Proud Boys' formed in response to leftist violence. Until VERY recently there was no right-wing response to leftist violence at all. Now there are Proud Boys, Oath keepers, Promise keepers, groups of vets or bikers or just patriots who seem to have finally had enough.

    Antifa--in all their endless permutations--has been attacking capitalism with fire, fists, sticks and bricks for a long, long time. Black bloc tactics didn't start when Trump was elected--the go back to at least the 80s. And before that things weren't as 'masky'--but they were no less violent.

    The people on the right aren't showing up to fight antifa--they're showing up to protest leftist attacks on free speech. Antifa is showing up to beat them into silence

  • ThomasD||

    "Well, I think it is lazy to equate Milo and Ann Coulter with someone like George Will just because the antia-types do so."

    Do you really think they do it out of laziness???

  • mortiscrum||

    RE: That seems a strange argument, since the conservative (alt-right and other) have been speaking out since long before the antifa existed.

    I don't think this is true. Antifa has existed since the 1920's.

  • Sevo||

    "Antifa has existed since the 1920's."

    OK, let's see a cite.

  • mortiscrum||

    My mistake, 1930's

    link

  • ThomasD||

    Interesting that they are both antifascist and anti-capitalist. Since fascism is opposed to free market capitalism that really only leaves one possibility for what they believe.

    Not that they won't tell you exactly the same, bringing the hammer and sickle everywhere they go, just that the media would rather not discuss it.

  • CatoTheChipper||

    Anybody to the right of Mao is alt-right.

    Libertarians are obviously alt-right.

    The politics of Bill and Hilary Clinton twenty years ago are alt-right.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    Hell, the social and political beliefs of most of the soldiers who actually fought the Nazis would be considered "alt-right" these days.

  • ||

    Lincoln's belief that black people should be free, should emigrate to S. America, and are largely and somewhat fundamentally inferior to whites is pretty alt-right.

  • mpercy||

    The "alt-right" at this point is anyone who does not comply 100% with whatever nonsense the antifa crowd insists upon.

    On a somewhat related topic, on my Facebook feed yesterday I saw a video from this crazy chick who demanded that the world be forced to be vegan or die "If you're not vegan you should be fucking forced to be" and "If you're not vegan, you don't deserve to live".

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    Send me the link. I've got some pork rinds to crunch on while I watch.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    I think Nick meant that both sides feed off the other. I don't see any evidence of that.

    Precisely. Antifa and the radical left no longer make any distinction between neo-Nazis and provocative but relatively benign right-wingers like Ben Shapiro. Their actions are specifically designed to use violence and the threat of violence to suppress political speech.

    Time to declare them a domestic terrorist group and treat them accordingly.

  • Sevo||

    I'm sure the SPLC will get right on it.

  • Finrod||

    Right after they declare themselves a hate group.

  • croaker||

    They'll soon be too busy dodging Discovery in several lawsuits, along with Amazon.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Antifa makes no distinction between Nazis and much of anyone that isn't them. That's what it ultimately devolved to with progressives.

  • Rhywun||

    antifa came about to specifically to suppress free speech and prevent conservatives from giving public speeches

    Antifa have been around on and off for many decades in Europe, usually in the form of Marxist or even explicitly Communist organzations. We're only hearing about them in the US recently but it's same old tired bunch of losers as always.

  • JWatts||

    "We're only hearing about them in the US recently but it's same old tired bunch of losers as always."

    I don't think that's exactly correct. They've been around US college campuses for decades (3% of US professors still self-identify as Marxist) but they have been fairly normal non-violent protestors. Only within the past few years have they become violent.

    It's an odd situation. The Left is clearly winning the Culture Wars. Everything is basically going their way. So, they resort to violent suppression of speech?

  • Rhywun||

    Today it's the culture war, but remember they're Marxists and they're (more or less) losing that war.

  • Sevo||

    "3% of US professors still self-identify as Marxist"

    I'm sure 5% self-identify as flat-earthers.
    These are supposedly educated people?

  • Ron||

    When you win enough and control the universities and the media then you can use violence to get the final 1%er's to conform. And it is working anyone who even wears a Trump hate or claims to have voted for him is not shunned, ostracized, fired and mad unemployable and even violently attacked. Antifa is the opening gambit of the next civil war

  • Ron||

    now shunned not "not shunned"

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    who even wears a Trump hate

    Perfect Johnism.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    Right, that is how they feed off the alt-right. They've been around for a while, but they surged in popularity and activity in tandem with the alt-right.

  • Likes him some booze||

    Except your time frame is off, and Antifa surged about a year before the alt right did.

  • Eric||

    "The Left is clearly winning the Culture Wars. Everything is basically going their way. So, they resort to violent suppression of speech?"

    The left is like the allied powers after WWI, or NATO after the fall of the Soviets. They not only defeated their adversary, but they are making the mistake of humiliating them and rubbing their noses in it. The inevitable reaction will not be good for anyone.

  • Lord_at_War||

    I'm waiting for "the right" to show up with 4-5 well equipped "softball teams", and those pussy masks on Antifa will allow them to find their teeth afterwards...

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Are we ready to call these idiots what they are; a domestic terror group? If so, we can work on getting rid of them. If not, everyone needs to figure out how bad they're willing to let things get before something is done

  • Mark22||

    Note that their flag and symbols, in fact, come from the German communist party in the Weimar Republic. These people aren't just kind-of-communist or kind-of-Marxist, they are the real deal.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I though that I was the only one who noticed the words on the flag were in German.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Well no one who speaks German could be a bad person.

  • Zeb||

    The antifa came about to specifically to suppress free speech and prevent conservatives from giving public speeches.

    No, they've been around longer than that. They are just expanding who they consider "fascists". They've been brawling with racists and nazis for a long time. Interesting article on the history: http://thefederalist.com/2017/.....ttesville/

  • Mark22||

    They are just expanding who they consider "fascists".

    Antifa has been around since the 1920's; they are dyed-in-the-wool communists. They have always been calling everybody who isn't a communist a "fascist".

  • Calidissident||

    I think it's wrong to say either crowd wouldn't exist with out the other, but I do think they feed off each other. They highlight the violence and craziness of the other side to gain sympathy for their position, and feed a narrative that they're the good guys forming the last line of defense against the (Nazis/Commies/etc.).

  • ThomasD||

    Pleather Jacket cannot solely criticize the left, it must always include some degree of 'pox on both houses.'

  • Zeb||

    I think that's because both houses suck. I have no issue with criticizing racists and neo-Nazis. And Antifa does exist as a reaction to groups like that. So it is relevant. They have bought into this narrative that Trump is somehow on the side of the fascists and used that to expand their definition of who is fascist to include most conservatives, which makes them even more awful. But it's not where they started from.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    But it was wrong to state (correctly) that both groups were violent in Charlottesville. I think that was Thomas's point. Marxists exist independent of white supremacists.

  • Zeb||

    Yes, that is a fair point.

    But a lot of people seem to think that antifa is some new thing. They have been brawling with neo-Nazis and others of that ilk for decades (including in the US, see the article I link above). The new thing is that they have taken an opportunity in this hyperbolic and polarized political climate to expand the scope of who they fight with. And sadly seem to be attracting more casual support than in the past.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    They're the same assholes beating people, rioting, and busting up storefronts in Seattle anytime the WTO or some similar group has a meeting there. Or just because.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Neo-Nazi's and other right wingers deserve criticism too.

  • Finrod||

    So do you, slaver.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Butt, you mean lefty Neo-Nazis and right wingers?

  • Eric||

    Enough with your "everyone I disagree with is a left winger" crap. Just accept that your side has some bad guys too.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Funny, you still think that me saying Neo-Nazis are lefties is because I disagree with them.

    They are lefties because they are not fiscally nor socially conservative. They are okay with furthering their radical agendas without having widespread support. In other words, using revolutionary tactics to take over.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Silly bitch, Nazis are socialists (it's in the name!), therefore they are leftists. Like you PB. Just more nationalistic.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Butt's pretty racist and so are Nazis.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    And they both want an end to capitalism and total government control too.

  • Mark22||

    The left/right distinction is meaningless. The distinction needs to be between totalitarian and libertarian. Fascists, anti-fascists, progressives, socialists, and communists are all at the totalitarian end of the spectrum.

  • Headache||

    Correct

  • Ariki||

    This,

    Has anyone found an effective way to communicate this to the average useful idiot?
    I haven't. They have become so polarised.
    I'm starting to get actually concerned for the future of your USA and the totalitarian ideals slipping into my country.

  • RenaD||

    I've talked until I'm blue in the face, make cases that are solid, rational, simple . . . And I've never convinced a progressive/communist friend of anything. Just like they can't convince me.

    Used to be, I could have these discussion with people and not feel like it was a deal breaker for our friendship. It mostly just felt like mental gymnastics, verbal sparing, and in the end we all sort of met up in the middle. We had so much else in common, so many other everyday concerns.

    Today, everything seems very much on the surface. Everything is politicized, polarized. It's all or nothing, us against them, yada yada.

    "Don't you believe in anything? Don't you want to help people?"

    Yes, I believe in your right to do what you want and my right to do what I want, as long as we don't act in an offensively violent manner against each other in order to achieve our goals. End. Of. Story. I don't see what's so difficult about that, but apparently I'm in a teensy tiny minority.

  • esteve7||

    Reason you have jumped the shark so pathetically. These people existed well before the alt right and gave just rebranded themselves to be "anti-fascist". just like how the communists were causing violence in Germany long before there even was a fascist party. Do any of you even know history?

  • Headache||

    You are right. Marx's manifesto was written for Germany in 1868.

  • tommhan||

    There are almost NO alt-right and none of us support them. You cannot say that about anti-fa because the left are cheering them on.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    As the The Washington Post reports, the violence this time was due entirely due to left-wing anarchists or members of a loosely aggregated group grouped under the generic name antifa (short for "anti-fascist").
    Yeah, pretty surprising that the media is actually admitting that the lefty neo-Nazi were peacefully rallying and the lefty Antifa initiated the violence.

    Well, the media won't admit these two groups are actually both lefty groups but you have to take baby steps sometimes.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Yes, yes, blame the media! YES! YES! YES!

  • Zeb||

    Once everyone agrees with lc1789 on the definition of "left", it will all be OK.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Nazis and neo-Nazis are socialist lefties. You disagree?

    Any political affiliation to the left of centralist Libertarians are lefties.

  • Zeb||

    As I said the other day when we had a pretty interesting discussion about it, I don't think that a left/right dichotomy is adequate or useful in describing the situation.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    What is useful to describe the situation then?

    The propaganda is that Neo-Nazis are conservative right-wingers or "alt-right". This implies that Republicans and anyone partly conservative, including Libertarians, are inherently racist or whatever.

    The racist shitbag Neo-Nazis are socialists at heart and therefore left-wing. They want to use revolution to control the government, economy, and people and further their racist agenda.

    This is left-on-left violence just like the Nazis and Communists fighting in the streets of Germany in the 20th Century.

  • Eric||

    "This is left-on-left violence just like the Nazis and Communists fighting in the streets of Germany in the 20th Century."

    Fair enough. However, if you are going to use the 1790's French interpretation of the left/right political spectrum, you'll have to concede that you (as a right winger) are a monarchist, and thus also an authoritarian.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I am not using a French anything.

    Lefties are revolutionaries and socialists with an extreme anarchy.
    Conservatives can be established government with monarchs at the far right.

    Either side can be authoritarian. Which is how you have tyrannical monarchs and tyrannical Communists.

  • Mark22||

    What is useful to describe the situation then?

    Totalitarian vs libertarian.

    Fascists, Nazis, communists/antifa, socialists, and progressives are all totalitarian. The left/right distinctions between those totalitarians are an irrelevant distraction from their commonalities.

    In fact, the left/right distinctions don't even apply anymore, since American leftists are economically closer to traditional fascists (government-controlled economy with private property) than to socialists (nationalization of all industries).

    This is left-on-left violence just like the Nazis and Communists fighting in the streets of Germany in the 20th Century.

    Quite right. But their violence is over small differences. Germany would have been equally doomed under communists as it was under Nazis.

    And it was the threat of communist/fascist violence that caused the moderate parties to throw in their lot with the fascists because, at the time, they looked like the lesser of two evils.

  • Azathoth!!||

    As I said the other day when we had a pretty interesting discussion about it, I don't think that a left/right dichotomy is adequate or useful in describing the situation.

    A 'left/right' dichotomy would be perfectly adequate--if one side didn't need to hide behind perpetual re-definition.

    Since that side does, in fact, twist the meanings of words out of all usefulness with the intent of making sure the useful idiots remain idiots, let's try, here, to nail them down a bit with less ambiguity than that simplistic 'Nolan Chart'

    One axis is Collectivism/Individualism
    One axis is Authoritarianism/Voluntarism

    See?

    You can have more axes-- Managed Economy/Free Market

    The thing is, so many things preclude other things--'racism' is collectivist. There's no way around that. The more racist you are, the less individualist you are. That preclusion is why the left/right dichotomy still works--because the things tend to go with each other

    The reason we are forever pushed away from this dichotomy is that the garbage tends to wind up on one side of the equation. No matter how it's sugar coated, one side gets authoritarianism, totalitarianism, racism, sexism(all the collectivized 'isms), redistribution, And the side that uses euphemism to hide what it really is can't have itself being examined too closely.

    Worse--the 'bad' side has all the good stuff. Even when they get the bad stuff it's good--a 'totalitarian individualist' isn't going to mess with anyone.

  • ThomasD||

    'racism' is collectivist.

    This certainly squares with the reaction to 'trans-racialists' like Rachel Dolezal and Shaun King.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Yes, yes, don't criticize the media at all! YES! YES! YES!

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    They're not even the media. They're directed propaganda corporations. Why does anyone address them in a fashion that dignifies the false notion that any of these organizations (NBC, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NYT, WaPo, etc.) are legitimate news reporting agencies? None of them are. They are propagandists and enemies of the constitution, the republic, and the individual freedom of every American. They should all burn.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Good point! I might start using the term propagandist. I like it.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    You neglected to mention ABC.
    I made the mistake of watching the Steffie Show last Sunday morning.
    Dowdie, Steffie and obligatory Negroes were all apoplectic when it was suggested that Antifa and BLM weren't the Second Coming fighting those Nasty Nazis.

    Bastard Leftie propagandists all of 'em.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    My list was in no way meant to be comprehensive. Sadly, that would take a lot of time. But yes, land o' Stephanopolous is clearly Clinton progtard country.

  • Brother Kyfho||

    At the Church Committee hearings, DCI William Colby said under oath that the CIA controlled "everyone of any importance in the news media", and that the CIA spent 40% of its budget on this endeavor.

    Does anyone other than credulous 5 year olds believe that since the large scale consolidation in the media business that this control has not tightened and expanded?

    The media is not "left/progressive" - it is establishmentarian, and is tightly run by the deep state. Notice how well orchestrated the attacks on Trump are across all networks.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    What's interesting is that, while the white supremacists don't exactly like journalists, they're not the ones who are assaulting journalists at these rallies. Antifa has certainly embraced the "I don't give a shit about the First Amendment" strain of leftism since it justifies them using violence, whether it's against Nazi LARPers or journalists who are simply doing their job.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    What's interesting is that, while the white supremacists don't exactly like journalists, they're not the ones who are assaulting journalists at these rallies

    Not that this example is perfect, because the aggressor is not a white supremacist and the event did not take place at a free speech event - but plenty of people...sympathetic to the alt right...certainly had no problem defending and/or cheering the Montana congressman after he threw a journalist to the ground, because hey, fuck you media!

    But, I do agree that for the most part the antifa types initiate violence against anyone they feel is against them and whatever their stupid cause happens to be.

  • Likes him some booze||

    "Not that this example is perfect"

    Bro, it was way worse than that.

  • SIV||

    I'm amused by the antifa vs media left-on-left violence. Can the WaPo please send Balko to cover it?

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    "Anti-fascist". LOL. The meatheads are doing so much to facilitate authoritarianism that I can't help but wonder if they're doing it on purpose. And if they are, I wonder if they've given the slightest thought to how that will turn out.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    I wonder if they've given the slightest thought to how that will turn out.

    No, they haven't. That would imply that they have the capacity to think things through and predict where their actions will lead. These are emotionally and psychologically stunted children throwing a giant temper tantrum.

  • Finrod||

    As it was predicted, fascism has come to the United States calling itself anti-fascism.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Why not. These leftist nutjobs are so ignorant that they think Nazis and Neo-Nazis are NOT socialist lefties.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    They have no education, only indoctrination. That has been the express goal of the democrat party for over forty years. This is explicit addressed in the emails leaked from the DNC server and Podesta last year.

    https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3599

  • Azathoth!!||

    They expect to be the ones holding the whip.

  • Jerryskids||

    If you say you believe that speech is violence I'm going to take you at your word. You start talking about hate speech is not free speech and I'm going to defend myself against your violence. Which, I suspect, is exactly what these punkinheads want - they're "anarchists" who think they're going to be the stronger side when push comes to shove. I got news for you, kiddies, you're not going to like it when the adults get tired of your shit.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    I got news for you, kiddies, you're not going to like it when the adults get tired of your shit.

    Most of Antifa are white middle-class college kids looking for something to give meaning to their atomized, socially stunted lives in a world where they don't really have to want for anything. They're basically the short-bus version of 60s radicals who haven't graduated to the bomb-making stage yet.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Basically the entire #Resistance is predicated on not having any real problems to worry about.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    It really makes one nostalgic for a Kent State moment.

  • mpercy||

    And they grew up getting ego stroked at every turn with participation trophies and played games where "we don't keep score" so it's always "fair".

  • KBeckman||

    You do realize that no one takes participation awards seriously, right? Just because parents don't keep score doesn't mean the kids don't.

    Kids aren't stupid. They KNOW when they suck. Just because the parents don't want to say doesn't mean kids don't realize it.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    The far left has spent the last several years equivocating "hate speech" (apparently defined as any speech they disagree with) with violence so that they could excuse using violence to shut down anyone they disagree with, so this is not surprising in the least.

  • timbo||

    Wasn't the event called a "march against Marxism"? Is there any evidence that it was a Nazi racist thing at all?

    I like the idea of a march against Marxism. Seems like a great thing.

  • Robert||

    See, when you eliminate Marxists, the only people remaining are Nazi racists.

  • mtrueman||

    The Antifa is attacking the fascists and disrupting their ability to organize. They see the fascists as enemies, not debating partners.

  • geo1113||

    To them, anyone who disagrees with them is a fascist.

  • timbo||

    The comedy here is the similarity between the black shirts and the brown shirts marching. Two groups of idiotic Marxists who have no idea that they are protesting to have their freedom of speech taken away from them ultimately.

    Of course the only speech they will tolerate is the following bullet points:

    Global warming is caused by evil capitalists
    Inequality is caused by evil capitalists
    If you think you should have the right to enrich yourself by innovation and problem solving, you are an evil capitalist

    Thus encapsulates the entirety of the left's brainwashed ignorance. They then think they get bonus points for preaching against racism, which no liberty loving capitalists buys into anyway. Why would I alienate a potential paying customer?

  • Brother Kyfho||

    > If you think you should have the right to enrich yourself by innovation and problem solving, you are an evil capitalist

    And probably a white male, to boot!

  • Mark22||

    The comedy here is the similarity between the black shirts and the brown shirts marching.

    Not so funny if black shirts and brown shirts have tried to beat you up or kill you in the past.

  • timbo||

    The comedy here is the similarity between the black shirts and the brown shirts marching. Two groups of idiotic Marxists who have no idea that they are protesting to have their freedom of speech taken away from them ultimately.

    Of course the only speech they will tolerate is the following bullet points:

    Global warming is caused by evil capitalists
    Inequality is caused by evil capitalists
    If you think you should have the right to enrich yourself by innovation and problem solving, you are an evil capitalist

    Thus encapsulates the entirety of the left's brainwashed ignorance. They then think they get bonus points for preaching against racism, which no liberty loving capitalists buys into anyway. Why would I alienate a potential paying customer?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Just out of curiosity, is Ayn Rand considered a "leftist" to you? She despised conservatives and actively campaigned against Ronald Reagan.

  • timbo||

    I have no great respect for conservatives because they are mostly associated with silly nationalism and witch hunts for social justice on their side too. The only people I have respect for are laissez faire capitalists who have respect for private property rights, enforcement of contracts, and adherence to the first and second amendment.

    Reagan paved the road for deficit spending and cold-war spending so he was no saint.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    But is Ayn Rand of the left or right?

  • Tom Bombadil||

    Neither, dumbass.

  • timbo||

    No idea. Never read her stuff. I read mostly bastiat, Hazlitt and freidman, among others.

    Those three made the charade of the left and Keynesian leftist central planning quite obvious.

    When you think of things in economic terms, as the most important aspect of freedom, all political affiliations other than free market capitalism are untenable.

    All of this other stuff is fodder for the moron herd which all political actors are happy to foment while Rome burns.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Butt, Libertarians are centrist.

  • Leo Kovalensky||

    Wrong. The major libertarian voices in America are "right" on the economic scale, and anti-authoritarian. Definitely not centrist. Also, it's absurd to think about the entire political spectrum as a single dimension.

    More to read here...

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Leo Kovalensky|8.28.17 @ 1:39PM|#
    Wrong. The major libertarian voices in America are "right" on the economic scale, and anti-authoritarian. Definitely not centrist. Also, it's absurd to think about the entire political spectrum as a single dimension.


    Wrong. Libertarians are socially liberal and fiscally conservative making them centrist between the lefties (fiscally unsound and socially liberal) and conservatives (fiscally conservative and socially conservative).

  • Azathoth!!||

    Libertarians are not socially liberal and fiscally conservative--they are libertarian.

    The items that are called 'socially liberal' are nothing more than bait. No leftist nation anywhere has anything anyone would call 'social liberties'. They are oppressive of speech, of expression, of association. All the things we associate with being 'socially liberal', all the things they promise and claim to love are absent from every nation they do control or have controlled

    And when these things appear on the libertarian side of the spectrum they do so because libertarians see them as issues the government should have no voice in--as issues of personal freedom.

    The 'center' is halfway to the totalitarian hell that leftists want. Libertarians are not 'centrists'. They are not 'socially liberal'

  • Elias Fakaname||

    It's entirely possible to be a socially conservative libertarian. For example, one can be against gay marriage in concept and through government licensing yet simultaneously hold that marriage is not something that should be subject to government oversight in the first place.

    I personally hold a number of opinions that would be considered 'socially conservative', but do not believe that government force should be used to back them up. Which is the biggest basic problem with progressives and the threat they represent. Philosophicaly, progressives believe ALL their ideas should be enshrined in law and backed up with force. That makes them a mortal threat when they are in large numbers.

  • Robert||

    So a great extent it's absurd to think about the political spectrum according to dimensions at all. Cluster analysis is more revelatory.

  • Ariki||

    Thanks for the link.
    It's an interesting test.
    I ended up smack bang in the centre of the Libertarian Right.

  • Mark22||

    Neither. Political orientation isn't one dimensional.

    Trying to pretend that political orientation is one-dimensional is a propaganda tool used by socialists/communists to declare anybody other than themselves to be an enemy/fascist.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Political orientation can be one dimensional.

    You're either a Communist or you're not.
    You're either a Socialist or you're not.
    You're either an anarchist or you're not.

  • Mark22||

    Political orientation can be one dimensional.

    Nope, sorry. You can choose to project a cube onto a line, but the cube is still three dimensional and can't be fully described in one dimension.

    Ditto for political orientation: you can choose to look at it one-dimensionally, but that only means that your can't fully understand it and make errors; political orientation is still at least two or three dimensional.

  • Eric||

    "The only people I have respect for are laissez faire capitalists who have respect for private property rights, enforcement of contracts, and adherence to the first and second amendment."

    What about the 4th amendment?

  • Mark22||

    The 4A is pretty much unnecessary in a libertarian society, since private property rights already cover it.

  • Harry A. Ness||

    It is funny they chose black shirts. Do they not understand that fascists marched in black shirts? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackshirts

    Not to mention they look a little like ISIS.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The antifa think they are fighting people that are conservatives (right wing on political spectrum). Neo-Nazis are socialists and are left on the political spectrum.

    The leftist Antifa are literally fighting leftist Neo-Nazis.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    They are fighting your Nazi brethren.

    Ever notice how Neo-Nazis, racists, and fascists are categorized as "far right"? Of course you have.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Nazis, the socialists who used racism to further their socialist paradise 1000 year Reich?

    Ever notice how the Nazis, Neo-Nazis, racists and fascists are all actually lefties but lefties try and say they are right wing? Of course, you do.

    Its funny to watch left-on-left violence and then the lefty media tries to say there are conservatives rather than revolutionaries being violent.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    No leftist will ever take responsibility for anything ever. Nothing will ever be their fault.

  • esteve7||

    Yes that is a nice branding effort by the left to deselect from their evil radicals. Fascists are leftists too you moron.

  • Mark22||

    Ever notice how Neo-Nazis, racists, and fascists are categorized as "far right"? Of course you have

    Of course I have: that kind of categorization has been a communist propaganda tool since the end of WWII. Other than that, the distinction is meaningless.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    PB, lying cunts like YOU have puked out that false bit of proggy pablum to distract from some of the billions of gallons of innocent blood you and your fellow travelers have on your hands.So please bitch, just stop.

    Now that I've straightened you out, feel free to thank me.

  • mtrueman||

    "The leftist Antifa are literally fighting leftist Neo-Nazis."

    They really should be debating each other.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    They both want the socialist utopia to further their tyrannical agendas.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    "Not to mention they look a little like ISIS"

    Archer, Lana, or Gillette?

  • mtrueman||

    No, the Libertarian line is apparently anyone who attacks a fascist, is a fascist.

  • MarkLastname||

    If you ca everyone you disagree with a fascist and seek to suppress them with violence, you're a fascist.

    The French nationalist is the enemy of the German nationalist, but neither is really an 'anti-nationalist' due to this opposition. Same principle. Two tribes who believe in stamping out dissent with violence at war with each other.

  • mtrueman||

    "If you ca everyone you disagree with a fascist and seek to suppress them with violence, you're a fascist."

    Who has time to find out everybody's opinions? Just call everyone a fascist and have done with it. The key point is the escalation of violence and culture wars. In whose name these battles are fought is secondary.

  • Robert||

    French & German nationalists aren't enemies, they each want each to keep to their own nation.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    No, the libertarian line is that antifa ARE fascists, just a slightly different flavor than the Nazis. If anyone else's attacks fascists, we'll sort them out as they come (Phrasing! Are we still doing phrasing?)

  • timbo||

    trueman, you do realize that just by calling yourself antifa, that does not mean you are not a fascist. These antifa fascists are employing the tactics of fascists to the letter.

    Awesome how many people have no idea what they are protesting about.

  • mtrueman||

    "trueman, you do realize that just by calling yourself antifa,"

    Read the article again. These anitfa were doing more than calling themselves anti fascist, they were beating up others who call themselves fascist. Good lord man, for someone who supposedly puts such an emphasis on debate, you've a lot to learn about the art.

    "Awesome how many people have no idea what they are protesting about."

    Go to their websites if you are curious. Don't let Reason be your only perspective.

  • Some Engineer||

    They see the fascists as enemies, not debating partners.

    That sounds like a personal problem, especially since they are making up what it means to be a fascist.

  • mtrueman||

    You can always tell them what the true meaning is. Even debate if you're that way inclined.

  • MarkLastname||

    As you yourself noted, they're not in the mood to debate; they'd rather throw rocks at people they don't like.

  • mtrueman||

    "they'd rather throw rocks at people they don't like."

    Baby steps. Go 20th century on their fascist asses.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Personally my tolerance for people who want to destroy my freedom and replace the constitution with the ten pillars of communism is over. It's time for some neo-McCartysim so we can wipe out every last stinking marxist from this country and one day the world. You people should never have been tolerated in the first place. Nothing but murderers and slavers, every last one of you.

    Freedom for America is worth more than the collective lives of every marxist in the world.

  • mtrueman||

    "It's time for some neo-McCartysim so we can wipe out every last stinking marxist from this country "

    You really think some senator is going to save your dwindling freedom? My advice, get yourself a firearm and learn to use it. You can then start wiping out the commies you come across without bothering your superiors.

  • Brother Kyfho||

    I'll say this for the so-called "anti fascists", they tend to put their money where their mouth is. They don't wait for someone else (the police/government) to do their dirty work, they step up and do it themselves. Libertarians could learn a thing or two from that.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    First, I'm very proficient in a variety of firearms, and am already a law abiding 2A enthusiast. So I've got my bases covered. Second, who said anything about some senator? This country needs a thousand,maybe ten thousand, anti Marxist leaders to rise up and rally Americans, and hopefully others against the red menace. And they are a menace. If you think the Marxists will stop where they are now, you're living in a dream world. Antifa is a small taste of what's coming when these monsters don't get their way.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    The Antifa is attacking the fascists and disrupting their ability to organize. They see the fascists as enemies, not debating partners.

    Initiating violence simply to shut people up that you don't like isn't an intellectually mature stance to hold. You don't have to debate them, but the minute you cross that line and start throwing punches simply for not agreeing with you, you've lost whatever moral high ground you had for your own position. You're literally demonstrating that your political beliefs require the application of force to survive.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Say what you want about mtrueman, but he's never denied that his political beliefs require coercion.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    Good point.

  • mtrueman||

    "you've lost whatever moral high ground you had for your own position. "

    The Antifa are attacking the fascists to destroy them and their ability to organize. That's their aim, not to impress you with their high moral ground.

  • Likes him some booze||

    The moral high ground is the only reason they have for engaging on violence. Eschewing it means they lose any ability to defend their actions.

  • Brother Kyfho||

    Not among themselves. They shut down the right because they don't want anyone to have the opportunity to persuade them that they're wrong - the equivalent of putting their fingers in their ears and shouting "Nananannanananana!!! Not listening!!! Not listening!!!" Anything that is a threat to what their leaders told them is pointed at (by leadership) and attacked. Rank and file are told it's because "Raaaaaaacciiiiisssss", but it's because it ultimately threatens leadership's position.

  • mtrueman||

    "but it's because it ultimately threatens leadership's position."

    He's talking about Al Gore and Al Sharpton. There's gotta be a woman, too. And a Jew, of course.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    The left hates Jews.

  • mtrueman||

    I suppose they feel their actions speak for themselves. Propaganda by deed, as they used to say. It's not really supposed to move the hearts of fascist sympathizers.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    The Antifa are attacking the fascists to destroy them and their ability to organize. That's their aim, not to impress you with their high moral ground.

    Well, if they're initiating violence, then some dangerhair getting run over by a car could certainly be considered "blowback."

  • mtrueman||

    Especially if it happens in a dangerhair salon.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The antifa ARE fascists. They clearly don't see the irony.

  • mtrueman||

    "The antifa ARE fascists. "

    As long as they are attacking somebody, the level of civil conflict and culture wars in the country is bound to rise. The chickens WILL come home to roost, as a great American Muslim once said.

  • Azathoth!!||


    As long as they are attacking somebody, the level of civil conflict and culture wars in the country is bound to rise. The chickens WILL come home to roost, as a great American once said.

    FTFY

  • mtrueman||

    Would you settle for secret American Muslim?

  • Azathoth!!||

    No.

    His faith is irrelevant.

  • CatoTheChipper||

    "If every event has the potential to become violent, fewer people are likely to gather."

    If Nazi gatherings promised to be violent, real Nazis and old-school Klansmen would be happy to arrive armed and ready to rumble.

    Fortunately, there are no real Nazis and very few old-school Klansmen.

    Antifa members live in a paranoid delusion that is continuously validated by what Matt Welch called "95%" of journalists in the last 5th Column podcast. Welch counted himself among that 95% -- journos so afflicted by TDS that they report that Trump signaled his Nazi/fascist/white nationalist sympathies after Charlottesville. These journos latch on to a single phrase uttered by the most inarticulate national politician of our age -- Trump makes the bumbling George W Bush seem like Cicero by comparison -- and then give the most uncharitable interpretation of the phrase. Then they broadcast their unreasonable conclusion as if it were an obvious fact -- despite overwhelming explicit evidence to the contrary -- over and over and over and over again.

    It's no wonder that a bunch of testosterone-fueled LARPers would fantasize that they are anti-fascists who valiantly defend a democracy that is threatened by the darkness of Trump. But, if they were to clash with real Nazis and old-school Klansmen, it would anti-fascist LARP blood in the streets. Fortunately for these children, they clash mostly with just Trump supporters and right-wing kids who reject national socialism.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Welch counted himself among that 95% -- journos so afflicted by TDS that they report that Trump signaled his Nazi/fascist/white nationalist sympathies after Charlottesville.

    Welch is correct about that signal.

    The Nazis/right should be allowed to organize, assemble, and march though. The ACLU has it right on that. The antifa movement were the thugs yesterday.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You meant the lefty Nazis and neo-Nazis. After all Nazis are the National Socialist German Workers Party.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Who gives a shit? We spend so much time here debating the definition of terms, that we lose all of the value of even having those terms.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    He cares. He hates all lefties so everyone hates is a lefty. It matters deeply to him.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    Bingo bango. To a normal person, all this "they're part of the left too!" whinging would make one rethink the relevance of the left-right spectrum. To particular partisans, it makes that spectrum even more relevant.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Bingo bango. To a normal person, all your whining to cover for lefties exposes you for not being a supporter of Libertarian principles.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Just what lefties want. Change meanings of words that negatively affect who they are or have done.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Which has ALWAYS been their MO. Just like how all those Dixiecrats magically turned republican after 1965, but no one know where they went.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Because the definition of terms is extremely important--this guy, Orwell, wrote a book about just how important it is.

    The left NEEDS to pin some bad stuff on the right--because they are nothing but bad stuff wrapped in nice sounding words.

    But to anyone really paying attention it can't work.

    Here are a few ACTUAL precepts of the right--

    Support for freedom of speech, the press, religion, of expression, and of association
    Support for governmental minimalism
    Support for free markets
    Support for low/no regulation
    Support for individualism, for personal liberty and individual responsibility
    Support for the right of self-defense

    Tell me, where is the path to the managed economies of the fascists from that? Where is the path to the controlled media? Where is the path to the death camps from that?

    How about some ACTUAL precepts of the left--no 'bait', just the raw stuff--

    Support for managed information flows, from official sources down to worker conversation
    Support for managed markets
    Support for a strong central government
    Support for a strong official security for the people's protection and strict gun controls
    Support for strong regulation on business and corporations
    Support for a unified society, with each working for the good of all

    And I've even candy coated it a bit, with your daily ration of Victory Chocolate flavored treat.

  • mtrueman||

    Orwell was a socialist for most if not all of his adult life. He even fought and got wounded in the darling socialist cause of his time, the defense of Republican Spain against the right wing. He was evidently wracked by guilt over his part in policing Burma, where abuse of natives was the norm. According to you he is a fascist. Why are you quoting him as some kind of expert.

  • Brother Kyfho||

    Cause the dude confessed to the tactics of the left.

  • mtrueman||

    Do you think that Azathoth's self serving laundry list comes from Orwell? It doesn't. It's just a name that one brings up to add some intellectual heft to the fluff that is floating around his mind. Orwell's name, that is. Not Azathoth.

  • Azathoth!!||

    I didn't quote him.

    I said he wrote a book about how his fellow leftists twist the meanings of words to serve their purposes.

    He fought on the side of the communists against the fascists in Spain. That makes him a communist, not a socialist.

    One refers to Orwell on issues of communist totalitarianism because he showcased their vileness in whatever he wrote--even when he was trying to paint them in a good light. It's like there was a light inside him that would not let anything--not even Orwell himself--hide the fact that leftism, all of it, every single concept, is a horrendous, awful thing that should never be used to torture humanity.

    The left fights mightily to pin the crimes of other leftists on the right because the right has no crimes that compare to the horrors committed in the service of Marx' vision of getting humans to behave like ants.

    We need to stop letting people like you do so.

  • mtrueman||

    "The left fights mightily to pin the crimes of other leftists on the right because the right has no crimes that compare to the horrors committed in the service of Marx' vision of getting humans to behave like ants."

    This is not true. You were the one who mentioned Orwell while remaining silent of his crimes. I raised them immediately in my first post on the subject.

  • Azathoth!!||

    This is a non-sequitar.

    It has no bearing on anything I've said.

    Further, Orwell is a leftist, and has actually committed atrocities in service to leftism. He is not being ignored, he's being included in the collective he so loved.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Words have meanings. The left twists them. Which is part of how they operate. Some of us don't let them get away with that.

  • Tom Bombadil||

    Hey Nick,
    You should read the comments sometime.

    99% of the commentariat have sussed Antifa EXACTLY AND REPEATEDLY for a very long time now.

    Welcome to the World of Reason, what took so long?

  • Zeb||

    This may come as a shock, but he may not consider the weirdos in the comment section his primary audience.

  • SIV||

    We're not millennial prog-tard enough to be Reason's target audience

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Yes, Reason should go after the 40 and over true libertarian police crowd.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Awful lot of words for "would."

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I don't know if he does or not, but he doesn't have to agree with us. Though, he could write anything and we would still argue over it as there is a wider variety of opinions here than many give credit

  • Domestic Dissident||

    And you've got to love Gillespie now trying to put on the mantle of ardent free speech supporter when just two or three days ago in the Tom Colicchio thread he openly admitted that he thinks things that annoy him and his friends should be renamed or removed from society altogether.

    "I fully support free speech, except when it bothers me." What a principled guy.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    openly admitted that he thinks things that annoy him and his friends should be renamed or removed from society altogether.

    So do I. That doesn't mean I'm at all interested in the government doing it.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    So do I.

    Shocking.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    For example, I think society would be much better if the number of yous in it was reduced by one.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    The feeling is 100% mutual, little mofo.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    So then you also agree with Nick, retard.

  • SIV||

    The thug's veto, this time from the far left.

    Nice troll, Nick.

  • Finrod||

    Indeed. When was the last time the thug's veto DIDN'T come from the Left?

  • SIV||

    Nick Gillespie is "Littlefinger" to Robbie's Sansa.

    Soave thanks him for "all the many lessons"

  • JuanQPublic||

    Yes, Antifa is illiberal and works against protecting liberal democracy with one stated goal of smashing fascists/authoritarians.

    However, if you're a president/"movement" that comes to the White House by making direct threats against already marginalized groups of people while encouraging violence, doing things like provoking groups and mere suspects while standing in front of a clapping crowd of police, and using the first opportunities of governance to pull those very levers, why would anyone think that no blowback is going to happen?

    Blowback is sure to happen, and it'll likely intensify through a feedback loop with disregard for non-violence and liberal democracy. The real struggle now is liberal democracy and due process vs. a cornucopia of illiberal players of both the "left" and "right".

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    However, if you're a president/"movement" that comes to the White House by making direct threats against already marginalized groups of people while encouraging violence, doing things like provoking groups and mere suspects while standing in front of a clapping crowd of police, and using the first opportunities of governance to pull those very levers, why would anyone think that no blowback is going to happen?

    I hate to break it to you, but the radical left were acting like this long before 2016.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Obviously so. Not sure where it was conveyed above that they weren't. But it's obviously going to intensify now that there is a new flavor of hardline, scapegoating rhetoric that is also amplified by the media.

    Increasing political violence is actually the logical outcome of all this. That doesn't imply that it should be supported. Saying that a logical outcome of heavy smoking is cancer doesn't imply that someone "should" get cancer.

  • Azathoth!!||

    'Already marginalized'?

    Are you kidding?

    With all the schools, most of the media, most of the government and damned near every talking head on TV on your side you don't get to call yourself 'marginalized'.

    'Empowered', 'Celebrated', 'Encouraged', or maybe 'Enabled', 'Flattered', and 'Pandered to', yes?

    Eventually the balloon bursts--your karass is a granfalloon.

  • JuanQPublic||

    "With all the schools, most of the media, most of the government and damned near every talking head on TV on your side you don't get to call yourself 'marginalized'."

    Who are you referring to, specifically? This reads like the blown gasket of a Democrat after Trump won the election.

    I'm referring to clearly marginalized people who Trump and Attorney General Buzzkill put in the crosshairs as soon as they got to the levers of governance: immigrants, drug users, and the general population being shuffled through a dysfunctional justice system. Scapegoating the "bad dudes" while removing restraints on the state. Those people. Not the Antifa or privileged college kids running to authority to shut down speech.

    Not sure why this isn't plainly obvious that both the political "left" and "right" use the levers of the state to further antagonize the already marginalized.

    And why are "talking heads" on TV the metric you use for gauging how marginalized a demographic is? I'm very curious as to how you explain that.

  • Azathoth!!||

    You don't get to call yourself marginalized when the bulk of the propaganda favors you.

    You don't get to call yourself marginalized when everyone is going out of their way to make sure you are heard.

    The use of the term 'talking head' was intended to create an image--that of the shrieking ninny. It is perfectly understandable that you would not recognize it fulfilling, as you do, the same function.

  • JuanQPublic||

    It's hard to see anything remotely "libertarian" here. Rather, more garden variety partisan rhetoric.

    Sorry, but the media doesn't control people's minds as you assert. It reinforces their existing biases. That's why they exist: to make money by targeting consumers and selling them to advertisers.

    So if you don't want to believe that immigrants, drug "criminals" and generally everyone locked into the bloated state's dysfunctional justice system "aren't marginalized", and you don't believe that the rhetoric that directly makes threats to these specific groups of people has nothing to do with increasing political violence, rather, "talking heads" on TV are the supposed reason they *seem* marginalized but aren't, then so be it. Yes, it reads just as ridiculously as it sounds.

  • Azathoth!!||

    As I noted, you are incapable of understanding this, being yourself an aspect of the problem.

    You cannot see the forest because you're a tree.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    I've said it before and i'll say it again: if you ever find yourself in a situation in which you're punching someone because you don't like their opinions, YOU ARE THE FASCIST.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    A big part of the problem is that "fascist" became nothing more than a perjorative after World War II to describe anyone who didn't identify as a liberal Democrat. Facism was as much an economic system as it was a social one, but those nuances have been lost in the last 70 years.

    It's far more accurate to just call these people authoritarian assholes. Someone here once described leftists as people who don't hate the whip, just the person who wields it.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    As to economic fascism, i doubt there's a single government in the world whose economic policies wouldn't make Mussolini proud.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    We need to be calling them what they are, communist traitors.

  • mtrueman||

    "A big part of the problem is that "fascist" became nothing more than a perjorative after World War II to describe anyone who didn't identify as a liberal Democrat. "

    Not true. "Better dead than red" were the watch words of the cold war period. A 'liberal Democrat' was called a pinko, and anything to the left of a pinko was a commie. The word fascist was reserved for rightists.

  • Sevo||

    "The word fascist was reserved for rightists."

    Cite missing, imbecile.

  • mtrueman||

    Tw'as never there in the first place.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    Not true. "Better dead than red" were the watch words of the cold war period

    At least until the Boomer shitlibs went to college.

  • Longtobefree||

    generic name antifa (short for "anti-fascist").

    Seldom reported, but true; the 'fa' stands for 'free americans' not 'fascist'.
    All they are against is freedom.

  • CatoTheChipper||

    And all this time I thought the "fa" stood for first amendment.

  • Robert||

    I thought it was a brand of soap. So are the anti-Fa pro some other brand, or are they just anti-soap?

  • Dan S.||

    the violence this time was due entirely due

    anarchists or members of a loosely aggregated group grouped

    a means by which an unacceptable status quo is maintained through a belief in a supposedly disinterested belief

    A lot of duplicated words. The first example doesn't make any sense at all, the second one does. The third example I initially thought was as confused as the first, but on re-reading, maybe it's not.

  • Ron||

    The left empowers the antifa by excusing their actions as honerable. Antifa is the lefts silent partner in silencing those they disagree with

  • Rebel Scum||

    this time from the far left.

    This time? This has been the rule as of late.

    handling of the neo-Nazi rally

    Which was not a neo-nazi rally, but a few were present...

    Antifa is at its core anti-liberal in that it dismisses freedom of speech and peaceful assembly

    Yes, Antifa are the actual fascists. They are violent, racist, socialist and do not believe in individual rights, but rather collective rights.

    As with white supremacists, getting a sense of the actual numbers of members of antifa is impossible, though the movement is clearly small.

    I'd wager the number of actual white-supremacists is around the range of zero, a decimal, and a series of zeroes, then a one as far as a percent of population. Antifa is far larger and probably growing. Didn't they and associated groups have twice the number show up as the (illegal, non-permitted) counter-protest in charlottesville opposed to the 'unite the right' crowd?

  • damikesc||

    Antifa also has powerful allies. Isn't the mayor of Berkeley tied to antifa groups?

  • Rebel Scum||

    Antifa also has powerful allies.

    This too. They get cover in the majority of the national news media and they have friends in high places.

    Isn't the mayor of Berkeley tied to antifa groups?

    It would not surprise me.

  • damikesc||

    Checked, and yes he is.

    At the very least, he is a member of the Facebook group for By Any Means Necessary (an exceptionally violent antifa group). Suffice to say, it is not an open group anybody can join.

  • damikesc||

    Why are they even permitted to wear masks at all? They serve no purpose except to protect them from the repurcussions of their actions.

  • NoVaNick||

    These antifa guys are not exactly original. I would say they are a pale imitation of their predecessors, who actually had the balls to go after the man, rather than beat up on mentally challenged white trash, who, according to them, are victims of the evil capitalist system

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Brigades

  • CatoTheChipper||

    Antifa are a LARP version of the real thing. Unfortunately, they still do a lot of damage.

  • MasterThief||

    Because they are the flip side of the coin to the KKK. Both groups focus on identity politics. Both groups have collectivists goals which they strive to achieve through violent revolution. It was confusing when I looked into the alt-right and found that they were not "right-wing" in most ways I knew of.
    However... in recent years the KKK and neo-nazis show their faces at their rallies and show more restraint and tolerance to their opposition. Their ideas still suck, but the left has gone so crazy that the white supremacist crowd looks almost reasonable.

  • Eric L||

    I was reminded of the quote from Burke "It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." upon reading the linked Andrew Sullivan article where he quotes a Catholic priest (who had formerly been a member of the KKK) "Believing that human beings are somehow inferior or superior because of their innate characteristics is not only to believe a lie; it is to live in a prison."

  • MikeP2||

    "The thug's veto, this time from the far left."

    This time?!? Fug your idiotic false equivalence, Nick. For the last few decades it has always been from the left. There has not been one incident where a group was up on a soapbox and a righty organization used violence to disrupt. Not one.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Because right wing violence is done for other reasons than speech.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    There really isn't right wing violence. It barely exists. Evil really is concentrated on the left.

  • MasterThief||

    The anti-abortion and #godhatesfags crowd might be the exception. Those are the two issues where I see the right going out and engaging in questionable activism.
    Overall though, it is the left who goes out and attempts to shut down ANY sort of expression from their opposition. The whole thing of shouting dumbass slogans rather than engaging anybody just pisses me off

  • Azathoth!!||

    The 'godhatesfags' crowd are democrats. they were invited guests to the Clinton inaugurals and provided campaign space to the gore/Lieberman campaign.

  • Cloudbuster||

    The thug's veto, this time from the far left.

    It's pretty much always from the far left these days.

  • Old Mexican's Speedos||

    As the The Washington Post reports, the violence this time was due entirely due [sic] to left-wing anarchists or members of a loosely aggregated group grouped [sic] under the generic name antifa (short for "anti-fascist").


    The level of violence is so disturbing and shocking that it even made the author suffer a series of spams of redundancy.

  • Old Mexican's Speedos||

    The rise of antifa, like the rise of ethno-nationalism, actually provides a common ground among conservatives, liberals, and libertarians who believe in the classical-liberal ideals of free speech and tolerance.


    That means: non-Trumpistas.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    "Antifa is at its core anti-liberal in that it dismisses freedom of speech and peaceful assembly as an instrument of Marcusian "repressive tolerance," or a means by which an unacceptable status quo is maintained through a belief in a supposedly disinterested belief in a marketplace of ideas."

    Antifa is, at its core, the very essence of Modern Liberalism; intolerant, smug, and fascistic.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Change 'liberalism' to 'progressivism' and we're in agreement.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    And why it is an existential enemy that should not be engaged, debated, or tolerated, but destroyed. They certainly aren't willing to live with us. Given some time and enough success, every libertarian will end up in an oven or starved to death in a work cap if progressives have their way.

    Destroy them all now instead.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I'm having trouble with the definition of terms here. I'll accept 'antifa' because, well that's what they call themselves. Were the members of the peaceful assembly really 'right-wing' or is that one of those media memes that runs on its own momentum, kind of like "arab street" did back in the early aughts?

  • MarkLastname||

    "Thug's veto"
    Racisssssst!!!!

  • Uncle Jay||

    RE: 'Antifa Attack Peaceful Right-Wing Demonstrators in Berkeley'

    The left's credo is tolerance, peace and open debate...and if you believe that one, I'll tell you another one.

  • Acton||

    So that's it? 168 posts debating whether Antifa is "Left"or "Right", "fascist" or not? If it takes 168 posts on Reason to clearify those terms, maybe they just aren't very bloody helpful.

    How about just describing what Antifa is without trying to fit that square peg in a round hole?

  • GILMORE™||

    How about just describing what Antifa is

    neocommunists?

  • TJJ2000||

    lol.. neocommunists... Couldn't have pegged that one any better. I was just about to ask how in the world Antifa calls themselves Anti-Fascist when everything they do is Fascist. Censoring speech, censoring statues, censoring debate - There nothing "Anti" about the group; they're flat out Fascists and use the same tactics Hitler did to gain power.

  • mtrueman||

    "and use the same tactics Hitler did to gain power."

    Yes the antifa has such a charismatic leader who really knows how to spellbind a crowd. What was his name again? Or is it a kind of lady Hitler?

  • Sevo||

    mtrueman|8.28.17 @ 6:07PM|#
    "Yes the antifa has such a charismatic leader who really knows how to spellbind a crowd. What was his name again? Or is it a kind of lady Hitler?"

    Yes, trueman misses the point again.

  • mtrueman||

    I got you to repeat 'lady Hitler.' That more than makes up for any point that I missed.

  • mtrueman||

    Obsessing over the exact categorization of various types of firearms is another well loved past time here. Maybe because the board is filled with conservative men who excel at this sort of thing. The fired google engineer said as much if memory serves.

  • Sevo||

    mtrueman|8.28.17 @ 5:46PM|#
    "Obsessing over the exact categorization of various types of firearms is another well loved past time here."

    Spreading bullshit is a well loved pass-time of trueman.

  • mtrueman||

    My speech is freer than yours, you fascist scum.

  • Sevo||

    "My speech is freer than yours, you fascist scum."

    You certainly spend a lot of time making an ass of yourself.
    You could save time and simply admit you are an ignoramus with nothing to add to any thread ever posted here.

  • mtrueman||

    I've never asked for or taken your advice in the past. But thanks for your concern, anyway.

  • Sevo||

    "I've never asked for or taken your advice in the past."

    So you're too dumb to learn? Why is that not surprising?

  • tommhan||

    WHAT A SHOCK! A LEFT WING EXTREMIST VIOLENT GROUP BEING VIOLENT.

  • swampwiz||

    Hmm, isn't pepper-spraying considered an assault that would legally allow someone to fight back? Is Reason devolving to propaganda?

  • Red Twilight||

    No, reason.com libertarians are Republicans. They bend over backwards to condone rightwing fuckery, and find the most obscure tangents to tie despicable acts to the "left"

  • Sevo||

    Red Twilight|8.28.17 @ 7:08PM|#
    "No, reason.com libertarians are Republicans."

    Red Twilight is a bullshitter.

  • Cy||

    "Red Twilight is a bullshitter."

    He''s also missing a few brain cells. I wonder if he qualifies for welfare.

  • hackajar||

    > was due entirely due

    Sigh

  • JeremyR||

    Good editors cost more than writers.

  • Red Twilight||

    But writers make more money

  • AD-RtR/OS!||

    Were those "peaceful right-wingers" Neo-Nazi's, Klansmen, or from the local Young Republican Club?
    And, when did "right-wingers" have the potential to do anything peacefully?
    Isn't that a violation of the AP Style-book?

  • Sevo||

    AD-RtR/OS!|8.28.17 @ 6:43PM|#
    "Were those "peaceful right-wingers" Neo-Nazi's, Klansmen, or from the local Young Republican Club?"

    They were not violent.
    Did you have a point, or just drop by to embarrass yourself?

  • Red Twilight||

    Antifa thuggery is a response to Neo-Nazism. It has nothing to do with the left's intolerance of white supremacists' speech. The white nationalists were deplored, but allowed to march in C'ville on Friday. The Saturday clashes were not with the left, they were with Antifa thugs.

    Conflating the two is only a feeble attempt to distance the neo-Nazis from Republicans. Almost a reflex, that because the Republicans are sympathetic to neo-Nazis, the amorphous "left" *must be* likewise to Antifa.

    That is just bothsidesism bullshit.

  • Sevo||

    Whereas your post is just plain bullshit:
    "The Saturday clashes were not with the left, they were with Antifa thugs."
    What a steaming pile of shit.

  • Procyon Rotor||

    Why are you refusing to unequivocally condemn neo-Nazis, Nick? When you focus on the violence of "the left", you send a clear signal to your alt-right readers that you're on their side. I for one am sick of this false equivalence between people who want to EXTERMINATE all brown people in the world, and the righteous movement to prevent genocide by any means necessary.

    /sarc

  • Mark22||

    Well played, Mr. Alinsky.

  • Hank Phillips||

    I'm gonna haveta go with Orwell on this one. He noted that English writers who believe "Communism and Fascism to be THE SAME THING invariably hold that both are monstrous evils which must be fought to the death."
    Then again, German writer Remarque envisioned the archbishops´ right and field marshals' left duking it out in an arena, as a spectator sport for soldiers to watch. I personally would pay good money to watch conservatives and econazis go at their initiation of force with swords and halberds--and root for both sides.

  • JeremyR||

    Before real violence, there was a long history of the left throwing fairly innocuous stuff at conservative speakers. Pies, water, other liquids, in order to keep them from speaking.

    A month or two that happened to Kat Timpf who is a libertarian. Not the constant virtue signalling kind found at Reason, but still pretty clearly not a traditional conservative.

    What's happening now is basically the same strategy the left has used, just different tactics. They know they can use outright thuggery because with the local politicians and unionized police on their side, they won't suffer any serious repercussions.

  • Steve Klopfen||

    By all accounts, ANTI-FA has become the very thing its stated mission was to oppose.

    I can understand, why it will likely end up being officially listed as a
    Domestic Terrorist Hate Group. Given its history of violently opposing free speak and
    causing repeated extensive property damages.

    For the record I am a Constitutionalist, not a RINO, DINO, TINO, Neo,
    Fascist or Libertarian. While I may not agree with what a lot said by either side,
    but it is Free Speech, unless it violates the Yelling Fire in the Theater test.

  • Ned Netterville||

    I used to b a Constitutionalist too--until I became a voluntaryist after much study.

  • Ned Netterville||

    Wait 'til you see what happens in this country when the left tries to or does impeach Trump. I doubt if his "core constituents will allow it to happen even if impeached and convicted. The iron rule of law is teetering. Its downfall would be a blessing if it was replaced by the Golden Ru le, not fascism or an-tifascism.

  • LifeStrategies||

    Your statement "any sort of neo-Nazi or alt-right beliefs" suggests a lack of understanding of the word Nazi.

    Few people realize that Nazi is the abbreviation for the German National Socialist party. The Nazi party's full name is NAtional soZIalistische deutsche arbeiter partei - which literally translates from German as the National Socialist German Workers' Party. Socialist? Workers? Nazis were left-wing, not right-wing.

    Mind you, Wikipedia do a very good job of muddying the waters by pretending that the abbreviation is actually NSDAP rather than Nazi. Soros apparently believes in Hitler's immoral justification: "The end justifies the means"

    Socialists hate the fact that the Nazi party was a National Socialist party with the same strong gun control agenda, the same strong social programs, the same government control of education, the same government control of the economy, and the same emphasis on government jobs and worker's rights as modern socialists -see Wikipedia's explanation of Nazi policies.

    There's also the same Nazi brownshirt violence against those who refuse to follow their left-wing agenda. Today they're masked and dress in black - and still very violent.

    So Socialists try to rewrite history by pretending Nazi means right-wing whereas in truth Nazi is actually left-wing and socialist. The all too abundant evidence prove the left are devout followers of Nazi ideology, even if they don't know it, and increasingly accept violence as a strategy.

  • Big Ed's Landing||

    Left Wing Brownshirts...no different than Nazis.

  • MoulanaRafi||

    It's an interesting link to share... Get Solution of Husband Wife Relationship Problem... Keep the good work going on...

  • gordo53||

    When the Antifa start getting shot, things will quiet down.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online