1. If you want to seed a civil war, this is how you do it…Why is this incredible story just an item on the daily ethics potpourri? For one thing, I don’t see why much commentary is necessary, or should be. I don’t typically write about robberies or murders, or other outright unethical acts that all but the worst sociopaths can recognize in a trice as unethical. I feel the same way about this, from the Wall Street Journal:
A mob surrounded ICE’s office in Southwest Portland June 19. They barricaded the exits and blocked the driveway. They sent “guards” to patrol the doors, trapping workers inside. At night they laid on the street, stopping traffic at a critical junction near a hospital. Police stayed away. “At this time I am denying your request for additional resources,” the Portland Police Bureau’s deputy chief, Robert Day, wrote to federal officers pleading for help. Hours later, the remaining ICE workers were finally evacuated by a small federal police team. The facility shut down for more than a week. Signs called ICE employees “Nazis” and “white supremacists.” Others accused them of running a “concentration camp,” and demanded open borders and prosecution of ICE agents. Along a wall, vandals wrote the names of ICE staff, encouraging others to publish their private information online.
Federal workers were defenseless. An ICE officer, who asked that his name not be published, told me one of his colleagues was trailed in a car and confronted when he went to pick up his daughter from summer camp. Later people showed up at his house. Another had his name and photo plastered on flyers outside his home accusing him of being part of the “Gestapo.”
Where were the police? Ordered away by Democratic Mayor Ted Wheeler, who doubles as police commissioner. “I do not want the @PortlandPolice to be engaged or sucked into a conflict, particularly from a federal agency that I believe is on the wrong track,” he tweeted. “If [ICE is] looking for a bailout from this mayor, they are looking in the wrong place.”
The phrase, “particularly from a federal agency that I believe is on the wrong track” mandates impeachment on its face. It is not the mayor’s proper role to decide who deserves the protection of the city against lawbreakers. “There is no place for personal, political bias when it comes to providing public safety services to our communities,” Portland Police Association president Daryl Turner said in a statement on Facebook. “In that respect, our Mayor, who is also our Police Commissioner, has failed miserably.”
- How many readers of Ethics Alarms saw broadcast news accounts of this incident and the Portland mayor’s conduct? It is the tendency to set out to bury and hide the worst examples of progressive and resistance excess that is the smokiest of smoking guns showing the degree to which journalists are actively attempting to indoctrinate and mislead rather than inform.
- Do the citizens of Portland really condone this?
2. Arrogant and not-too-bright directors gotta arrogantly direct not-too-brightly. In LA, Director Stan Zimmerman’s is re-imagining the classic “The Diary of Anne Frank” with Anne and her family portrayed as illegal aliens in hiding and the role of the Nazis taken by ICE. He apparently got the idea from a the true story of a Jewish woman in Los Angeles who created a “safe house” for a Hispanic mother and her two daughters after her husband was deported by ICE.
From a theatrical perspective, this “concept” is no more wrong than thousands of other versions of plays and musicals that are made worse by a director’s attempt to drown out the playwright’s voice with his or her own. If you think a good drama can be written about illegals hiding from ICE, then write one. Distorting another author’s work about something completely different is like drawing over the Mona Lisa or “Cristina’s World” with crayons.
Again, if I have to write much to persuade you how disrespectful, irresponsible and stupid such a version of “The Diary of Anne Frank” is, you really aren’t alert enough to be here at all. To begin with, this whole project is wildly unethical. Albert Hackett and Frances Goodrich wrote the original play, which was good enough to win the Pulitzer Prize for Drama. Playwright Wendy Kesselman wrote a new adaptation of the diary of the doomed Austrian teenager in 1997, and somehow was allowed to give it the same title as the Broadway play. She, in turn, being “woke” but apparently having no respect for the original author of the diary, allowed Zimmerman’s stunt.
ICE is not taking citizens and sending them off to be exterminated. ICE’s job is to find non-citizens who have broken our laws, and to send them back to where they came from. No illegal immigrants are being murdered, though many illegal immigrants have murdered others. The story of Anne and her courage, and the realities of the Holocaust deserve, more respect than being treated as convenient puppets for open-border agitprop.
3. Oh what a tangled web the New York Times weaves…A caption to an online photo in a May 29 New York Times article about Roseanne’s catastrophic tweet originally read “The network’s decision to cancel “Roseanne” over a racist comment will cost it. But when people decide to let racism slide, it costs us all.”
43 thoughts on “Sunday Ethics Reflections, 8/5/2018: Abdication, Arrogance, Airbrushing”
1)Ok, these people need to realize the ice officers are following policy that they do not always agree with. The police should be protecting them as there home life should not be infringed on. I do not agree with everything that is going on in our immigration policies. But we need to be working together to fix the problem. Trumps hard stance is wrong and the lefts stance is equally problematic. But as long as we have this posturing we are in trouble as nothing will be fixed.
2) Cheap theatrics that cheapen the seriousness of the Holocaust. Yes I realize there are dangers in Central America. But there are ways to apply for amnesty.
3) Times needs to be called out on everything, I am often perplexed by the support it receives from my gay brethren after a century of homophobic coverage. Yes occasionally they get it right but I point the example of the broken clock.
Rip writes: “Ok, these people need to realize the ice officers are following policy that they do not always agree with. The police should be protecting them as there home life should not be infringed on. I do not agree with everything that is going on in our immigration policies. But we need to be working together to fix the problem. Trumps hard stance is wrong and the lefts stance is equally problematic. But as long as we have this posturing we are in trouble as nothing will be fixed.”
Having studied the positions of the Dissident Right in America, one must state that their position is that because white people are a small minority of the Earth’s demographic, that the efforts (conscious or unconscious) to dilute or eventually to do away with Whites — a declared intention among many — is a direct and real assault against white survival. They understand that ‘Demography is Destiny’ and that therefor, to put it in stark terms, the white population must come to hard realizations and must choose, against huge ideological forces and indeed against a Combine, to counter-propose to the destiny being enacted on them and against them. These are hard truths, and they are hard facts that are hard to face.
In my excessively humble opinion one must understand that those who define themselves as ‘Antifa’ are radically opposed to this ‘turning back of the immigration tide’ and, as with Ben Shapiro who said he did not “give a good damn about the browning of America’, have a very different idea about ‘destiny’. Therefor, what must be seen in greater clarity is that a chasm is opening within the Nation that will not go away, will likely not be modified, and will rather likely increase.
You say “Trump’s hard stance is wrong” but I am not sure that his stance is really that hard, nor that wrong, at all. It is true that Trump has made statements about the destructive aspect of European immigration, that is of Middle Easterns and Africans (I assume he does not mean Eastern Europeans). But what is Trump’s view of, say, the Immigration Act of 1965?
This really is the ‘larger issue’ and, until it is seen, brought out into the open for a truly ‘public discussion’ along with a very large group of other genuine and important concerns, the conflict that we now witness in a sort of chaotic, mired state, will remain such. But when the ‘real issues’ get exposed, talked about, and acted upon, then the incipient conflicts will become even more marked.
The issues here resolve into questions of *subversion*. But who gets to define this *subversion*? For example take this statement:
The present Media and its ownership interests relentlessly propagandizes against *traditional White values* and are instrumental in shaping and advancing policies that undermine traditional White families and communities.
This activity, those intentions, represent a definition of subversion and, looked at through another lens, of treason. The point being that we seem to be dealing with 2 very different poles of view and understanding, and ones that will not be reconciled. How could they be? As one defines itself more it will run up against the other one more. And as that other one reveals what it really is about, so too will its position and its intentions be seen as more unacceptable to the former.
“We need to be working together to fix the problem”, when seen against the real backdrop of what really is happening, is an example again, in my excessively humble opinion, an example of ‘mired thinking’. Because you seem not to be able to really see the issues you remain in a sort of suspended state and holding, as it were, to a false idealism.
Talk about painting with a broad brush. What are you even on about here? Only the very fringes of the right have anything even approaching this viewpoint, and it is no different on the left, just different targets.
Insisting that we follow immigration laws is not white supremacy. Please stop acting like people who have this view are Nazis, it is insulting to all of the people that had to deal with actual Nazis.
What are you even on about here?
Clarity, seeing things as they really are. Removing ‘lenses’ that no longer function. Replacing them with others.
Looking at Ian Cheong’s Twitter post, I noticed several people were disputing it’s accuracy. I followed the link provided in one reply: https://www.nytimes.com/section/arts/television, then typed in “Roseanne Barr” in the search tab below the “Watching” line, and I found these items (tried to paste the screenshot I made in here, but it wouldn’t take).
Roseanne Barr Crosses a Line, and ABC Draws One
The network’s decision to cancel “Roseanne” over a racist comment will cost it. But when people decide to let racism slide, it costs us all.
By James Poniewozik
Then right below it:
After Racist Tweet, Roseanne Barr’s Show Is Canceled by ABC
Ms. Barr cited the “The Planet of the Apes” in discussing Valerie Jarrett, a black woman and former advisor to President Barack Obama. ABC Entertainment’s president called it “abhorrent”.
By John Koblin
So the original caption still stands. The other statement was NOT a caption, but the title of another article written by a different author.
How did you do that? I followed the links, and couldn’t find the original caption.
Which doesn’t change the fact that the Times is, in fact, doing what it previously wrote “hurts all of us.”
It IS a caption though: See?
How do you get a title out of what is written in small print under a photo?
Of course, we wouldn’t have to be puzzling this out if the NYT didn’t hire racists and then pretend it didn’t…
OK, I see what happened. They took out the photo caption from the article you linked to, but the original statement still shows up under the headline on the “Roseanne Barr” search results. Either they can’t change that, or they missed it. If you go to Ian Cheong’s Twitter post that you linked to, you can see screenshots of the original statement under the “Roseanne Barr Crosses a Line” article in the search results.
And yeah I goofed. “ABC canceled its highly-rated sitcom “Roseanne” after Roseanne Barr made racist remarks on Twitter. ” and After Racist Tweet, Roseanne Barr’s Show Is Canceled by ABC” obviously aren’t the same. I wasn’t paying close enough attention there.
1. I can’t speak for everyone in Portland but some folks here are not happy with Wheeler including both sides of the rally/protest here yesterday. This week I went before a city bureau here basically asking them to do their job by telling Wheeler & Co. to be examples of civility. I’ll be doing the same later to his face this month. Will only have 3 min to talk so if anyone has any good suggestions let me know.
This is all fascinating, because I had read an article about an earlier issue in Portland about mayor Wheeler essentially accusing police of targeting Portland’s homeless die to the high incidents of arrests. And Police Association President Turner (who I believe is African-American) publicly blasted Wheeler for this, pointing out that Wheeler’s own progressive policies had created a massive homeless crisis and that he was now trying to deflect blame onto the cops forced to deal with it.
I don’t know what the popular opinion was about all that, but on the Portland newspaper website, the comments on the article were just about 100% pro-Turner and anti-Wheeler. I wonder if Wheeler is nursing a childish grudge, and I also wonder just how dysfunctional the Portland Police Department can get with him in charge.
Mrs. Q, linking the ICE incident with the information Isaac provided below, I suggest that you might add to your already full measure of wordpower (and the courage to speak it in public) the idea that he is endangering the public by in going against federal as well as local law by aiding in the destruction or weakening of the power of law enforcement. And that he is weakening his own authority by going beyond mayoral mandates (his job description, so to speak) and threatening public safety by doing so. A police department that is not fully backed by or over-burdened by the city government is getting it from both sides; and that does not make for happy police or ICE officials who may then be more likely to treat lawbreakers as enemies as well as criminals without knowing whether they are or not.
It sounds like you are deliberately trying to not be confrontational, so I would not suggest you tell him he is abusing his authority by elevating his personal feelings above the law, or that he is jealous of President Trump’s ability to punch down whenever he feels like it. Or that allowing free rein to mobs is not the best way to run a railroad … mobs have a tendency to turn at whim and attack those who gave them permission in the first place. It is also not a good idea to tell him he’s an idiot, … but you knew that already.
I, and I’m sure everyone else who reads your well reasoned comments (which reminds me that I still owe you at least one response), wishes you well in your public efforts.
Shit like this makes me understand why Hollywood used to blacklist Communists.
1. There’s a bit more to the story. Eventually the Feds pulled together a task force of ICE and other agents and cleared the area themselves, rehoisting the Stars and Stripes that the activists had replaced to make the point who was in charge again. The encampment ironically had its own wall, and has been declared a biohazard by the city due to human waste, etc. The Feds will be damned if they are going to clean this up, that’s on the city. The Feds would probably be within their discretion if they had their Special Prosecutions unit, which handles government corruption, et al., bring charges against Wheeler for failure to do his sworn duty. I think it’s incumbent that they do something, because I think setting a precedent for law enforcement at different levels to refuse to aid others clearly in need is a very bad idea. Say what you want about DeBlasio, but even he hasn’t gone this far, and in fact deployed the NYPD to guard statues of Columbus, et al, that were threatened by activists. This is kind of weird, I have to add, since Wheeler does not appear to have had a career as an activist, community organizer, or even a lawyer representing radical causes prior to this. Oh, and yes, the citizens of Portland are fine with this, as long as it doesn’t interfere with their commute or threaten their kids. Portland is the most liberal city in this nation, bar none. San Francisco is close behind, and better clean up its act soon, lest it scare the tourists away. Portland is not as popular with tourists.
2. Forgive me if I yawn. This kind of reinterpretation of theater to serve a naked political agenda is so predictable as to be boring.
3. The New York Times’ credibility went out the window almost two years ago with the 2016 election. Any more loss of credibility or hypocrisy is just making the proverbial rubble bounce.
P.S., these righties are whackos, but I applaud them for giving the antifa thugs a taste of their own medicine.
“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.” ― H.L. Mencken
If only one side is shooting, the other side will soon be dead.
I just wish the “whackos” would, for once, organize themselves sufficiently to carry out the very same tactics and practices of the enemy leftists: Stalking them to their homes, and then trashing their properties. Finding their names and painting them in large letters on big walls. Hacking into their computers and wreaking all manner of havoc. Et cetera. This street-theater shit is so 1960s. So 1917 Moscow, really. The right needs to become even more sneaky-effective at terrorism, et cetera, than the left.
Capturing one or two and giving them the Cersei Lannister treatment might also not be such a bad idea.
I think the antifa (I hate that made up term, it sounds like a word out of a song in The Sound of Music) are much more crafty and practiced in maintaining their anonymity than are federal employees and unorganized righties. They seem to be working from a handbook.
They are working from several handbooks and have been practicing their despicable craft since 1965. If I were the president I would put together a task force with the specific mission of breaking them, all tactics authorized, with autographed get out of jail free cards for those in charge so no one’s afraid of being without a chair when the proverbial music stops.
With the Presidential pardon powers having few if any limits, it might even be legal in the USA. This “Task Force” – the Covert National Police, say. CONAPO for short. In German, Geheim Staats Polizei. Or perhaps something less sinister sounding, the People’s Commission for Internal Affairs. PCIA. In Russian, Narodnyy Komissariat Vnutrennikh Del.
p.s. Neither the GESTAPO nor the NKVD are regarded by most historians as the Good Guys.
COINTELPRO 21, or simply Kosmos (“Order”) will do, I think. And the Bolsheviks and Brownshirts, which these thugs closely resemble, aren’t exactly regarded as saints either, Susie Q.
This may interest you Lucky: https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2018/08/05/review-a-fair-hearing-the-alt-right-in-the-words-of-its-members-and-leaders/
My view is that when one actually sees what this Dissident Right is on about, and I mean by understanding it as explained by the most intellectual and articulate, that one can much better understand what the Idea War that is going on is really about.
We are working not for short-term gains but rather for a renovation in how people think and how they see. These are painstaking processes and the forces that oppose us are powerful indeed.
[Reply to Alizia’s Aug 6 at 10:18 am]
Thank you, Alizia, for your reply and for sharing that link. Idea War is continual, IMHO. If it wasn’t for today’s muscle-flexing of the leftists in the was-U.S., we who pay attention, or who try to pay attention, surely would be warring with some other “idea leaders.” A toast to you in your quest about how people think and how they see! A toast to renovation! Peace.
I do want to add, though: What I read at that link parallels a line of thought among today’s leftists – a kind of faith, really – that there is such a thing as a Hyper-Competent Government. Now, at the link, that faith is not in evidence, but instead, what is in evidence is a faith in such a thing as Hyper-Influential Judaism; I do not possess that faith. Even though I DO trust that there is such a thing as a leftist “Deep State,” I do not trust the operatives of that quasi-government, because I do not share the left’s faith in a Hyper-Competent Government. I hope that clarifies where I stand.
I do understand what you are saying. Thank you for the comments.
The first rule if you’re genuinely serious about this and not just bloviating is not to broadcast your intentions on an open channel .
It is because I don’t take you seriously that I’m writing this. Otherwise ‘never correct an enemy when they’re making a mistake’. I don’t see you as an enemy. We merely hold differing views.
If you were an enemy, of course I wouldn’t write this, I’d keep silent and keep records of your terrorist intent to hand over to prosecutors.
See Shakespeare on the subject.Henry V Act 4 Scene 1
So. In the name of Jesu Christ, speak fewer. It is the greatest admiration in the universal world when the true and aunchient prerogatifes and laws of the wars is not kept. If you would take the pains but to examine the wars of Pompey the Great, you shall find, I warrant you, that there is no tiddle toddle nor pibble babble in Pompey’s camp. I warrant you, you shall find the ceremonies of the wars and the cares of it and the forms of it and the sobriety of it and the modesty of it to be otherwise.
Why, the enemy is loud. You hear him all night.
If the enemy is an ass and a fool and a prating coxcomb, is it meet, think you, that we should also, look you, be an ass and a fool and a prating coxcomb, in your own conscience, now?
I will speak lower.
I pray you and beseech you that you will.
Thank you, Sue (Fluellen?). I appreciate your wisdom, even as we hold differing views.
See, I don’t worry about broadcasting my intentions, or even about correcting my enemies when they’re making a mistake.
In the first case, it doesn’t take much thought or effort to state the obvious.
In the second case, I already know that I am struggling with enemies who will not respond to any of my attempts at correction, except for complete dismissal. Their mistake-making will go on as if I never spoke up. They surely think exactly the same of me, and correctly so.
So, might will have to make right. Since the contesting forces’ respective might and right are distinct and mutually exclusive, there is simply no alternative but continued struggle until the one or the other achieves total victory.
Actually, they are not ‘whackos’ and that is a too-easy slander on your part, Steve. But to describe them, and really an entire section of America right now, is not easy and requires careful analysis and careful description.
By using that term and others like it you do in essence what the HRC and NYTs did (a media establishment) when it defined a swath of America as ‘deplorables’. At the same time 2 years ago that you refer to the same arrogant and elitist *arguments* were used. But it is not a fair one.
This is one of the reasons why I say that so-called American *conservatives*, when you actually look at what they say and what they support, stand more on the side of their Progressive directors.
These groups of people are ‘true patriots’ and even though they are using the means at their disposal, and these are imperfect and incomplete means, they are acting in their world against forces that they understand as being destructive to themselves, their interests, their families, their nation.
They are not always very sophisticated, but then nor has been any populist movement that ever arose in America to counter the machinations of the powerful. This unsophisticated population, this large mass, is in a sense the *outcome* of 40-50 years of educational policies. I don’t think they should be blamed and ridiculed as they work to reverse what has been wroght against them.
I say this not necessarily because I take Joey Gibson’s *side*, whatever it is, but because I am opposed to psuedo-Conservative treachery-of-idea.
You and I are closer than you think, Alizia. I do agree with a lot of what groups like this stand for, or at least we are on the same side against what we stand against. I just consider some of their tactics to be crude and in some cases counterproductive. In America the law says you can’t ban viewpoints. As such both sides need to win hearts and minds. It’s hard to win the hearts and minds of the undecided if you are perceived as a bully or a thug who smashes things and attacks innocent people.
I see what you mean.
I get a great deal of my information from books and articles, and then through speaking with the people I know in my world and internationally. I think my understanding of things is quite theoretical.
But watching some of the videos that Paul posted, below, of the events in Portland, I realize that … I don’t really like any of these people very much. They don’t inspire me. The leader of the Proud Boys seems … slightly deranged I am afraid to say. There is a disturbing similarity between them all (Antifa and the rightists). They all seem crude, badly formed, rather ugly. And as I watch them in their *epic battles* with each other, shouting cursing screaming and insulting, I have no clear sense what they are standing up for.
What has happened? Where did these people come from? What produced them? What are they going to achieve?
It seems to me that everyone is atomizing into incoherent particles, but each particle has a screaming story. A great deal of noise. I wonder if people are really serving *ideas* or if they are serving lower aspects of the emotional body?
I do. What they’re standing for is shouting, cursing, screaming and insulting.
It’s the inherent basis of the alt right, where “might makes right” is a cornerstone of the ideology, and as for the rest, it’s a first order consequence of any movement so convinced of its own moral rectitude that no method is impermissible in furthering The Cause.
Of the two, the second is far more insidious, the first a more overt threat.
Hey, I ended up agreeing with your statement. We have some common ground, rationality.
Don’t jump to hasty conclusions, Sue! it is quite possible your notion of your *rationality* is a self-deception. 😉
It’s the inherent basis of the alt right, where “might makes right” is a cornerstone of the ideology, and as for the rest, it’s a first order consequence of any movement so convinced of its own moral rectitude that no method is impermissible in furthering The Cause.
I say this because you have just made an irrational statement, if we understand irrationality to be the intrusion of emotion and bias into one’s perception and then one’s thinking.
I would guess that you do not have a very good sense of what the ‘alt-right’ is on the basis of this skewed statement you made about it. You could find out of course, and then you might begin to make informed statements not mis-informed ones.
You make another irrational statement when you say that the cornerstone of the alt-right is ‘might makes right’. There is a Nietzschean branch, as it were, perhaps best exemplified by Jonathan Bowden:
[ https://youtu.be/sDGWr8kMBk8?t=89 ]
If you bothered to listen to his talk you would find that he deals on very interesting ideas. But these ideas are *reactionary* to the ‘liberal construct’. You would also understand why his position, and his ideas, have a great deal to do with ‘recovery of self’ but also of power.
You made another irrational statement by referring to one defined ‘ideology’ of the ‘alt-right’. There is no such thing. There are many different factions within it and they have an uneasy alliance-of-convenience that often tends to break down around difficult issues. For example there is a ‘Christian identity’ movement that is largely Protestant. These people have a hard time with the ‘pagan wing’ of the alternative right, for obvious reasons. The pagans are sort of ideologically bound to reject Christianity, and some show only contempt for it. Yet the intellectual wing of the alt-right does recognize that they would have a tough time getting anywhere without an alliance with the Christian section. I needn’t mention the latent conflict between the Protestant and the Catholic branches…
To understand the alt-right, therefor, one has to turn back to Europe and the Interwar Period. One section, the religious section, attempting to hold out against Communist assault on one side, and Capitalist assault on the other (the American side predominantly). I won’t bore you but there is a great deal of very interesting material in those who were writing and thinking at that time.
As to ‘moral rectitude’ you have made another skewed statement. The alt-right that I am familiar with is very interested in defining morality. That is, moral positions that involve the defense of the family structure or certain hierarchies within society that have tended to uphold *value* against the leveling and destructive counter-valuations of (hyper-) liberal culture. It is in very many ways a moral movement insofar as it is generally not an atheistic one and it presupposes metaphysical morals, if you will permit the turn of phrase.
And you are wrong again when you imply that the alt-right is “so convinced of its own moral rectitude that no method is impermissible in furthering The Cause”. Again because the movement is not a monolith with one Opinion of View, but because it is a tentative exploration of ideas whose purpose is to devise alternatives to the present Regime of Liberalism. I do not know what term to use to refer to the negative aspect of Liberalism so I generally use ‘hyper-liberalism’).
Make an honest effort to look into what this movement is about and you will find many worthy ideas there, and certainly worthy individuals.
Yet still, this does not change that down at the *street level* there is a great deal of obvious confusion. But there is a more generous way to see that confusion as part of a social-psychological crisis. When established patterns begin to break down, chaos asserts itself, and chaos is very distressing to the Self. Now, in America (certainly) there is a kind of contagious hysteria. It affects nearly everyone, in one way or another.
Would you feel much offended if I now presented you with a bill for my clarifying services? Does $750.00 seem too little? (I have PayPal).
I will forego the payment if you promise to say only smart and rational things going forward!
Such a promise would be worthless. It would be unethical to make it.
I can promise I’ll do my best of course. I make no claim to either perfect rationality or superior intellect.
So.. Zmbabwe dollars ok? Smallest note I have is 100 trillion. Can you make change?
I am sure she has a penny, so change is assured.
Would you provide an example of *your best* by commenting in detail on my post to you? I am resolved to pay you if need be… 🙂
There is so much to talk about … and no one available who will.
Two comments from this very thread:
My own words:
The alt right is no more monolithic than the far left. They tend to have certain common features though that define them. Chrysi Avyi, White Aryan Resistance, National Front, Russian National Unity, Fiama Tricolore, Antipodean Resistance, Fédération d’action nationale et européenne..
I think I see what you are getting at. It would be an interesting angle to explore: a kind of point-by-point comparison between ‘the extreme Left’ and ‘the extreme Right’. Myself, I think I know quite well the positions of the Left and the Progressives having read a great deal of Chomsky, Zinn, Malcolm X, Angela Davis and many others (not to mention nationalistic resistance to US domination in the Latin American countries). It was simply a natural move on my part to gravitate to those ideas and positions. I am glad that I did my own research because no one can tell me what they say (or how *evil* they are, et cetera) because I know their work first-hand.
What I do, now, is to treat the Far-Right Extremists in the same way. For example, I intend to research the list-of-evil-ones that you provided, some of who I knew of course. What I find is that when you see and hear whaqt they say about themselves, it turns out to be very different from the wild, outrageous stories that are told about them. So, in regard to Tom Metzger I found this interesting interview:
[ https://youtu.be/TdNSCuSXHFg ]
One can research le Fédération d’action nationale et européenne and discover that it, too, has origins in popular resistance to the large machinations of the powerful players, those with the power to determine cultural direction, and those who control the media-systems with all the resources of the state. But what interested me in the few minutes I spent going over your list is the mention of Alain de Benoit ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_far-right_movements_in_France ), who is a very interesting man with very interesting ideas:
Alain de Benoist’s Nouvelle Droite and the Club de l’Horloge
In the 1980s, Alain de Benoist theorized the Nouvelle Droite movement, creating the GRECE in 1968 with the Club de l’Horloge. They advocated an ethno-nationalism stance focused on European culture, which advocated a return of paganism. Members of the GRECE quit the think tank in the 1980s, such as Pierre Vial who joined the FN, or Guillaume Faye who quit the organization along with others members in 1986. Faye participated in 2006 in a conference in the US organized by the American Renaissance white separatist magazine published by the New Century Foundation.
On the other hand, Alain Benoist occasionally contributed to the Mankind Quarterly review, which insists on hereditarianism and associated with the US think tank Pioneer Fund, headed by J. Philippe Rushton, author of Race, Evolution and Behavior (1995), which argues in favour of a biological conception of “race.” GRECE, as well as the Pioneer Fund, are actively involved in the race and intelligence debate, postulating that there is an identifiable link between levels of intelligence and distinct ethnic groups.
The Club de l’horloge itself had been founded by Henry de Lesquen, a former member of the conservative Rally for the Republic, which he quit in 1984. Others members of the Club de l’horloge, such as Bruno Mégret, later joined the FN after a short time in the RPR.
And with this one quickly notices that the European idea-movement has come to have influence within the American scene.
Including when one looks at the program of Fiamma Tricolore:
[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUUsgwI-nAQ ]
Generally, it is the same motif as what was common in the Interwar Period: common people making an effort to defend ‘their world’ from the large and powerful machinations of huge players with the resources of the state and the means to mold opinion and direct culture.
What I think is happening now, in our world, is that more than ever before, because of the Internet and the ease with which one can access information and make contact with other people, that these *machinations* as I call them are being successfully challenged and people are thinking in their own terms and defining their own interests. And this is terrifying to the ‘power structure’ and, as they always seem to do, they vilify the people who have these ideas and sentiments, and attempt to discredit them.
I would say that I think the Left and the Progressives are less involved with real ideas than it appears. What Leftism and Progressivism tends to — if one takes Sixties Radicalism as an example — is the breakdown of hierarchical structures through ‘Marxian Acids’. Critical Marxism is sharp, direct and *acidic*, and these acids do work by eating structures apart, but they end up destroying necessary structures and, finally, destroying even the intellect (as intellectus). The progressive movement ends up seducing itself on all levels and ends up not with strong directing ideas but rather with unleashed emotions and uncontrolled sentiments. It reduces Man to a contingency within mutable circumstances and takes away his power to choose and to mold.
Therefor, and now again strongly in our present, there seems to be arising a very strong movement-in-idea that rejects Hyper-Liberalism but is uncertain exactly how to act against it, and confused as to what specific line of action to take. Yet it is world-scale! And its ideas are strong and its exponents committed. You can see the same resistance, however crude and raw, in the Antipodean Resistance:
[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUhDHu1NdTg ]
When resistance arises in the ‘social body’ the first manifestations of it are as we see them: crude, visceral, raw, direct. But that is usually true in any situation, isn’t it? If you’ve been tricked and manipulated for a long time, when you finally realize it, your first reaction is going to be extremist.
There is a certain violence in the phrase Smash Cultural Marxism!
Antifa are an embarrassment to street gangs. Unless they ounumber you by at least 100 to 1, they are completely non-threatening. One thing Blacks, Whites, women, men, Muslims, atheists, and Christians all have in common is that there are YouTube videos of them beating the crap out of Antifa. The average Antifa is a pasty, doughy low-testosterone college-aged male who has never done manual labor or been in a fight, but feels confident that maybe he can at least sucker-punch a girl from behind or hit a guy with a bike lock or something, as long as he’s wearing a mask and in a crowd of at least 50 like-minded dorks. Yell “boo,” however, and they all scatter. They generally don’t vote and literally do not know what a “fascist “ is or what the word “Nazi” is an abbreviation of. Antifa have officially passed the putties from Power Rangers to claim the title of Least Threatening Minions in Ninja Outfits.
They wear ninja outfits? Some of the ones I have seen are wearing black leather motorcycle jackets, presumably in the mistaken assumption that said jackets would provide protection.
”The average Antifa is a pasty, doughy low-testosterone college-aged male who has never done manual labor or been in a fight,”
Bingo! Just like Ernie’s the toughest Muppet on Sesame Street!
“as long as he’s wearing a mask and in a crowd of at least 50 like-minded dorks.”
From the aptly titled Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (Charles Mackay)
“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”
Still wrong, even if ineffective. That they are protected by police in leftist strongholds makes this terrifying.
JACK: I just tried to post a comment in follow-up to my own comment of Aug 7 at 8:43 am. It has not appeared, even though all the other comments I have intended to post since logging in this morning HAVE appeared.
Would you please check your spam, and see if my most recent comment (before this one) landed there? Thank you!
NEVER MIND. Latency. I am too impatient. The “missing” comment now appears. Thank you again for your attention to your commenters.