more terrorism from the right?
I realize that associating wackos from extreme fringe is sometimes disingenuous. But when the fringe/Faux right spent a week complaining about observational concerns within the people who create their "fringe" for violent action, and then we see violent action from that extreme fringe, i suspect we can say something like "told you so". This isn't a phenomenon limited to right-wingers (many of the anti-globalization forces are for example anarchists), but it is a phenomenon we will be seeing more of over the next few years to have some right-wing nut job shooting abortion providers, Jews, Muslims, blacks, Mexicans, or some other group "causing" perceived injustices. Because the people that for some reason oppose these various groups are most casually aligned with "Southern Conservatism" (of the sort that dominated GOP politics over the past decade), and the source of a domestic terrorist's motivations seems most like "the perceived inability to produce action through legal channels". Something that Southern Conservatives presently cannot do without decent spokespeople, a coherent message, and representation in key federal channels. It's something that bugged me about many Ron Paul's acolytes being drawn strongly from these sorts of people, and which more clearly defined his brand of libertarianism as inconsistent with the underlying ideology of a classical liberal. I have no interest in preserving the ability of some to practice social discrimination (individual discrimination is something we all do more or less in our choice of associations, this is different) or to permit the authorities exercising local or state power abuses over individual liberties while denying this to federal (or international) authority. But these people do. And without the perception that they have a voice (however flawed that voice was), they will choose to act.
Good luck getting people to back rational causes of social conservatives (whatever these might be) when your primary "advocates" are armed lunatics on a mission from God.
Class in 21st Century America
1 hour ago
Posts
4 comments:
Sickening. Where's Trogdor when you need him?
I guess I had forgotten about the guy who shot back at the police because "Obama was taking his guns away". This would make it strike three. Of course, extremist people will tell us that striking out in a "liberal" dominated world is a good thing as it proves the level of conviction in your ideas (a triumph of will over logic basically). Never mind that strikeouts are only surpassed by double plays as a bad thing. We haven't quite gotten one of those yet at least. But we have had one back in OKC. And that was cut out of the same mold as this shooter.
Trogdor might be helpful before we get to that point, yes.
"A triumph of will over logic..." I like that. The phrase, that is, not what it signifies. That can hardly ever be a good thing.
I don't think it's mine. Or least, I've seen the concept before many a time.
The trouble seems to be that the oppositions on BOTH sides are often guilty of this type of thinking: that their opponents cannot be reasoned with and are illogical and misinformed lunatics. When you get stuff like "liberalism is a mental disorder", you tend to recognize that there's a certain frame of mind that concludes a particular viewpoint is flawed without due consideration. I do the same thing to the Hannity-Limbaugh right because they don't use the same fact set as the rest of humanity.
I think the difference is that I have no problem letting them live within their illusions provided they don't act violently in accordance with them (and to a lesser extent, encourage and inflame violence on the part of others). I've yet to see an actual defense of someone with a different ideological set to Hannity made by him. Whereas I went out and defended the ultra-radical Mr Savage (despite disagreements over almost any word out of his mouth). One can argue that I'm a nobody and nobody cares if I defend people I disagree with, but I think that's how it starts. If you're allowed to be tolerant of people while still disagreeing with them on a personal level, you're not going to pile all that up into a mass of public rage that someone in a public position can exploit for profit (like they do).
Post a Comment