Washington Post (The National Laughingstock) Publishes Op-Ed Calling for Political Violence

Yes, I can see now how completely opposed to political violence you are.

Marty Baron lives in a $1.7 million condo in Logan Circle. It’s seven blocks away from the headquarters of the Washington Post. And a 12 minute drive away from the FBI’s J Edgar Hoover Building.

Arrest him.

His paper’s latest contribution to wrecking this country is an editorial titled "Charlottesville showed that liberalism can't defeat white supremacy. Only direct action can."

It concludes with, “Start throwing rocks."

"Resistance, be it forceful or clandestine, threatened or explicit, stands as our 'rock.' Rocks can look like armed self-defense or nonviolent direct-action campaigns," N.D. B. Connolly, a history professor at Johns Hopkins who specializes in racism writes.

"In April 1968, amid a flurry of other 'rocks,' riots shook American cities following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. It took that rolling unrest, not the promise of further economic growth, to spur President Lyndon Johnson and Congress to action."

Incitement to riot is a crime. And it’s about time that the Washington Post along with other media outlets was held accountable for the violence that is tearing apart our cities and our campuses.

The National Laughingstock isn't quite done yet, though. Here is their thoroughly airbrushed, sanitized account of what Antifa supposedly is, which does everything to recruit for them short of including a sign-up sheet.

But what is antifa? Where did it come from? Militant anti-fascist or "antifa" (pronounced ANtifa) is a radical pan-leftist politics of social revolution applied to fighting the far right. Its adherents are predominantly communists, socialists and anarchists who reject turning to the police or the state to halt the advance of white supremacy. Instead they advocate popular opposition to fascism as we witnessed in Charlottesville.

We call this "mob violence" or "vigilante violence" -- except when we approve of it.

There are antifa groups around the world, but antifa is not itself an interconnected organization, any more than an ideology like socialism or a tactic like the picket line is a specific group. Antifa are autonomous anti-racist groups that monitor and track the activities of local neo-Nazis.

This picture at the Daily Caller shows the result of "monitoring" a "neo-Nazi" who showed up at a college speech. He was struck in the head with a U-shaped bike lock (a heavy improvised weapon made of steel). The professor who cracked his skull was ignored by police and only outed by 4chan -- after which, the police resigned themselves to arresting him on three counts of assault with a deadly weapon.

Here is a Politco story about "antifascists" (Politico's word) "monitoring" a speech at Middlebury College, which ended with a riot and "antifascists" wrenching the neck of a female prof who tried to protect the speaker Charles Murray.

The woman had to be hospitalized.

Let's read more about how great this leaderless "anti-fascist" movement is:

They expose them to their neighbors and employers, they conduct public education campaigns, they support migrants and refugees and they pressure venues to cancel white power events.

Note that pressure might occasionally involve riots and personal assaults with deadly weapons>

The vast majority of anti-fascist organizing is nonviolent.

Cite? Everytime they gather there is violence -- which they start.

But their willingness to physically defend themselves and others from white supremacist violence and preemptively shut down fascist organizing efforts before they turn deadly distinguishes them from liberal anti-racists.

Oh, they're defending themselves, huh?

The guy who sprayed this young woman giving an interview was attacking them, you say?

Antifascists argue that after the horrors of chattel slavery and the Holocaust, physical violence against white supremacists is both ethically justifiable and strategically effective. We should not, they argue, abstractly assess the ethical status of violence in the absence of the values and context behind it. Instead, they put forth an ethically consistent, historically informed argument for fighting Nazis before it’s too late.

Here's a historically informed, ethically consistent sucker-punch of a guy just standing on the street:

This is the Washington Post -- advocating physical violence against political opponents.

You want a war?

Be careful of what you wish for, fellas.

posted by Ace at 07:39 PM

| Access Comments