Category: Right Wing

Why does US Government Ignore Right Wing White Terrorism?

today, more than 70 percent of nearly 300 murders by ideological extremists in the United States in the past decade were by far-right actors, according to data compiled by New America.

In 2017, 20 of 34 such killings were perpetrated by the far right.

Rather than criticize the extremists, Trump prevaricated, insisting that “both sides” were to blame and that there were “very fine people on both sides.”

“We have the first president in modern history celebrated by these groups, that these groups believe is on message with them. The political tides are with them,” said Singer.

via Why does US Government Ignore Right Wing White Terrorism?

The cult of Right-wing illiberals

Think about it. When someone joins a cult, they don’t try to align their thinking to that of the other members; they surrender it. Being a cult member is about relinquishing your critical faculties and instead embracing a single dominant story (the word “narrative” cannot be used in this instance, as it contains the possibility of complexity and nuance). People within a cult are no longer individuals, but instead part of a giant amoeba that functions with the same voice coming out of every mouth.

via The cult of Right-wing illiberals

Dutch cartoon contest and protests in Pakistan: All for show? | Pakistan News | Al Jazeera

Geert Wilders cancels Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest

When the ultra -Right-Wing compete with each other the irrelevant just talk Islamophobia. Wilders seems to have had his day (ODT)

Geert Wilders cancels Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest

But Wilders seems a little bit over the hill, although I wouldn’t count him out, but because there’s so much political competition [on the right] I don’t know if this will boost his support again.

Al Jazeera: How much of this is about religion and freedom of expression, and how much about gaining political prominence and power?

Van Kessel: Obviously I can’t look into the head of Wilders, but this is simply a tactic to increase media attention.

If you’re in the news, it gives emphasis to the issues and the parties, and he hopes that will increase public support for his political project.

Dutch cartoon contest and protests in Pakistan: All for show? | Pakistan News | Al Jazeera

and

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/geert-wilders-cancels-prophet-muhammad-cartoon-contest-180830185845498.html

Far-right protesters including man in Trump mask attack socialist bookshop while chanting about Muslims | The Independent

A spokesperson for Bookmarks declared the incident a 'fascist attack'

In memories of Kristallnacht

The owners of Britain’s largest socialist bookshop have said the store was attacked by masked far-right protesters who chanted fascist songs and threatened staff.

Authors and an MP were moved to express solidarity with workers at Bookmarks Bookshop, on Bloomsbury Street in central London, after around a dozen people stormed in on Saturday night.

It followed the conclusion of a “Make Britain Great Again” protest against the censoring of a conspiracy theory website nearby.

The far-right group filmed their actions before swiftly deleting the video from their YouTube channel, however a copy was saved and uploaded again on the channel Far-Right Watch.

It shows protestors screaming abuse, tearing up signs on display in the shop, and brandishing books with titles they disapprove of.

via Far-right protesters including man in Trump mask attack socialist bookshop while chanting about Muslims | The Independent

The alt-right is in decline. Has antifascist activism worked? | World news | The Guardian

 

Antifascist protestors marching towards Michigan State University where alt-right leader, Richard Spencer, addressed an almost empty audience on 5 March.

The alt-right appears to be falling apart. The Traditionalist Workers party disintegrated this week after a lurid interpersonal drama among its leadership. Richard Spencer says his alt-right rallies aren’t “fun” any more, and is rethinking his college tour in the aftermath of his fizzer of an event in East Lansing, Michigan, two weeks ago.

via The alt-right is in decline. Has antifascist activism worked? | World news | The Guardian

Why Redneck Revolt Says Deal With Racism First, Then Economics | Informed Comment

AlfredPalmerwelder1

Laws have been written to oppress and exploit particular identities—Native Americans, Black Americans, Asians, homosexuals, transgender, and women—in a successful effort to maintain a system of White supremacy. Yet, members of these communities have worked for the rights and equality of everyone. In turn, White allies have joined in these anti-racism fights.

via Why Redneck Revolt Says Deal With Racism First, Then Economics | Informed Comment

“You Terrorist”: Senator Sam Dastyari Racially Abused In A Melbourne Pub

(L-R) Labor MP Tim Watts; a protester; and Labor senator Sam Dastyari.

Andrew Bolt’s true Aussie’ Patriot Blue meet and greet Sam. Unlike Andrew Bolt Sam hasn’t clenched is fists or taken a swing. Bolt obviously knows where to go for lunch and be welcomed even shouted and not expected to go Dutch.

 “You Terrorist”: Senator Sam Dastyari Racially Abused In A Melbourne Pub

The rise of antisemitism in Australia has a distinctly American tone | Alex Ryvchin | Opinion | The Guardian

Australian far-right discourse, while also targeting other minorities, has maintained an obsessive focus on the ‘Jewish problem’

Source: The rise of antisemitism in Australia has a distinctly American tone | Alex Ryvchin | Opinion | The Guardian

Day to Day Politics: The problem with Policeman Peter. – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Saturday 20 August 2016 There are no two better politicians at feigning indignation than Peter Dutton and “the mouth that roared” Christopher Pyne. Though it has to be conceded with Christopher that he rather enjoys his notoriety. Even being called the most hated politician in Australia seems to give him some sordid sense of self-satisfaction. Unfortunately…

Source: Day to Day Politics: The problem with Policeman Peter. – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Pub Inundated With Five-Star Ratings After ‘F*ck Pauline Hanson Day’ Event Attacked By Far-Right – New Matilda

A far-right blogger took offence at the event and called for followers to give the Lord Gladstone a bad rating. But with some help from the Halal Snack Pack Appreciation Society, the pub hit back. Max Chalmers reports. A Sydney pub will go ahead with an anti-Pauline Hanson themed event, despite receiving threats to theMore

Source: Pub Inundated With Five-Star Ratings After ‘F*ck Pauline Hanson Day’ Event Attacked By Far-Right – New Matilda

From Oregon to Australia: the unifying force of far-right resentment | Jason Wilson | Opinion | The Guardian

The Oregon militia’s fondness for groups like Reclaim Australia should puncture any complacency about the growth of rightwing militancy

Source: From Oregon to Australia: the unifying force of far-right resentment | Jason Wilson | Opinion | The Guardian

‘Soldiers of Odin’: Finnish anti-migrant group with ‘extremist features’ takes to patrolling streets — RT News

Far-right militia groups are assuming police functions by patrolling the streets in Finnish towns housing asylum seekers. The “Soldiers of Odin,” who always dressed in black jackets, claim they are protecting native Finns from immigrants, Reuters reports.

Source: ‘Soldiers of Odin’: Finnish anti-migrant group with ‘extremist features’ takes to patrolling streets — RT News

The right’s favorite new race guru: Why you should know Jason Riley: You will see his ideas transplanted to Andrew Bolt’s explanation of Indigenous Australia. Has Bolt anything original to say?

The right's favorite new race guru: Why you should know Jason Riley

WSJ’s Jason Riley blames liberalism for brainwashing black America. Here’s why it’s so wrong — and dangerous

The American left should start paying attention to the Wall Street Journal’s Jason Riley. His name is on the rise. An editorial board member of one of the nation’s most well-known publications, a paper that boasts an average weekday circulation of 2.4 million and falls under the umbrella of Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News empire, Riley has a new book out, “Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed,” which is beginning to pick up steam. This weekend, he’ll be featured on C-SPAN to talk about it. A few days ago, he sat down with Lou Dobbs. Before that, Bill O’Reilly. Now, his name is being praised by the National Journal (who called him an author who “annihilates nonsense”) and circulating throughout the Twittersphere as a man who has written “a great primer on race.”

As an African-American columnist, Riley has built his brand by diverging from the “black liberal” moniker. In fact, his career has been predicated on maintaining a conspicuous level of skepticism toward the “Lean Forward” stylings of MSNBC and the left’s alleged coziness with black America. He once said: “I think there’s a pattern at MSNBC of them hiring black mediocrities like Melissa Harris-Perry, Michael Eric Dyson, Touré and, of course — the granddaddy of them all — Al Sharpton, simply to race-bait.” Quite often he goes “against the grain” (much like ESPN’s Jason Whitlock). Perhaps this explains why a friend and former colleague of his at the WSJ lauded Riley for being an “affable” editorialist “who came to his views as a college student reading writers such as George Will and Charles Krauthammer in the otherwise liberal Buffalo News,” an independent thinker whose mind was heavily influenced by the works of “economist Tom Sowell and historian Shelby Steele, black thinkers who rejected the liberal pieties about race.”

Riley’s recent New York Post column“Why Liberals Should Stop Trying to ‘Help’ Black Americans” (much like his book) is undoubtedly a continuation of these teachings and his latest effort to invalidate liberal ideas. In it, he attempts to disentangle liberal rhetoric from the actual effects of liberal policies on black Americans. He wants to show how liberal ideology holds black success in the Lex Luger torture rack. But behind his fundamental question — “At what point does helping start hurting?” — also lies a troubling and familiar query, one that has historically proven resilient in American political discussion despite the best efforts to lay it to rest: Do black Americans actually need to be saved?

Riley thinks this to be the case. And it’s liberalism that black Americans need to be saved from. The crux of his claim, it seems, is that liberalism’s coercive powers cause more harm to black advancement than the painful enduring legacies of American slavery and Jim Crow era racism. These legacies, Riley writes, “are not holding down blacks half as much as the legacy of efforts to help them ‘overcome.’” To attach a sense of urgency to his words he then cites a few obvious statistics to show how the plight of the black community has worsened in the last 50 years. “The black-white poverty gap has widened over the last decade,” he writes, adding that the “black-white disparity in incarceration rates today is larger than it was in 1960” and that “the black unemployment rate has, on average, been twice as high as the white rate for five decades.” These grim statistics Riley puts forth demonstrate what we supposedly should have been skeptical of all along, liberalism’s ability to save black America.

Central to Riley’s rebuke of liberal politics is the presumption that black Americans have somehow been brainwashed into thinking of themselves as victims. “Today,” Riley writes, “there is no greater impediment to black advancement than the self-pitying mindset that permeates black culture.” This condition, Riley argues, is evidence of the triumphs(?) of liberalism, which “has also succeeded, tragically, in convincing blacks to see themselves first and foremost as victims.” Black Americans, so the story goes, have been duped by the liberal conspiracy. What’s more, they are as much to blame for conferring the status of victim as the grifting liberals who bequeathed that status upon them.

The problem with this logic is that it is unprovable and only exists in the minds of those who rely on myth to explain their own shallow assumptions. There is no evidence that blacks see themselves as victims any more than any other demographic, whether they be white, Latino, Asian-American or whatever. Black people don’t carry with them, in the words of New York’s Jonathan Chait, a “cultural residue” of oppression that they remain entangled in any more than the next race. If Riley bothered to survey actual black Americans he might realize this much. That blacks see themselves (like I hope Riley sees himself) not as victims, but as human beings, operating from unique experiences and disparate backgrounds while all tied to a larger complicated history. While, undoubtedly, self-pity may exist for some black individuals, it has not infiltrated the masses.

This is not to say that blacks have not been injured. The plundering of black people is as old as the country itself and still exists today. But it is not a result of the failures of liberalism; rather, it is a triumph of white supremacism. Liberalism did not deny opportunity and prosperity to black Americans; instead, racism attached itself to liberal policies. As the Atlantic’s Ta-Nehisi Coates eloquently articulates in his June cover story, “The Case for Reparations,” the liberal holy grail, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, was crafted specifically to include the racist traditions of the Jim Crow South. “The omnibus programs passed under the Social Security Act in 1935 were crafted in such a way as to protect the southern way of life,” Coates explains. “Old-age insurance (Social Security proper) and unemployment insurance excluded farmworkers and domestics—jobs heavily occupied by blacks. When President Roosevelt signed Social Security into law in 1935, 65 percent of African Americans nationally and between 70 and 80 percent in the South were ineligible.” Coates also recounts how troves of black soldiers were denied access to low-interest home loans under Title III of the G.I. Bill due to racist local V.A. officials and racist lending practices by banks. Liberalism was overpowered by America’s most time-honored tradition.

Of course, despite evidence to the contrary, Riley is quick to remind us that this all happened in the distant past. And to be fair, his critique supposedly is limited to the last 50 years. Perhaps that is why he calls the spoils of the civil rights movement — “the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which outlawed racial discrimination in employment and education and ensured the ability of blacks to register and vote” — the shining example of “liberalism at its best.” This statement is not difficult to dispute, even if you only think (mistakenly) of liberalism within the confines of curbing racial discrimination. Other landmark achievements include legalizing interracial marriage and constitutional amendments banning slavery, giving blacks the right to vote, and bestowing full-personhood — rectifying the three-fifths clause — to blacks. “Liberalism at its best” was a set of laws guaranteeing black people what they supposedly were legally entitled to 100 years prior. The reoccurring theme was that “liberalism” (Riley’s definition) had to reassert its will against white supremacism.

Ironically, Riley’s beacon of “liberalism at its best” — the Voting Rights Act — is currently under threat, not by liberals but by conservatives. Yet, he makes no mention of this whatsoever in his column. Instead of standing up for what he says he believes, he chooses to stand with the very man, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who voted to effectively destroy it. Last year, Thomas was part of 5-4 split decision that ruled the VRA was unconstitutional. The court’s reasoning was that essentially, things have changed and gotten better; racism is a relic of the past. Riley’s complaint against liberals echoes the dangerous logic used by the court (what’s in the past is in the past!). Liberals “continue to blame the past,” he writes, inferring that times have changed. Liberals, black and white, seem drunk off their “obsession with racial slights real or imagined.” Essentially, this means that we talk too much about race. He then quotes Thomas who said to a crowd, oddly enough, despite what he wrote in his memoir, that America is more color sensitive now than during his time as a black child integrating into white schools in the deep South before the legal abolition of Jim Crow. “My sadness is that we are probably today more race-and difference-conscious than I was in the 1960s when I went to school … Everybody is sensitive,” Thomas said. Doubling down, Riley claims that we live “in an era when public policy bends over backward to accommodate blacks” and that even “King and his contemporaries demanded black self-improvement despite the abundant and overt racism of his day.” Once again liberalism’s best efforts to save black America have had a deleterious effect on the black psyche. We can’t even help ourselves.

According to Riley, the key offender of liberalism’s stranglehold over the black community is none other than America’s first black president, Barack Obama. Citing a sliver of the president’s remarks following the acquittal of George Zimmerman for the killing of Trayvon Martin — “They understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history” — Riley misconstrues the president’s empathy for liberal brainwashing. He writes: “Obama was doing exactly what liberals have been conditioning blacks to do since the 1960s, which is to blame black pathology on the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow laws. And the president is conditioning the next generation of blacks to do the same.” Riley calls the president’s words a “dodge” for his policy failures, a representation of the “left’s sentimental support [that] has turned underprivileged blacks into playthings for liberal intellectuals and politicians who care more about clearing their conscience or winning votes than advocating behaviors and attitudes that have allowed other groups to get ahead.” Another example of the left’s indoctrination of black minds.

If this all seems like déjà vu, it should. Many of Riley’s criticisms echo the oft-cited talking points of the right wing. Which makes his polemic, one that excoriates liberals for “more of the same,” particularly laughable. It is not new ideas he yearns for, but old ones that conform with his limited pre-established political leanings. But on a deeper level, Riley’s invective sheds light on the twisted logic that continues to pervade Republican circles. He thinks that once the liberal spell is lifted, black liberation will be realized. That when blacks no longer drink the liberal Kool-Aid, believing in their status as victims, they will be made whole. Republicans, desperately trying to convince blacks to abandon the Democratic Party, have imparted the same messaging (evidence be damned): Liberals have made your lives worse; but we can save you. Rid yourselves of liberalism, and follow us down the road to salvation.

But the truth is no political ideology can save black people from the tireless forces of racism. White supremacy knows no party or clique. American history has proven how resilient the virus of racism can be; even when blacks have been made equal in the eyes of the law, racism resurrects itself and spreads through the veins that gives life to the American ideals of freedom and liberty.

This is history. And the Jason Rileys of the world can try to ignore it all they want. But they can only obfuscate what we feel all around us, that which we cannot separate ourselves from, that which we carry with us each day. As James Baldwin reminds us, “The great force of history comes from the fact that we carry within us, are unconsciously controlled by it in many ways, and history is literally present in all that we do.” To tell ourselves otherwise is to subscribe to a much more troubling pathology than victimhood, which is to detach ourselves from who we are.

Strangely, this is the path Jason Riley has chosen. And the sad part is none of us can save him.