* These are lone wolf psychos. You can't hold anyone else responsible. Think of a lone wolf psycho as a stick of dynamite. They are drawn to extremist groups who provide a narrative to make sense of the world. Those groups and that narrative is the match to make the dynamite explode. And the match is lit with full knowledge of what the dynamite will do.
* These terrorists are really left-wingers, Liberal Fascists. Go back to the definitions of the words. Fascist is a force from the right. The corresponding word for the left is "communist." Both are flavors of "totalitarianism."
* Public right-wing groups don't advocate violence, so they can't be blamed. But their worldview of cosmic struggle of good/evil and us/them requiring world purification means (at least to the psychos) terrorism is an unavoidable conclusion.
* These are tiny groups we don't need to worry about. The number of hate groups has increased by 40% since 2000. The various groups are quite well connected. They're big enough to do real damage.
* It's not fair to hold right-wing talking heads responsible for their listeners actions. Advertisers will spend $50 billion on TV and $15 billion on radio this year. Why? Because it works. The right also complains that our national morals are being degraded by TV and radio content. The religious right came to power on the strength of cable TV shows. But talking heads have no effect? Right.
* Left-wing talking heads are just as bad. (So you admit that talking heads do have an effect, hmm?) Both left and right commenters can get out of hand. But none of the talking head leaders on the left has called for extermination, silencing, and harassment of conservatives. And all of the leaders on the right have said that of liberals. Some of them say it weekly. Besides, the targets for terrorism are not fundamentalist churches or organizations.
* Accusations that talking heads cause terrorism mean the left wants to use government censorship to shut them down. You accuse us of trampling free speech? After Bush? Nope, we know the value of the term. Besides, there is a better and more effective technique. First, we call you hypocrites. Then we tell your show's sponsors what you said and ask them if they want to be associated with such hate speech. Such language is really bad for PR.
* But that's also censorship! Nope, your free speech does not demand that I (or sponsors) pay to listen to it. Besides, aren't you champions of the free market?
* That guy who shot two military recruiters in Arkansas was a liberal! Not everyone who opposes the war is a liberal. The shooter is a Muslim from Yemen, nothing to do with the American left (or right).
It is only when we get the myths cleared away can we properly discuss the threats we face.
The "lone wolf" way of spreading terrorism is one popularized by the Aryan Nation back in the 1980a -- and picked up by Al Qaeda. The parent organization only inspires individuals and small cells, allowing them to work on their own initiative. The organization can then claim leaderless resistance. The lone wolves usually declare their allegiances. The parent group works under the premise that the rest of the society will see what the lone wolves are doing for them and will join the resistance. This is a huge flaw because most of society and even most whites no longer support white supremacy.
In response to my posting about the rise of domestic terrorism and the opinion that a gruesome event will either end it or touch off a civil war, my friend and debate partner responded:
I have absolutely zero concern that a civil war will develop in this country, especially over hate crime issues. Political apathy is too entrenched and personal and family anxieties too widespread to take us even to civil skirmishes. Militia wannabees are more likely to feel pressure to feed their families than to take to the woods in rebellion. A public that is welcoming to LGBTs and blacks to degrees never before known will insist that the government stamp out organized actions by the tiny hate crime communities.
The real outcome of this sad crime wave will be beneficial: The public appetite for gun control will grow. Assault weapons should be the first ones banned and criminalized.
I hope he is correct about gun control, considering how pragmatic Obama is about it. Please note my friend responded promptly to my post. I'm the one who delayed in sharing it with you.
No comments:
Post a Comment