The editorial board of the LA Times has apparently had enough, particularly because so many journalists and news photographers have been assaulted. And, though they do not mention that all these Antifa, Black Bloc, etc folks are Democratic Party voters, they seem a bit concerned that they will make the Democratic Party look bad, eventually
Editorial: Violent demonstrators in Berkeley are thugs, not activists
There can be no justification for the violence perpetrated on Sunday by a group of leftist protesters who attacked supporters of President Trump and others Sunday during an otherwise peaceful “rally against hate†in Berkeley.
Whether they are described as “black bloc†or anarchists — the nomenclature isn’t important — the masked, black-clad protesters are criminals, not the vanguard of a righteous resistance to fascism. They also are traitors to the thousands of peaceful demonstrators who gathered in Berkeley’s Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Park to counter a “No to Marxism in America†rally — a non-event that drew a relatively small contingent of right-wingers after its organizer, fearing violence, had urged supporters to stay home. (snip)
This is thuggery, not activism. And it has become too familiar a phenomenon in Berkeley, belying its reputation as a citadel of free speech. In February, for example, 150 black-clad agitators caused $100,000 worth of damage when they smashed through the city protesting a planned UC Berkeley speech by right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos. The speech was canceled.
It has become all too familiar across the country. But, good job for the LATEB to stand up against it. They probably understand, also, that LA is a prime place for more nuts to show up and cause problems.
An entirely different issue is whether it is ever acceptable to commit violence against someone who is peacefully expressing a point of view, however repugnant. The answer to that question is no. There is no “hate speech†exception to the 1st Amendment, and no “anti-fascist†dispensation from laws against assault and battery. (Notably, it’s not clear whether those who were set upon Sunday were attacked for their views or for simply showing up.)
Ooooooh, Leftists are going to be upset that the LATEB just blew away the “hate speech is not constitutionally protected” meme.
Yet some would rationalize or explain away violence of the kind engaged in by the masked protesters in Berkeley. According to this view — summed up in the glib slogan “Punch a Nazi!†— right-wing extremism is such a threat to the body politic that preemptive violence isn’t just permissible but necessary. That’s a seductive but sinister notion that, if acted on, empowers the very groups the protesters oppose. The punches they’re throwing are injuring their own side.
Unfortunately, they didn’t go far enough, in that these violent lefties and their supporters/protectors have labeled anyone not on their side as neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and Klan members. Also, fascists, which is interesting in that the “anti-fascists” are the ones trying to shut down Free Speech and create massive, giant, domineering government.
Do you mention that white supremacists, neo-Nazis and Klansmen that you refuse to condemn are Republican Party voters?
People who commit violence, even against neo-Nazis, white supremacists and Klansmen are criminals who should be arrested.
It’s our OPINION that neo-Nazis, Klansmen and white supremacists spew little of value, but no one is forced to listen the their vile hatred. That said, any time they march, carry torches, semi-auto weapons and swastikas, and shout slogans incredibly offensive to specific groups of citizens, they will be met with opposition which, unfortunately, may become violent – which is the objective of the neo-Nazis. Maybe next time, rather than resort to violence, antifa will merely drive a car into a crowd of neo-Nazis.
While the editors of the Times, along with The Washington Post and ABC News, have finally stopped giving the fascist left a pass, it seems that Jeffrey has not. How are we to read:
as anything other than a justification for ‘unfortunate violence?’ After all, Jeffrey then drives home his point — pun most definitely intended — by concluding:
I do wonder, of course, whether the editors in Los Angeles weren’t merely concerned about being one of the latter lemmings to follow the swarm, and wanted to get ahead of things; the violent tactics of the leftwing fascists have been known for a while now, and only lately have the credentialed media been willing to report the stories. Perhaps someone has clued them in to the fact that coddling Antifa isn’t likely to help the Democrats in 2020, but simply harden the hearts of the ‘deplorables’ who put Donald Trump in the White House.
Dana,
If someone was harassing your wife verbally how would you defend her? Call the police?
I’ve already condemned them. Many times. We all say we want no part of them. Have you condemned your nutjobs and said you want no part of them?
Regardless of how vile they are, it is no excuse for violence. You are simply making excuses. If the roles were reversed, you wouldn’t be saying it was OK.
Communists fighting NAZIs fighting fascists fighting socialists has been going on for many decades. This is nothing new, and they all need to be shown to be the bullies and cowards they actually are.
Is Jeffery’s head exploding yet?
Jeffery’s “logic”-it’s ok to use violence against people marching peacefully because they symbolize bad things…. Such intelligent thought