Het hieronder opgenomen artikel verscheen eerder op Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) en werd gisteren op Anti-Media gepubliceerd. De schrijver, Jeffrey Tucker, stelt: ‘sociale en politieke bewegingen kunnen niet volledig de gevolgen bepalen van door hen gedane inspanningen. Acties worden gevolgd door tegenacties, die niet verwacht noch bedoeld zijn. Dit omdat geen beweging of groep, hoe groot en machtig ook de menselijke geest kan beheersen van anderen die geen deelgenoot zijn van hun zaak’.
Het doel van de KKK, neonazi’s en andere extreem rechtse, fascistische bewegingen, was de gelederen te sluiten, het protest tegen het voornemen om het standbeeld van Robert E. Lee te verwijderen, was een excuus om dit doel te bereiken: ‘Unite the Right…’ Het beest Trump en anderen, zoals een fiks aantal ‘journalisten en intellectuelen’ in ons land, stellen dat er veel ‘goedwillende mensen’ onder deze fascisten waren te vinden en wijzen ‘alt-left’ (ofwel: ‘Antifa’) aan als mede verantwoordelijkenvoor de ontstane ellende…… Alsof deze mensen, net als de fascisten in de VS, de ene na de andere moord begaan……… Tucker betoogt dat de deelnemers aan dit ‘Unite the Right’ evenement, alle verschillen die men had met de neonazi’s en KKK leden, opzij wilden zetten en zich zo als een politieke eenheid te tonen…….
Deze foto heb ik op 23 december 2017 geplaatst toen ik zag dat een eerdere foto door Google is verwijderd, hier de tekst bij die eerdere foto, die ik niet terug kan vinden: Zie
de eerste vrouw in uniform, rechts naast de gekleurde man, op haar
bedrukte shirt, kan je nog net een swastika zien…….. Volgens
velen, zelfs intellectuelen in Nederland, moet je dat geteisem de
vrijheid geven hun mening te uiten…….. Walgelijk!
Lees dit uitstekende artikel van Jeffrey Tucker, waarin hij betoogt, dat ‘alt-right’ haar doel heeft gemist, voorts stelt hij dat het standbeeld van Lee meer symboliseert, dan de persoon zelf (opgenomen een video, die ik al eerder in een bericht heb opgenomen, Tucker adviseert die eerst te zien, voor zijn artikel te lezen):
Charlottesville
Effect: 5 Ways the ‘Unite the Right’ Marches Totally Backfired
August
18, 2017 at 8:11 am
Written
by Anti-Media
News Desk
(FEE) —
It’s
a rule of social and political movements that they cannot fully
control the outcome of their efforts. Actions cause reactions, many
of them unanticipated and certainly unintended. This is because no
group, no matter how powerful, can control the human minds of others
not part of their cause.
This
is why so many movements driven by a revolt ethos and revolutionary
intentions have created so many unforeseen messes that are often the
opposite of their stated aims.
So
it is with the “Unite the Right” (alt-right, fascist, white
supremacist, revanchist, Nazi, and so on) marchers who descended on
the peaceful Virginia town of Charlottesville in August. Before
you read on, I would strongly suggest that you watch this video on
the march. It is truth telling, and it provides the context you need.
Donald
Trump and many others like to say that there were “good people”
marching too, but this ignores the entire title of the rally. The
“Unite the Right” theme meant that anyone participating was
necessarily putting aside differences with the Nazis and the Klan in
order to achieve the goal of becoming a national political presence
(the controversy over the statue of Robert E. Lee was only the
excuse).
The
aftermath of the march has been a fallout very different from what
they expected.
Statues
Torn Down
Only
a few years ago, the idea of toppling the statues of Confederate
generals strewn throughout the South would have been unthinkable.
Charlottesville was a test case: perhaps this Lee statue should go,
simply because it seems to be a distraction from the progress the
citizens want and an unnecessary reminder of a painful past. The city
council voted to remove it. This precipitated the rally.
To
be sure, there are defensible arguments for recognizing the
Confederate dead. But the protesters were not drawn from a heritage
society like the Sons of Confederate Veterans (my great-grandfather
was a medic in a Southern troop, and I’m named after Jefferson
Davis), but rather the hardest and most bitter among the hard-right,
anti-liberal ideologues. That association has further fueled the
anti-statue movement among activists, and today none are safe. They
are being torn down in the dead of night, all over the country,
stricken down by city councils all over the South, and condemned as
never before. None will likely survive this.
Should
the statues stay or not? These statues have a complex history. They
were not erected to honor the Confederate dead following the war or
even at the end of Reconstruction. Most appeared in the early 1920s
to send a message that the race-relation liberalization that happened
between 1880 and 1900 would not return. The progress and normalcy
would be replaced by a racist/statist/”progressive” movement
rallying around new eugenic laws, zoning, white supremacy, forced
exclusion, state segregation and so on – policies supported not by
the people but by white elites infected with demographic fear and
pseudo-science. This is when a movement started putting up these
statues, not to honor history but as a symbol of intimidation and
state control of association.
The
statue in Charlottesville statue went up the same year that
immigration restrictions went into place for explicit eugenic
reasons, and Jim Crow laws were tight and an entire population group
faced what amounted to an attempted extermination (that is not an
exaggeration but a description of a well-documented reality).
In
other words, Lee (a tragic figure in many ways) was then being
drafted by a wicked movement he would likely have never supported,
despite all his failings. So the controversy over whether it should
stay or go is not really about the war that occurred a half-century
before the statue went up but a symbol of racial control. This is the
memory we are dealing with here. It’s very similar to how the
Neo-Nazis today are abusing his tragic legacy in service of their
dangerous agenda.
Public
Revulsion
During
the presidential campaign in 2015, Hillary Clinton famous attacked
the “deplorables” who were supporting Trump, including hard
racists and fascists. The result was outrage: it seemed that she was
calling all Trump supporters these names. In fact, Trump supporters –
so many were just people disgusted by the policies of his predecessor
and wanted fundamental change in government – took on the name
“deplorable.”
Most
people in those days – never forget that most regular people do not
follow 4chan or Twitter – had no idea of the burgeoning movement of
hard-right ideologues that was gathering at the time, using Trump for
their own purposes.
The
Charlottesville “Unite the Right” march changed everything. What
we saw from online videos and news reports was what looked like a
dangerous paramilitary force, none from the city, with optics from
the interwar period, carrying torches, Nazi-style insignias, flags,
and screaming anti-Semitic and racist slogans. This was not anything
like a Tea Party protest. It was something completely different and
truly terrifying for the residents of this idyllic town.
In
other words, it looked deplorable. It was the breakout of this
movement into the mainstream. But instead of fueling some kind of
white revolution, the results have been the exact opposite. This
movement seems anti-American, filled with hate, unchecked by normal
civil engagement, truly dangerous to public order, and of strange
foreign origin. This did not look like free speech; it looked like a
threat. It was not about demanding freedom but rather demanding
power.
This
is what accounts for the shock and disorientation among conservative
and Republican commentators who want nothing to do with these people
and the ideas behind it. From my point of view, this is a very good.
From the point of view of this movement, it is presumably not what
they were going for.
What’s
fascinating to me is how these people got to this point of no return,
forgetting to check themselves with observations such as: “do you
think it is wise that we parade around like the very people the US
went to war to defeat only 70 years ago?”
To
understand that requires we plunge into the kind of group psychology
that leads to such fanatic movements – too much to take on here.
Government
Crackdown
The
marchers used Virginia’s open-carry laws and protections for free
speech and association to their advantage. They also used the plea
for tolerating their ideas in order to get a hearing. The ACLU, I
believe, was right in fighting for the speech rights of the marchers.
That
said, this was not a march about human rights; it was a march about
threats to others and a demand for power. It has prompted Justice
Department investigations, a resignation from the board of the ACLU,
and a widespread questioning of how this fiasco that resulted in so
much mayhem was ever tolerated to begin with.
We
are nearly guaranteed to see an increase in government surveillance
of hate groups, of monitoring of our online communications, of
restrictions on political organizing – all in reaction and response
and to the cheers of a terrified public.
It
is precisely events like this that cause people to lose freedoms, not
gain them. If any participants in the “Unite the Right” really
believed they were fighting for freedom, they have achieved the
opposite. But there is also this: groups like this thrive in
persecution. They never go away, especially this one because so much
of its ethos is about how they have been suppressed and oppressed.
Make them victims and they thrive ever more.
Boost
to the Left
The
true tragedy of many responses to the march was the false choice it
set up: that the only alternative to the alt-right is the leftist
antifa. Or conversely, if you hate the leftist antifa, you have no
choice but to back the alt-right. This is sheer nonsense. Most of the
people resisting what had all the appearances of a Nazi invasion were
regular citizens, not antifa. There is nothing “leftist” about
resenting the vision of Nazis taking over public spaces.
It
was a true inspiration to see the response from the merchant class,
condemning racism and fascism in no uncertain terms. Business loves
peace and friendship, not hate and civil unrest.
However,
politically, it is unclear whether this response will find a voice.
The people most in opposition to the rise of the Nazi movement in
America has been the left, and the fallout could actually boost the
prospects of the Bernie Sanders movement, as revulsion leads to an
embrace of its seeming opposite.
Incidentally,
this is precisely why it is so important for libertarians to speak
out with truth and courageous conviction. We simply cannot allow the
left to be the only ideological voice of oppositional.
Trump’s
Legacy
It
is probably too early to say what will define Trump’s legacy in
office, but his defense of the marchers, and the equation of their
bad elements with the other bad elements that opposed them, might be
it. It was the very statement that the most indefensible aspects of
the alt-right truly wanted. And it was thus no surprise that even
some of Trump’s previous defenders bailed on him in the days
following.
You
cannot give up your credibility on basic issues like human rights and
the dignity of every human life and expect to maintain political
support over the long run. We are too far down the path toward peace
and universal emancipation to go there. The future is bright and not
grim and bloody, as these marchers and their backers imagine.
Many
people have predicted the end of the Trump approach before, but
something does seem different this time. It’s very sad because
Trump has many good ideas – ideas that are evidently not that
important to him – and represents too many good causes (for
which he has done very little) for this to happen. But when you
choose to die on a hill of bigotry and intolerance, there is not
enough credibility remaining for anything else.
No
movement based on the aspiration to rule and oppress others can fully
anticipate how their activities will play out over time. In this
respect, the alt-right has done a terrible disservice to itself and
perhaps to everyone else as well.
The
question is: what are people who love human rights and liberty for
all going to do about it? In the end, the only really effective
resistance comes in the what we believe and how we live our lives. We
have seen what we do not love. The real issue is whether we can find
and then build what it is we truly do love.
By Jeffrey
A. Tucker / Creative
Commons / FEE.org / Report
a typo
=========================================================
Zie
ook:
‘Before
Trump, Clinton Democrats Invoked the Term ‘Alt-Left’ to Demonize
Critics‘
‘Among
the Racists‘
(met mogelijkheid tot vertaling)
‘Neonazi
terreuraanslag in VS, westerse media spreken ‘op hun best’ over ‘een
daad van agressie……’‘
‘Charlottesville:
Trump haalt antifascisten toch onderuit………‘
‘Charlottesville:
twee schuldigen? Of is het de taak van eenieder te vechten tegen
fascisme?‘