Tolerating dissent

[Wokko]

[Mugwump]

A plague on both their houses seems the only reasonable position to me.

I agree that Europe’s history from 1917-1933 suggests that street fighting is part of the route to crisis, and then to real political terror. And the “counter-demonstration” is the source of most of the street fighting. I think both sides do this to some extent, but it may be more of an Antifa specialty.

Certainly one of the problems with the disorienting and destructive rate of change that has been inflicted on our society is the stimulus it provides to genuinely far-right and other extreme groups. Europe is showing that very clearly again now. Like the Allied invasion of Iraq, even if you are not actually blowing people up, you bear some responsibility for creating the conditions in which destructive people can thrive.

Dealing with P4S’s latest bout of fascist-sniffles, no, indeed, I don’t think Wokko is a fascist, based on what he has posted here, though I accept he may flirt with the far-right. Umberto Eco has a useful (if slightly ideologically self-serving) 14 point checklist, and Wokko ticks some of those boxes.

While he can speak for himself, he seems to see masculine strength and national unity as particularly virtuous. Such views may be a sign of far-right sympathies, but they’re no more equivalent to historical fascism (most especially Nazism) than loving the welfare state is equivalent to communism. Having a raised temperature does not mean you have Ebola. Still, his politics are assuredly not mine, and there are things in his views which make me uncomfortable, and presumably vice-versa. VPT is interesting because it is not formed though political selection like most discussion fora, so it’s not an echo-chamber.

These categories, unless carefully handled, can mislead as easily as they illuminate. One of my Italian friends is fond of pointing out that Mussolini and Hitler ticked as many boxes of socialism as they did Fascism. The NSDAP, after all, was the “National Socialist German Worker’s Party”, in name and (in part) in policies. And I would far rather have lived under Mussolini than under Hitler, or Stalin, or Pol Pot.

[Wokko]

My philosophy and politics are far more Atlas Shrugged than Mein Kampf. Where I differ from the Libertarian or Objectivist viewpoint is immigration, but only insofar as we live in a welfare state where the population can vote themselves largesse. In the absence of welfare and with a small, minarchist Government I'd be inclined to more open immigration for work or trade but not permanent migration in large enough numbers to dilute the culture of host nations.

I find the notion of a small government, rabidly pro free speech, libertarian nationalist being a fascist so laughable I can't help but poke the idiots who suggest it.

[thesoretoothsayer]

[David]

Around 250, according to this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/local/charlottesville-timeline/?utm_term=.d4668c6ce091

That's just in one small town in Virginia. Even if they came from all over the state to attend, you're still looking at potentially tens of thousands of fellow travellers around the US as a whole. Of course we're still not dealing with massive numbers in a country of 320 million, but they're far from negligible, and they seem to be gaining credibility and support all the time.

[stui magpie]

^

Frigging hell. Sticks and yelling is one thing, people openly carrying guns in a tinderbox situation like that..............Faaaaaaaaaaark.

[thesoretoothsayer]

Commemoration rally in Washington. About a couple of dozen.
That's your "growing" white supremacy movement. 24 attending out of 330 million people. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/12/us/unite-the-right-charlottesville-anniversary/index.html

[stui magpie]

^

That actually matches better with the general feel I had, that the far right are generally far outnumbered by the counter protesters.

That doesn't mean that there's more or less far right than far left people though, the counter protests would attract people from a lot of disparate groups

[David]

[stui magpie]

It actually raises a different question, about the media in general and whether they are causing problems rather than just reporting on them. It may warrant a separate thread or may not.

Today we had a bunch of Green Mayors come out and slam the federal government and the media in general for their reporting of Sth Sudanese youths "misbehaving". The argument being it tilts public perception against the majority of well behaved Sth Sudanese.

How that relates to this is I saw a comment from someone referring to the far right rallies who said the KKK held a rally at her uni in the 70's, it got no attention in the media, so they weren't given oxygen to enhance their platform.

Fast forward to recent times, a little blonde Canadian female, quite cute and very right wing, came to Australia for a paid speaking tour. She hit the media almost immediately when the Vic Police allegedly hit her with a bill of around $60k in anticipation of the resources they'd need to expend on dealing with expected protesters.

Sure enough, protesters showed up , blocked the Hume Hwy, with their numbers (significantly out numbering the attendees) and it was all over the media.

Without the threat and actuality of the protest, most Australians would have never heard of this woman or her message. The protesters and resulting media coverage gave her far more oxygen than she deserved. People who would never have heard of her would have googled her name, checked out her Wiki profile and some will have then gone to her youtube channel and became followers (I did the first 2, I didn't view her youtube channel)

So in the first instance, these numbat protesters are actually giving oxygen to the very things they protest against. The far right activists love the attention.

What would happen if one of these far right groups got a permit to do a march down Swanston st one Sunday and there was no counter protest. Would it make the media? Would they be largely ignored by the people in the city? Would their cause be fed oxygen or deprived of it?

In the current day, the news cycle is not what it was 40 years ago when you had 30 minute evening news on the 3 or 4 FTA channels you could get and daily newspapers. Now it's a 24/7 business with a voracious appetite for content that will be click bait.

Media coverage can raise awareness of a good cause, which is helpful, and raise awareness of a bad cause, which isn't helpful. At what point do they create (or exacerbate) the problem rather than just reporting on it?

[Mugwump]

“Misbehaving”. The language says it all. Why worry ? The green mayors, of course, are all in the expensive seats. The violence happens far away to poor people who don’t vote green anyway. Meanwhile, mayors in the poorer towns are no doubt reticent and far too decent to put out a statement which asks for a stop to Sudanese immigration. Across that imbalance lies a wasteland of violence and broken lives.

As for the police allowing Antifa lawlessness to dictate the costs of free speech, well, that is another memorial to democratic tradition. So a fee society dies. By the way, can we charge the police for our time when we get burgled because they no longer chase down burglars ?

While I would,like to see good taste rule what gets reported, I’m afraid journalism in a free society has to be a free market for it to do its job.

[HAL]

Good point.

[Mugwump]

[Wokko]

[Mugwump]

^ well, I’m not sure Reagan was anti-Establishment at all, though Paul probably is. Anyway, every good society needs an ecosystem of political views and that includes small government libertarians to try and hold hold back the self-aggradising, oppressive tendencies of the executive.