Portland Republicans considering using militia groups as "security" for public events.

[madd0ct0r]

Ok. I am caught up.

I am also confused. The thread started with lots of people going 'uh-oh, that sounds like an escalation of violence, by members of the political establishment'. Then Kon-El suggested that the left started it, and baited Dragon and Flagg into arguing about a protest by a grass roots organisation against a politically charged writer.

Surely the horrfiying thing about the OP is not that there exist various grass roots militas and angry people on either side, it's the fact that the Republican Representative is suggesting they might use them? Becuase that is making the milita an extension of the establishment, with trappings of authority and investment of the state monopolopy of violence IN THE MILITIA.

[Joun_Lord]

I don't know if you jumped in from a rainbows and kittens parallel universe, but Neo-Nazi's are already notoriously violent and regularly harm innocent people due to idiotic notions that skin color, sexual orientation, gender identity, or just because they (The walking fecal matter who own cum stained paperbacks of 'The Turner Diaries' and 'Mein Kampf' as if they can actually read, not the victims of said not-worm-food-soon-enough shitpiles) are drunk and/or on drugs (usually meth, the glass dick) warrants robbery, rape, torture, mutilation, murder, or some combination (and in the really fucked up cases all of the above) of said violence is justified to "defend the white race" (because white people, especially males, in America have it so bad). So that genie is as out of the bottle of whatever engine solvent the local KKK chapter drinks before playing grabass.


The only difference is that the Mindless Media now consumes the same engine solvent and calls Nazis in suits and ties (who used to only be called "The Defendant" ) the "Alt-Right".

As someone from an area that hosted the headquarters of some Neo-Nazi fucks founded by the fucker who WROTE the Turner Diarrheas and sees shitbags with 88 tattooes far too regularly, I'm aware of the violence perpetrated by various white supremacy groups even in the rainbows and kittens parallel universe I inhabit.

I'm also aware the meth brigade of the white supremacist movement is far less violent then in the past thanks to being rendered pretty much irrelevant, mostly contained and few in number. I'm also also aware that Neo-Nazis like Richard Spencer are not the same breed as those backwoods holler good ol'boys. Spencer and his ill manner ilk have a far different approach and appeal compared to cross burning redneck idiots and so far have also been far less violent.

Hence my concern is that Dick and his lot will be driven to violence and not even reprehensible violence like their forebears but actual legal self defense. Few are going to defend some sheet wearing shit doing a lynching or some goosestepping piece of human garbage goosestepping into the ribs of some minority, plenty will defend someone defending themselves from a "unwarranted" physical attack, when they wind up being the person getting a boot to the ribs. They will be able to play the victim card, get supporters. play up the angle that they are oppressed because nothing says oppressed like being violently assaulted over saying things someone doesn't like, and even have people who hate their fucking guts defending them because they think using sticks and stones and glass bottles and fists and bikelocks over words is pretty effed up. Their attackers will be in the wrong morally and legally, left wing groups will play "The Defendants" in the all new summer blockbuster reboot while the Alt-Reich with star as teh plaintiffs. And Samuel Jackson will be in it because he's in everything.

And the violence will grow and spread and it will be more the dreadlocked white college kids and closeted right wing Dicks being hurt.

[Kon_El]

Then Kon-El suggested that the left started it

I didn't say the left started it. This conflict has been ongoing for a long time. I pointed to the events in Berkeley as the preceding chapter of escalation.

[Dragon Angel]

Then Kon-El suggested that the left started it, and baited Dragon and Flagg into arguing about a protest by a grass roots organisation against a politically charged writer.

To be fair to ... myself, I didn't even want to get into yet another political violence argument #35423. I just saw that whole "well who can tell what is a Nazi nowadays" thought line and I was close to asking if Kon_El would think we'd say a common housecat would be a Nazi. Then Milo was brought up with Kon_El willfully covering his ears toward any arguments we could have made aaaaand I withdrew, not wishing to pollute this thread any further. Sucks I got baited though.

And yeah, that the Republican establishment may want to utilize these militias for themselves is indeed the real terrifying prospect. Everyone knows my stance on protests maybe getting wild, but I do realize the Democrats can't officially with Congressional authority associate with them and extend them power.

[Beowulf]

Not to defend Milo, but a trans woman he outed using a picture from a news story about her?

What news story? Did that story out the trans woman too?

Anyway, even if the photo/outing had been published elsewhere (source?) there is still extreme context.

Where do you think Milo got her picture and name? Just randomly chose someone to pick on? No. She had very recently shown up in the student paper: http://mediamilwaukee.com/special-proje ... nder-wraps. And the picture was a screen cap from a TV clip on her. This story: http://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news/uwm ... che-center There's another story from the student paper: http://mediamilwaukee.com/top-stories/m ... -alt-right that includes footage from Milo's talk, cued to where he was talking about her.

He commented on a local story, recently again in the news at that point in time.

[Flagg]

Ok. I am caught up.

I am also confused. The thread started with lots of people going 'uh-oh, that sounds like an escalation of violence, by members of the political establishment'. Then Kon-El suggested that the left started it, and baited Dragon and Flagg into arguing about a protest by a grass roots organisation against a politically charged writer.

Surely the horrfiying thing about the OP is not that there exist various grass roots militas and angry people on either side, it's the fact that the Republican Representative is suggesting they might use them? Becuase that is making the milita an extension of the establishment, with trappings of authority and investment of the state monopolopy of violence IN THE MILITIA.

Oh, I didn't get baited. That implies trickery, and I'm happy to engage in point out to apathetic mindless middle idiots that hate speech shouldn't be protected speech and if the first amendment needs to be changed to make that happen, the sooner the better. I love pointing out that Western and most of Central Europe have such bans yet are getting along just fine. Hell, Germany goes after Nazi's who train their dogs to do what has become known as the Nazi Salute. As usual, they get shit done.

Merkel for United Earth High Chancellor!

[Dragon Angel]

Where do you think Milo got her picture and name? Just randomly chose someone to pick on? No. She had very recently shown up in the student paper: http://mediamilwaukee.com/special-proje ... nder-wraps. And the picture was a screen cap from a TV clip on her. This story: http://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news/uwm ... che-center There's another story from the student paper: http://mediamilwaukee.com/top-stories/m ... -alt-right that includes footage from Milo's talk, cued to where he was talking about her.

He commented on a local story, recently again in the news at that point in time.

OK, so that changes the events a little bit. For all I know, Milo had taken her photos and information from a Facebook account, whether public or private. (It would not be the first time he'd have taken information that was believed private and secured) And yeah, I fully believe he would randomly choose someone. This is how many transphobes have approached us in the past; see Cathy Brennan's history for an example.

There still remains the context in which that information was shared.

(note: I know you said you don't intend to defend Milo, but this next rant is directed toward bystanders, since I'm expecting a GOTCHA! response at some point)

Milo's fan base has ... a sordid history of harassment and intimidation. When he outed that trans woman, he had picked one story out of hundreds or thousands on the Internet to target one specific person at random, who unless she had been unlucky with someone else (say, Cathy Brennan) would have forever just stayed under the radar. Just had her moment in that one story and faded into history. She is not a gigantic figure in the movement--she isn't even a figure at all--so, Milo effectively took someone who was powerless, and hung her forth in front of a mob that has a statistically very high chance of engaging in harassment, as well as a high chance of doing something worse.

If he wanted to make his stupid point about women invading a locker room or bathrooms, he would probably still engender violent feelings in me but I'd be less inclined to believe in physical violence against him ... yet. But to make his case, he took a living person and painted a target on her. That changes the development a lot. Now, he is specifically endangering someone instead of trying to make an abstract transphobic statement.

The university officials didn't step in. Security didn't step in. No one stepped in. Milo was allowed to continue painting that target on her back, unchecked.

In that event, where else are people supposed to expect protection from? If no one is willing to stop him from potentially causing a harassment mob to swarm on her, or worse, what's to say he will be stopped at any time he pulls this shit?

Hence, the reason why people fight back now, physically. Nonviolent protest works only so much if the people you are trying to reach give a modicum of a damn about your situation. If the authorities won't stop him from endangering others, if the university staff won't, then people will see vigilantism as their only possible option. No one will protect them except their peers.

...

Also since I expect this too, inb4 those saying "IT'S PUBLIC INFORMATION, SO IT'S NOT WRONG": Frightening amounts of information is available publicly over the Internet, and often it's because of causes you can't control. In this trans woman's case she was featured on a newspaper, but that is no more "consent" to be targeted than a random datamining agency publishing your address, or a random courthouse archive publishing a case you were involved in. So, if you try to argue Milo is somehow not responsible for misusing this information, then I have freedom to call you dipshit because then you give me implicit authorization to put your personal information somewhere and "conveniently" have a denizen in that somewhere send a SWAT team to your house.

This will hopefully be if not the end, the closest to the end of this discussion because I'm not sure if it's trying the mods' patience.

[madd0ct0r]

Then Kon-El suggested that the left started it

I didn't say the left started it. This conflict has been ongoing for a long time. I pointed to the events in Berkeley as the preceding chapter of escalation.

I'm not sure I would give you even that. Berkeley did not involve the authorities acting against either side.

The OP is a member of the Republican Party discussing the use of militias as party protection. If it were police, no problem. If it were licensed security firms, no problem* - these are both categories of entities that the country accept as having access to the use of violence.

Do you agree that extension of the state monopoly on violence to these militias is problematic?


*generally speaking. It's not hard to find specific people or firms that come with baggage.

[The Romulan Republic]

State use of civilian militias, in my opinion, tends to be the worst of both worlds. You get the powerful backing and "monopoly on violence" of the state, and the lack of proper training and accountability, as well as fringe partisan motivations, of militia groups.

[Kon_El]

Do you agree that extension of the state monopoly on violence to these militias is problematic?

I referred to it as "a terrible idea" on page 1.

[madd0ct0r]

Do you agree that extension of the state monopoly on violence to these militias is problematic?

I referred to it as "a terrible idea" on page 1.

So you did