Anarchists suck at organizing!
LATimes wrote:Stewart Rhodes, founder of the citizen militia group known as the Oath Keepers, said he came from Montana with about 50 others to protect Trump supporters. They were joined by bikers and others who vowed to fight members of an anti-fascist group if they crossed police barricades.
“I don’t mind hitting” the counter-demonstrators, Rhodes said. “In fact, I would kind of enjoy it.”
But Rhodes credited Berkeley police for new tactics that mostly kept the two sides apart and “our side chilled and relaxed,” though sporadic fights broke out among both groups throughout the morning and afternoon.
“It’s getting sporty,” said Oath Keeper John Karriman, 59, who is from Missouri and was among the group’s security leaders.
AJ Alegria, 31, of Sacramento said he also came to Berkeley to help defend Trump supporters. He said he pursued a counter-demonstrator down a side street and found himself surrounded by a dozen protesters in black masks who he said attacked him with sticks and pepper spray.
“These people create violence all the time... somebody has to stand up to them,” said Alegria, who was injured in the fight. He was treated by Trump supporters who bandaged his head, washed off the pepper spray and gave him encouragement, saying, “You’ve earned your stripes, bro.”
This does go some way in displaying how effective the right has been though.
Not only do they feel like victims, but even in taking action they cannot see the contradiction in their own stance. The idea of a Black Bloc coming from Oakland to rural Montana and having a march is completely absurd. It would never happen, and the thought is nearly unthinkable.
People from rural Montana and the Deep South going to Berkley to march (or protect a march, implying violence) is not only in the realm of possibility, but also actions that they themselves are taking part in. And yet, from the rhetoric, they feel that they are the victims.
There is also the ignorance in application of any kind of political terms at all into a crude binary that doesn't make much sense. Even in this thread, there's horrifying misuse of the word, "liberal." The United States was founded as a liberal republic.
The far-right has effectively attempted to link liberalism—which represented the ideology of the Founders, Adam Smith, and the Enlightenment in general—with communism. They were not the first to invent such an ideology:
Hitler wrote:The main plank in the National Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute therefore the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood. A very simple statement; but it involves a principle that has tremendous consequences.
Is this not the same, "main plank," that the far right are supporting in denying, "the liberalistic concepts," they don't like and, "the Marxist concept," they despise?
Is it not telling that, whispered even in this thread, that the insidious Jew is somehow behind the, "left," that had the nerve to be in Berkley when truckloads of rightwingers from Montana came parading into town to crush them?
Nonetheless, they are not fascists even if the movement itself has parallels. It is, however, telling that after a century of repression, assassination, and blacklisting of Marxists, there is nobody to stand up for the left aside from anarchist teenagers that will probably grow up to become lawyers. And that these are the people that need to be suppressed by a national movement of right-wingers to come into what they imagine is the den of evil to suppress.
Alis Volat Propriis; Tiocfaidh ár lá; Proletarier Aller Länder, Vereinigt Euch!