Yes, Antifa Is Very Dangerous -- But Not To Fascists - by Gene Lyons

[DonViejo]

Full article posted with the permission of the author - Don

September 5, 2017 10:38 pm

Call me unromantic, but I disliked a lot about the fabled “Sixties” the first time around. Some of the music was good, but otherwise 1968 was among the worst years in American life. The center nearly failed to hold.

As if the Vietnam War were not bad enough, the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy made it feel as if America’s democratic institutions might not survive. Eager for “revolution,” hothouse warriors in the SDS and Weather Underground did everything possible to promote anarchy—from rioting to setting off bombs. During the 1968 Democratic National Convention, pitched battles between street fighters and Chicago police brought chaos and a massive voter backlash.

The most immediate result, brilliantly chronicled in historian Rick Perlstein’s book “Nixonland,” was the criminal presidency of Richard M. Nixon.

So I found it heartening to see Perlstein take to Facebook to scold the latter-day anarchists of “Antifa.” There was nothing subtle or scholarly about it.

“Stop destroying the left, you infantile [bleeps],” Perlstein wrote.

Can I get an amen?

In a subsequent post, the historian quoted an eyewitness account of Antifa goons assaulting KKK-style marchers at a “white-power” demonstration in Berkeley, CA, of all places.

““Yesterday, at the anti-Alt-Right rally in Berkeley,” Leighton Woodhouse wrote, ‘I watched groups of masked Antifa members in Black Bloc formation swarm individuals who were apparently antagonizing them, and pummel them with their fists, feet, and flagpoles. When the victims tried to escape, they were run down, and in at least one case, cut off by the Antifa mob and beaten down some more.”

A similarly vivid account of Antifa bullying by photojournalist Mike Kessler appeared in The New Republic. The irony was that until the masked, black-clad social justice warriors appeared, the Berkeley crowd had decisively outnumbered, ridiculed and shamed “alt-right” marchers as the pathetic goobers that they are.

Much as thousands of peaceful citizens on Boston Common had so outnumbered white supremacists a week earlier that they took off their little bedsheets and went home without even trying to harangue the crowd.

That’s all that ever needs to happen.

But I don’t even need to turn on Fox News to know that Sean Hannity and the rest of the merry band of Trump apologists on right-wing media are playing up Antifa as the moral equivalent of Bolshevik revolutionaries.

Well-meaning journalists such as the Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan and Atlantic Monthly’s Peter Beinart are certainly correct to argue that there’s no real comparison between left- and right-wing political violence in the United States. The “alt-left” Trump described scarcely exists, and had almost no role in the Charlottesville tragedy.

Beinart cites Anti-Defamation League statistics showing that 74 percent of politically-motivated murders in the US since 2007 were committed by right wing extremists; versus 2 percent by leftists.

The news media’s tendency to soft-pedal the far-right motives of killers from Timothy McVeigh to Dylan Roof has long been an instance of willful blindness.

Journalists on the left correctly fear that won’t be the case with Antifa.

Also on Facebook, Lindsay Beyerstein explains that she’s covered many protests halfway sabotaged by Antifa antics: “I always thought of them as self-indulgent parasites because they’d show up at demonstrations organized by other people and capture the news cycle with petty property destruction.”

But when masked intruders quit breaking windows and start carrying weapons, things can change fast. “Paramilitaries facing off in the streets is God’s gift to fascism,” Beyerstein adds. “Not everyone likes racism and militarism, but everyone likes safety and order. If we’ve already got safety and order, fascists have nothing to offer casual supporters.”

But she predicts that if real “violence comes the backlash is going to come down as hard against the entire left as it did against the alt right after Charlottesville.”

That’s certainly what happened during the Sixties.

My late father taught me an oft-repeated expression I always took as the essence of Americanism. “You’re no better than anybody else,” he’d growl “and NOBODY’S BETTER THAN YOU.” There was more than a little Irish nationalism in what he said, but he definitely meant it. So do I.

Most Americans do too. Even under Donald Trump, the great majority remains deeply attached to the fundamental premises of democratic citizenship. They want to believe that we’re all in it together—America, that is—and they react against anybody threatening that belief.

So that when Alabama segregationists attacked peaceful civil rights demonstrators with clubs, tear gas and dogs, the majority sympathized with the victims—and brought about the end of Jim Crow. But after rioting tore Chicago apart in 1968, they went the other way. Hard.

Nobody needs the help of Antifa militants and the idiot professors making excuses for them to reject the KKK.

But let them start real trouble, and we’ll all end up wishing we’d never heard of them.

###

http://www.nationalmemo.com/antifa-dangerous-fascists/

[Thomas Hurt]

1. If you use violence in some "leftist" cause, you might as well as join the KKK...

because you are only aiding their cause.

[get the red out]

2. Absolutely!

[leftstreet]

3. He wants us to get beaten and killed so we'll get sympathy

So that when Alabama segregationists attacked peaceful civil rights demonstrators with clubs, tear gas and dogs, the majority sympathized with the victims—and brought about the end of Jim Crow. But after rioting tore Chicago apart in 1968, they went the other way. Hard.

LOL When I read shit like this from someone who starts out grousing about the badness of the 60s...what I hear is "college kid who couldn't get laid"

[OKNancy]

4. Gene Lyons???

I think you also misinterpreted what he meant.

I agree with him and I lived through 1968. The worst year of my life. The SDS and others DID bring us Nixon.

[leftstreet]

5. Well, Nixon has been described as the last liberal President

So there's that


"The truth of the matter is, when you look at some of my policies, in a lot of ways Richard Nixon was more liberal than I was," Barack Obama

[OKNancy]

7. That is a mistake made with the clouds of time. He was an evil son-of-a-bitch

[leftstreet]

8. I don't think Obama was mistaken

He's very intelligent

[Expecting Rain]

9. You are comparing Barack Obama to Richard Nixon on a forum designed to support Democrats?

HOW FUCKING DARE YOU!!!

Enough of this shit.

[leftstreet]

11. LOL oh knock it off!

That's a real stretch there

Read the thread



Obama stated Nixon was more liberal than he was

[Expecting Rain]

12. He was depriving Bill O'Reilly of talking points on FOX "News"

...in an act of political jujitsu.

No one, Barack Obama included, believes Richard Nixon was a liberal. Do you?

Or are you just stretching to make a non-germane smear on a great DEMOCRATIC president?

[leftstreet]

13. I don't care

You accused me of making a comparison between Obama and Nixon

That was false

Obama made the comparison

Oh wait, did my italicizing the quote make it unreadable on your screen? I know DU has had some html hiccups of late. Well, Google it if you need to

[Expecting Rain]

16. You forced an out-of-context incident into a thread where it was irrelevant...

and you act like the offended party? Spare me.

I know the quote. I already referenced in my pp that it came from a Bill O'Reilly interview on FOX "News" where the president was out-foxing his adversary on a network that had Obama pegged as a radical Muslim extremist.

Context is everything.

[leftstreet]

19. Alert if it's a violation of TOS

I don't think it is, but I could be wrong

I've never seen a TOS warning for "forcing an out-of-context incident into a thread where it was irrelevant", but it doesn't mean the rules haven't been upgraded or something



I don't want to talk about Bill O'Reilly. I come to DU to get away from that sort of thing

[Expecting Rain]

21. I don't want to talk about Bill O'Reilly either...

but this was an example of Barack Obama kicking some right-wing ass on their propaganda network.

He undercut their attempt to portray him as a radical and he reminded the conservative Republican FOX viewership that even right-winger an obvious right-winger like Nixon once supported the EPA. This undercuts the right-wing narrative, and brilliantly.

No serious person believes Nixon was more liberal than Obama, most especially Barack Obama.

Political jujitsu from a master of the art.

[OKNancy]

15. I think Obama said it for political reasons and he said "in some ways"

the end

[Expecting Rain]

22. Exactly. In just the same way Bernie Sanders could have punked O'Reilly...

by bringing up Nixon's "wage and price controls," which he could have called "more socialist" than anything I have in mind.

Political jujitsu.

[mountain grammy]

34. Big business brought us Nixon..

and every GOP president since..also, governors, legislators, congresspersons, judges, and, probably even the dog catcher. If it's good for GE, GM, Ford, etc. it's good for America. So good, they bought up media to convince American voters to vote against the interests of working people and for corporate interests. I was 21 in 1968, but not until the end of Nov. so couldn't vote, but I knew what that election meant and ranted about it for the next 40 years, doing what I could to stop it. I was called a Communist, a traitor, unAmerican, baby killer, and worse.

No, corporate America gave us Nixon and the America we have today, and Americans voted for it. Reagan was the corporate American dream who crushed the American dreams of average, working Americans.

[Jake Stern]

6. For the sake of optics we should just take the ass whooping, right?

Can't be mean to wittle Nazis. They fee fees might be hurt.

[Coventina]

10. *barf* "Idiot professors" Please spare me.

That phrase immediately tells me the anti-intellectual stance this guy has.

Fighting fascists is a social duty.

[Greybnk48]

14. Agree with Coventina n/t

[DonViejo]

18. Do some research on "this guy." Both he and his wife are retired Professors.

[Not Ruth]

28. But not with violence

Gandhi did just fine and he had no white privilege

[HughBeaumont]

32. Gandhi got assassinated, as did Martin Luther King and the Kennedys.

Decades later, "Fascism" controls our country. Nearly every single aspect of it.

Nazis are marching in the street and white people who had ancestors that fought against them be like "but thur free speech". Oh, and made people fighting against them the real enemy.

We've won NOTHING. We're further away from a progressive president than ever. We're never going to get a Universal Basic Income despite millions that are soon going to need it.

The SCOTUS is going to be 6-3 Conservative soon, and y'all can say bye-bye to Obergefell when that happens.

That is, if we don't all die in a nuclear holocaust brought about by tiny pee-pee swinging.

[Downtown Hound]

56. Gandhi did just fine because the Germans

bombed the shit out of Britain during the second world war and when it was over they couldn't afford to hang on to India anymore. His non-violent resistance did do a part, no doubt, but it would never have worked on its own. He also had to spend a considerable time of his life in prison. I admire the man's inner strength, but I also don't think people are bound by some moral obligation to be just like him. You know that Hitler urged Churchill to kill Gandhi? Gandhi was lucky he was facing the British, who, in spite of being racist and having a colonial mindset when it came to India, were bound a system of laws and open media that mitigated the repercussions he faced.

If Gandhi had faced a truly violent and fascist enemy, he wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes.

[Efilroft Sul]

58. Truth x 1000.

[maxsolomon]

17. stand in the back, then.

more pearl-clutching.

[politicat]

20. Nice ivory tower this guy has. Lucky him.

He's had regular columns for decades, so either staff or well paid, so likely a pension or at least enough spare income to fund his 401k and IRA.

He's 74, so he's got Medicare, Social Security and he's sold best sellers, so probably not worried about his mortgage, either.

He's white with a WASPy name, so nobody's likely to come through his door, under the mistaken assumption his visa expired. He's unlikely to be assumed to be a parole jumper because he happens to have the same name as someone else. His neighborhood is probably not subject to many no knock raids.

He's male and in his 70s, so it's not terribly likely anyone's gunning for his reproductive rights.

Must be nice.

[Expecting Rain]

23. WASPy name? Then he must be a counter-revolutionary!

Four legs good!
Two legs bad!

[politicat]

24. Six legs excellent! Eight legs get the planet!

(I like anything that eats mosquitos. Yay, spiders!) I see your sarcasm and decline acceptance, unopened. Thanks anyway.

No, it's just a reality. Gene/Eugene denotes a certain generation -- probably not a teenager in 2017. Lyons in Arksansas is likely to get kinder treatment than Littlebird or Lopez or Lakshmi. It's generally more or less unconscious, but names carry privilege and power. Just look at the statistics on response to resumés for Alyshia Jackson versus Alice Jackson or Israel Cruz versus Israel Stein.

There's a huge difference between counter-revolutionary and short-sighted privilege. This guy: the latter.

[Expecting Rain]

25. So now we add people with WASPy names to the list of the privileged along with...

those who get Medicare or Social Security or who have a 401K or have an IRA? And for goodness sakes, all those with white skin?

Let's reject anything any member of this "class" has to say out-of-hand as they are clearly bourgeoisie oppressors who are blinded by their own privilege.

I left out the sarcasm smiley, but you'll figure it out.

[Not Ruth]

29. 74 means that he has lived through Nazi Germany

That gives him credibility

[Initech]

26. The right is spreading false narratives about the left.

And they're getting away with it.

[socialist_n_TN]

27. Thank God others have noted the privilege this guy has.......

Of course in the end, that privilege won't help him if the fascists build their mass movement. As usual, that movement will come after communists, socialists, and trade unionists FIRST, darker skinned and Jewish people SECOND, and liberals LAST. Speaking as one of the first they'll come for, I'm not comfortable letting THEM get comfortable on the streets without letting them know it won't be as easy this time around.

Also this is NOT 1968. In 2017 the majority of people are not economically comfortable like they were in 1968. In 2017 most are living a precarious economic existence under capitalism. Today it's NOT just a war and the draft that is concerning a mass of people to get out in the streets, it's the entire system that's giving grief. Compared to those systemic problems, ending an unjustified and imperialist war was an easy fix.

It's really a simple proposition. If fascists are NOT confronted on the streets where they make their home, then they will grow. If they grow, they will win through intimidation. I'd rather stop them now in their infancy than in a few years when it will take millions of dedicated and armed communists and leftists to stop them.

[Not Ruth]

31. What percentage of voters would you consider to be fascist?

[HughBeaumont]

33. The 62 million who thought it would be the bees knees to put one in charge of our country.

Sorry if that means anyone we're related to, but there it is.

[Not Ruth]

36. Almost half.....would you consider most cops and military to be fascists?

[socialist_n_TN]

41. The cops for the most part IMO are fascists........

Or at the very least STONGLY authoritarian. The military is a little different. The officer corp, especially the upper ranks are also strongly authoritarian to fascist. As far as the lower ranks go, probably not at all.

Wasn't there something about white supremacist and fascist infiltration of the police a couple of decades ago that the right-wing quashed?

[Not Ruth]

43. Thanks for all the replies, are there any organizations other than Antifa that are anti fascist?

Not the Republicans, not the cops, and maybe not the military.

For instance, would you say that the DNC is an anti fascist group?

[socialist_n_TN]

45. EVERYBODY is anti-fascist in words..........

The question is how many of them are actively attempting to stop them in the streets, the place that they really want to own. The DNC? Not a bit of it. Antifa and various anarchist and socialist groups are the only ones that take them on there.

[Downtown Hound]

55. I would say the DNC is sometimes an anti-fascist group

And other times a fascist collaborator when they think it will suit their needs.

[Not Ruth]

49. How do you tell the difference between a fascist and and authoritarian?

[HughBeaumont]

44. Yooooouuuuu rreally don't want me to toss paint on those sacred cows . . .

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21/us-army-white-supremacists_n_1815137.html

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31/the-fbi-has-quietly-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforcement/

[socialist_n_TN]

39. Voters are not the goal of fascists.........

Never has been and never will be. Fascists win by being stronger in the street than their opposition AND thereby intimidating ALL the opposition from speaking out against them.

And I personally don't think that every Trump voter was a fascist or a white supremacist, but every Trump voter WAS OK with, at the very least, white supremacism if not outright fascism.

[Not Ruth]

40. You seem to be saying that fascists do not vote, is that correct?

[socialist_n_TN]

42. No that is not what I'm saying.........

What I'm saying is that winning elections is not what fascism is about. Winning POWER is what fascism is about and that can be done by intimidating opposition with, overt or implicit, threats of violence. Voting is not as important as winning power, but that doesn't mean that it's not used when you're trying to win power.

[Marengo]

47. I'd hope "dedicated and armed communists" would be stopped in infancy as well, being little better

Than the fascists.

[socialist_n_TN]

50. The fascists, Donald Trump, Jamie Dimon and all the other oligarchs......

of the world thank you for your support of their goal of a seamless and ironclad rule over the rest of us. Including you.

At least armed and dedicated communists know whose side they're on and it's NOT the oligarchs and the dictatorship of capital.

[Marengo]

53. Spare me the propaganda. In my youth I was involved with Bob Avakian's clown circus. As an adult...

I periodically live and work in a communist county. Have a number of family members who experienced the cultural revolution and are real happy those days are far behind. I find it laughable that folks like you rail against dictatorship and authoritarianism when in practice you offer nothing but the same.

[socialist_n_TN]

57. Stalinism (of which Maoism is a variant) is.........

a degenerated version of the dictatorship of the proletariat and NOT to be confused with actual communism as envisioned by the Bolsheviks.

The next wave of Marxist revolutions will be led by Trotskyists, the Bolshevik road not taken by the Stalinists. We'll see if it's better, though IMO it couldn't be worse. Or we can continue to be ruled by fascists and the pure capitalists of the neo-liberal school of economics. That's the ACTUAL choice. Either capitalism and capitalists make the decisions for society or the workers do. Choose.

[Marengo]

59. The Maoists of course disagree, considering themselves the only true ideological descendants...

Of the Bolsheviks. Are you a Trotskyite? If so, better hope the Maoists don't seize power, otherwise you'll likely be shot against the same wall as the fascists and other non-conforming leftists. As I recall, the Bolsheviks themselves weren't very kind to non-conforming leftisits as well, such as the SRs and the like. As for these armed communists you speak of, what faction do they belong to? Are they Maoists, Trotskyites, CPUSA revisionists, Stalinists? How long until the contradictions lead to turning the guns on each other? How long until the promise of worker's rule is betrayed by a party who claims to know the interests of the proletariat better then the proletariat itself, and to criticize or oppose it is a capital offense?

"We'll see if it's better" doesn't inspire much confidence. What if its not? You think Americans are yearning for a society in which people are whisked away in the dead of night to a labor camp for daring to criticize the dear leader/great helmsman/comrade what's-his-face? That, it seems, is usually what it degenerates into.

[mopinko]

30. chicago was a police riot, you twit.

the hippies didnt start it, the cops did.

[G_j]

48. Exactly!

[Bradical79]

37. It's inevitable

I don't think there's ever been a counter movement against fascism that hasn't involved violent anarchists doing their thing. If you're anti-Antifa on the left, fine, but you have no influence with these people. Part of the problem is centerists, moderates, and others left of the GOP focusing such a disproportianate amount of attention on the left and progressives you think give a bad look. It's stupid. You give up the message to go hard after other's methods.

[LAS14]

38. Amen!

[kentuck]

46. Antifa is not good for the Democratic Party.

I would agree with Gene Lyons.

[MineralMan]

51. Lyons makes some good points in that.

While it's crucial to fight the fascists, how that is done is also important. As Lyons points out, violent reaction action rarely accomplishes broader goals and can lead to a loss of support from people who are not directly involved, meaning voters in general.

[backscatter712]

52. Those "innocent victims" of Antifa beatings weren't so innocent.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/09/04/1695551/-Uh,-About-That-White-Supremacist-that-Antifa-Roughed-Up

They were alt-righters trying to snap photos for the purpose of doxxing Antifa members, and broadcasting their info on neo-nazi websites for subsequent terrorizing.

They deserved their beatings.

[Downtown Hound]

54. Another pseudo intellectual pansy who fancies himself the keeper of "the right way" to do things

Since the left adopted an almost fanatical obsession with non-violence, the right wing has only gotten stronger. Tibet has been practising non-violence against China for more than half a century. How's that been working out for them? More than 2 million dead and their country dominated by an iron fist, with no end in sight.