I have been an anti-war activist all my adult life but I supported the initial effort against the Taliban in Afghanistan and I support Obama's renewed focus there.
Let the banks fail? Really?
I was a Hillary supporter and, like you, laughed at the Hillary-bashers who thought Obama would be so different. But so far I give him credit for dealign pretty well with an amazing mess on all fronts.
You have unintentionally answered my question. If you have never heard a black person say "the man" without it being tongue-in-cheek, then you've spent more time with intellectuals and hipsters than with the folks I'm talking about. In other words, you really DON'T know.
Yeah, well I worked in prisons as a therapist and I can tell you that it's not a matter of fantasies. It may be an after-the-fact justification, or maybe not, but it is definitely part of the rhetoric.
But left-wing violence is also displayed by groups such as ELF and ALF, and was very present in the bombing of Army Recruiting stations in recent years, such as Times Square on 3/6/08.
I agree that right-wing terrorism is a bigger problem in the U.S. today but the larger point is that advocates of racial justice, even militant black nationalists, are not responsible for the actions of a single misguided cop-killer, and environmentalists aren't responsible for the the use of napalm and other explosives by ELF.
Why do I get the feeling you've never been too close to a murderer?
But let's look at the case of leftist hero, Mumia Abu-Jamal. Are you familiar with his case? He is a convicted cop-killer whose death sentence was recently overturned. I support a new trial for him because of some very shaky testimony at the original trial, BUT he has been lionized in many quarters for a
Unabomber was proposed by OP as example of right-wing terrorism. That is ridiculous. Not a perfect leftist? Yeah, you're right. And the Pittsburgh cop-killer doesn't show the respect for law enforcement typical of the political right. Jeebus.
"(Erickson) is no better than the guy who gunned down those 3 cops."
This is where hysteria and poor argumentation leads us. Thought crimes are the same as real crimes. Pathetic.
As to the Unabomber--it's a long manifesto. Let's just say that offering him as an example of a right-wing nut is more absurd than left-wing. He was anti-corporate, anti-development, etc. Look at his victims. To say he's uh, not one of ours--archly misses your original point and my response. He's not really one of ours, theirs, or anyone else's. He is an individual who, like all individuals, acts on ideas that are determined by a nearly infinite flow of inputs. To blame someone who spouts ideas for the actions of the Unabomber or anyone else whome the spouter has never met is irresponsible.
I've worked with perpetrators of domestic violence. Most would agree totally with laws against domestic violence. They just don't control their behavior under certain critical circumstances. Erickson isn't talking about laws or situations even resembling the situation in Pittsburgh but you try to draw a parallel. Erickson is much more likely talking about "excessive" federal intrusion around the second amendment (yes, a concern shared by the psycho in Pittsburgh but not the reason he was approached or started shooting). Charleton Heston talked about the gun being pried only "from my cold, dead hand." Is he responsible for the three dead cops in Pittsburgh?
Twenty years? There are MANY cases of police officers killed in the line of duty by people who spout, among other things, anti-racist rhetoric. Some would argue that the radical rhetoric of black nationalists inspired such murderers as Joseph Gardner, a sailor AWOL from the Navy in South Carolina in 1992. After watching with two friends film of the Rodney King he muttered "400 years of oppression" and went into a prolonged rage about how black folks are justified in seeking revenge. He and his two friends decided to kidnap and rape a white woman, which they did before killing her. Gardner was recently executed. I wouldn't blame black nationalists for this crime--I am very sympathetic to black nationalism--but the ideas of prolonged oppression and reparations can become twisted in the minds of those who have other impulses and determinants towards violence.
Another example: Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front are both influenced clearly by leftist political principles. Firebombs and the use of homemade napalm in bombs such as the one in Vail, CO have caused great damage--no loss of life yet but that is both a result of design and luck. I wouldn't hold radical or militant (but non-violent) environmentalists responsible for those crimes.
Well, the Unabomber, for starters, but if you want to count a neo-Nazi white boy shooting cops as a result of incitement by right-wing radio, then you'd have to count as a result of "revolutionary" rhetoric some of the cops killed by young black men who view police as pigs and enforcers for "the man."
First of all, you want a Progressive version of the Unabomber? OK, how about.....the Unabomber!
His politics were radical environmentalism, like EarthFirst! and influenced by anarchist thought. What did you think he was--a Nazi?
Erickson is a demogogue, sure...but he is advocating protecting his property, or self-protection, not shooting cops who respond to a domestic violence situation, unless you think laws against assaulting a partner are what Erickson intends by "nonsensical legilsation"--I doubt that's what he meant.
But left extremists using violence? Man, you didn't try very hard. How about Bill Ayers, Berhadine Dohrn, etc.--and I respect a lot of the work they've done but to dismiss their "revolutionary violence" while blaming Sean Hannity for a cop-killer is just irresponsible and dishonest. Plus, Black Panther Party, Revolutionary Youth Movement, those responsible for bombing the Army Math Center at UW-Madison (and they include a man I respect greatly), etc.
I condemned Nixon and Kissinger as murderers, and I would say the same for Bush and Cheney. Does that make me responsible for some nutjob who commits a violent act against a government official? (Hint--No).
But we're still doing it! We have nuclear weapons but we are preparing sanctions against countries that develop them.
This is why it is so important that Obama, unlike his predecessors, is able to acknowledge that the U.S. is the only nation that has used nuclear weapons and that we have a special responsibility to move assertively towards worldwide nuclear disarmament and not keep the distracting focus on emerging nations with a dream or only a handful of weapons compared to our thousands.
but it doesn't remove the stink of hypocrisy when developed nations try to tell developing nations--don't you dare do what we've already done, and used to enhance our position of power in the world. It would be a nice touch if that dynamic was acknowledged once in a while.
As if the left was responsible for every violent act committed by an extreme group or some cop-hating paranoid "anti-fascist."
Really, it takes a certain kind of hysteria to accuse ideological opponents of sociopathy and to hold them responsible for acts committed by crazy fuckers they've never met. Can't we try to be a little more than a mirror image of Limbaugh, Beck, etc.?
by not initiating direct talks between presidents--which in the case of Iran would be crazy. HRC was right--it's important to lay lots of groundwork and to test out receptivity before direct negotiations which could legitimize a tyrant.