I'm beginning to wonder whether the events at Charlottesville, VA last weekend were deliberately set up and allowed to unfold, as a calculated political maneuver to put President Trump in particular, and the Republican Party and conservatives and the alt-right in general, into an impossible position, where anything they might do could be criticized by the massed battalions of the Democratic Party, their lackey news media, and the forces seeking to undermine the US constitution (George Soros, take a bow).
In order to forestall the inevitable idiocy of those who might wish to accuse me of Nazi sympathies, or anything stupid like that, let me state at once that I unequivocally condemn racism in general, and Nazism in particular. I have literally exchanged gunfire with neo-Nazis in South Africa, about which I wrote some time ago. That, plus my other articles on racism, xenophobia and discrimination, speak for themselves, IMHO. However, I also strongly uphold the Constitution of the United States, particularly the Bill of Rights. I uphold free speech, without restrictions or preconditions or limitations. If you limit free speech for one, you necessarily limit it for all. This is completely unacceptable. (See Lawdog's take on the subject for a very good, balanced perspective.)
That said, consider the following political maneuvers that have been uncovered since the demonstrations:
- It has been claimed by Fox News that police were ordered not to make any arrests without the specific permission of the Mayor of Charlottesville. The ACLU has stated bluntly that police did little or nothing to prevent the violence;
- Virginia Governor McAuliffe claimed that protesters had weapons 'stashed around the city' - a clearly inflammatory remark that was promptly denied by his own State Police. I get the impression, from this and other reports, that law enforcement agencies and officers in and around Charlottesville were more than a little angered by the restraints imposed on them for political reasons, thereby giving violent demonstrators a relatively free hand. City Journal called it 'avoidable mayhem'.
- The 'hot button' issue allegedly driving the Charlottesville clashes was the removal of Confederate monuments in that city. Since events there, calls to remove other Confederate monuments have redoubled, coming thick and fast from far-left-wing and progressive spokespersons in other major cities, including Chicago, Baltimore (where statues were immediately removed overnight, to forestall protests), and even a call to remove a Confederate memorial carved into the face of Stone Mountain, Georgia. One can believe that these calls were all made on the spur of the moment by opportunist politicians . . . or one might suspect, as I do, that there was a certain amount of prearrangement and coordination involved.
- Businesses are either acting on their own accord, or are being pressured by other customers and peers, to cut off services to those held responsible by 'public opinion' (note - NOT the courts or any official source) for the violence in Charlottesville. As far as I'm aware, that backlash has been exclusively directed against right-wing groups and individuals, even though left-wing groups and individuals have publicly boasted about their own violent actions there. Legal Insurrection calls the one-sided blame game a 'reversal of reality'.
- President Trump is being attacked from all sides for failing to unequivocally condemn the right-wing demonstrators in Charlottesville - despite the fact that he has, in fact, done so. He is being criticized for pointing out that there was violence on all sides - despite the fact that this was, in fact, the case. This is clearly an orchestrated, organized, deliberate attempt to ignore the facts and paint him into a corner as a neo-Nazi sympathizer - an accusation for which there is no evidence whatsoever.
Putting all these things together, I can only conclude that a shadowy behind-the-scenes organizer (or organizers) is/are pulling the strings, coordinating responses to Charlottesville for the benefit of far-left-wing and progressive elements in this country. I have a pretty good idea who's to blame, as well.
- I have little doubt that George Soros, and organizations and individuals funded by him, are heavily involved.
- I have little doubt that former President Obama's 'Organizing for Action' and its leadership is in this up to its neck.
- It's very obvious, from their own statements and those of their leaders, that organizations such as Antifa, Black Lives Matter, etc. are behind much of what's going on.
- I have little doubt that the national news media, so infamously in the tank for former President Obama and so clearly united in opposition to President Trump, are playing this up for all they're worth.
The question thus becomes, where will the next Charlottesville happen? The left always looks to keep the momentum going, to pile on incident after incident, to build up a mass reaction to what they perceive as an evil or an injustice. Charlottesville has been grist to their mill . . . but the furore will die down in the not too distant future. Where will they strike next? I have no doubt whatsoever that they're already planning the next incident like this, and already lining up publicity, calls for action, and everything else that will inevitably follow it.
Meanwhile, of course, let us not forget Newton's Third Law of Motion, commonly stated as: "To every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction". Right-wing reaction to left-wing excesses is building. Some are already calling this 'Civil War 2.0'. Even the venerable New Yorker asked, 'Is America Headed for a New Kind of Civil War?' Even 4Chan is getting in on the act, with proposals to take down statues of Communist figures. I'm also hearing verbal reactions from individuals in various parts of the country, who are furious that such a sequence of events was allowed to unfold by the Charlottesville city fathers. The general tone of the comments seems to be, "If they don't stop that sort of thing happening here, I damn well will!" I fear a backlash from ordinary citizens who've had enough of extremists of every stripe. So do a number of law enforcement personnel of my acquaintance, who know they're likely to get caught up in it, whether they like it or not.
Individuals whom I know and respect have stated openly to me that they believe some kind of separation is inevitable, with left-wing, liberal states hiving off from right-wing, conservative states, and vice versa. (The current 'Calexit' movement is a good example.) My response is that I don't know of a single state that is monolithic in its politics. It may be predominantly left- or right-wing, but in every case there will be a substantial minority of those from the other side of the political spectrum. Absent some sort of (forced or voluntary) 'ethnic cleansing' (or, in this case, political cleansing), how is such a separation to be achieved? I doubt whether it's practical. If it happens despite being impractical, I fear bloodshed will result, just as it did in the former Yugoslavia a few decades ago.
The irony, of course, is that the two sides are far closer to one another in terms of their philosophical underpinnings than either would ever imagine. A few days ago, I quoted Brendan O'Neill's comment that the conflict was essentially over 'the narcissism of small differences'. Donald Sensing points out that Nazism's roots are emphatically and unequivocally in Socialism and Communism, as confirmed by Hitler himself. One wonders what the neo-Marxists, neo-Trotskyites and neo-Leninists of the far Left would say to that?