Let's start with an angry passage from Roger Kimball's "The Use and Abuse of Democratic Freedoms".
This brings me to the core piece of deception that is operating in the protests against supposed police brutality.  It is a textbook case of the radical left using and abusing democratic freedoms in order to destroy those freedoms. On the one hand, you have the contention that the protests are simply a healthy expression of peaceful democratic protest. You’re not against free expression of political differences are you? Thus we have “progressive” Mayor de Blasio defending the protests: “Do we tell people they’re not allowed to raise their voice?  Do we tell people they’re not allowed to march?”
The deconstruction is being enabled from On High.
With their non-stop racist interventions, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton, Bill de [Blasio], abetted by their enablers in the media and the academy, have pulled back the healing scab covering the atavistic passions of tyranny. What happens next is anyone’s guess. But these people already have blood on their hands.  The only question is where it all will end.
Mr Kimball is not the angriest voice at Pajamas Media. Here's Walter Hudson.  It's the usual tu quoque that passes for argumentation these days (one reason I'm dialing back my consumption of opinion media) and yet worked to a fine level of anger.
The absurdity of blaming the Tea Party for acts of violence emerges from the fact that violence is antithetical to that movement. The principles of the Tea Party, and the broader conservative/libertarian community, center on the sanctity of individual rights – including the right to life.

By contrast, a considerable segment of the Black Lives Matter movement has been defined by violence. We watched Ferguson literally burn as rioters expressed themselves by stealing and destroying their neighbors’ property.
And yet, something more ominous is present.
The Black Lives Matter movement shares profound moral responsibility for the killings of  Ramos and Liu, not because they dared criticize the police, but due to the particular actions they have advocated and modeled. They’ve created a sense of war between the police and the broader community. It should hardly surprise us when a sense of war produces combatants.
Here, from a different perspective, is sociologist Corey Robin on where that might lead.
Listening to these cries from the cops—of blood on people’s hands, of getting on a war footing—it’s hard not to think that a Dolchstosslegende isn’t being born. Throw in the witches brew of race and state violence that kicked it off, the nearly universal obeisance to the feelings and sensitivities of the most powerful and militarized sectors of the state, and the helplessness and haplessness of the city’s liberal voices, and you begin to get a sense of the Weimar-y vibe (and not the good kind) out there.
Professor Robin's working hypothesis is that nearly half a century of neo-liberalism has left the city's elite without a way to respond to the police.  Perhaps, though, that bad Weimar vibe is actually the cost of what the cognoscenti think of as the good kind of Weimar, namely the avant-garde intellectual currents that laid the foundations for post-modernism and deconstructionism.  The risk, though, is that where there are no foundations, the resulting trashy, splintery culture is fertile soil for authoritarianism.

No comments: