It seems to me, violence by socialists is acceptable, while free market liberals are slandered by it. Socialists have a free pass when it comes to violence, when an act of violence happens the media that calls itself unbiased claims it might be a conservative, until they find out it was another progressive, then they drop the story as old news. Throughout the twentieth Century, by far most of the violence, outright wars, insurgencies and terrorism, was by Marxists to gain power. The Marxists however were never brought to international trial, nor were they the pariahs the “right wing” Juntas were that fought the Marxists, saving their countries from tyrannical Communism of the North Korean variety. The treatment of a “right winger” who does an act of violence is far different than that of a Marxist. The difference in treatment is startling considering how our culture is supposed to value appeals to logic rather than hyperbole. The real threat of this perhaps unconscious pass the new class gives to socialists committing violence, is the pernicious incentive that arises, such actions and attitudes lead inevitably to more and deadlier violence.
No one is surprised at the looming violence at the democratic convention. Bernie is a Soviet style Marxist, as he would say in Vermont in the 1970’s all the time, and his supporters openly support “socializing” anything they can get government’s sticky hands on. Moreover, there is violence at many democratic conventions, the most historic was the 1968 free for all. Violence at democratic conventions is commonplace as it is accepted by the new class. I looked and couldn’t find a single incidence of a republican convention that became violent other than the Taft/Roosevelt, where Roosevelt of course was a progressive, bringing his progressive thugs in with him. Where there has been violence it was from democrats trying to force their way in to sow chaos and violence.
Violence in the cause of enslaving people is cheered while violence in the cause of liberty is booed. How many new class reporters do you think secretly cheer on the Colombian rebels? How often do you suppose that same reporter cheers on the Colombian government? The rebels seek to force by violence, everyone to become a slave of the state, while the government is freely elected and therefore has the patronage of the people. Even the extraordinarily violent and brutal Shining Path Gorillas got better press than Pinochet. Since Marxists usually can’t win an election, they opt for violence and since their violence is accepted by the new class, it becomes a more viable option.
When the Iranian people rose up against the theocracy, a theocracy that dictated to them by violence, what to believe, what to think, what to do in marriage, how to raise children, how to dress… all enforceable by extreme public violence, Obama, the ultimate new class President warned the people against violence, Obama and the rest of the new class then turned a blind eye, when the Iranian zealots would threaten the families of Iranians living in Europe and the US, sometimes even torturing innocent women and children on video feed, to force the people living abroad not to speak out. That uprising received zero international support, zero, and it would have swept a nuclear threat from the world, but the new class only accepts violence by those seeking to enslave, never to throw off the shackles of slavery.
William James in his lectures on pragmatism, said that both the religious and the atheists have explanations for the state of affairs… and how to improve them. The atheists believe it is up to them and them alone, since there is no God, no overriding force pushing mankind to the good, so they must do it, by whatever means. While the religious can push hard but in the end can rest on the faith God will make it all work out in the end. The atheist then, has every incentive to violence, while the believer doesn’t. Let society and culture give a nudge and wink of acceptance to the atheist and violence is even more probable. Marxism, communism and socialism are all at heart atheist/rationalizing ideologies and so those that adhere to those ideologies tend to be more atheistic.
The insidious threat that such an attitude, that of accepting violence from those factions seeking to enslave humanity, while slandering those seeking to unburden humanity from slavery, as violent. In the US take the example of two mad bombers. One, Tim McVeigh was executed, and rightly so, the other, Bill Ayers, who told and FBI informant, he, Bill Ayers, would kill fifty million Americans if and when he came to power, and should have been at least incarcerated… you are now paying that guy better than one hundred grand a year, to teach your children his violent tyrannical Marxist ideology. The difference in treatment is as shocking as it is… well, shocking. Add to the nudge and wink the fact that people who are atheists tend toward socialism, progressivism, communism and Marxism and the conditions become ripe for political violence perpetrated by progressives and blamed on conservatives. With only a few calories spent taking this pernicious incentive to it’s natural outcome… one must shudder at the future our children will have to live in.