Friday, November 13, 2020

Musings on Irreconcilable Differences in American Politics

      By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

The 2020 election confirmed that the partisan hostility and hate in American politics has not diminished.  In marriage a divorce can resolve such irreconcilable differences, but not in politics.  A politics of reconciliation requires minimizing partisan hostility in Congress, and one way to do that is to shift the center of gravity in American politics from Washington to the states.


The Constitution supports a devolution of legislative power to the states.  The Tenth Amendment affirms that the states retain all powers not delegated to the United States.  Partisan politics at the state level are less divisive than those in Congress.  They are more bottom-up than top-down, and limit a concentration of political power in Washington.


Having elected a president, Democrats are heady about pushing their liberal agenda, but they’re not likely to pass much of it with a new Congress that’s split between conservatives and liberals.  Most state legislatures are more moderate than Congress and can continue to make progress on major issues, while Congress remains gridlocked in partisan debate.  


To restore a functioning Congress the states must assume more responsibility for contentious legislation on education, law enforcement, housing, health care and abortion.  That would leave Congress with fewer partisan national issues, like those related to foreign policy, national defense, immigration, interstate commerce and Social Security.


Restoring an emphasis on law-making at the state level is not a partisan issue and is consistent with bringing governance closer to the people.  Federalism was a political priority in the 1970s and 1980s with revenue sharing.  The new Congress should emphasize a new federalism to counter partisan polarization and promote a politics of reconciliation.


Those in Congress committed to follow their national party leaders will likely resist sharing control of important legislation with states, where national partisan control is minimal.  Partisan polarization has debilitated Congress, making it an existential issue in American democracy; and a new federalism could revive the long lost spirit of compromise in Congress.


A new federalism emphasizing state legislation on domestic issues that defy resolution in Congress, like those on gun control and abortion, would not divest Congress of its legislative power.  It would provide more options for legislative priorities, and remind Americans that their  democracy is a federal system with power shared by the states and the national government. 


Donald Trump will be evicted from the White House in January, but partisan polarization will continue to unravel the fabric of America’s democracy unless it’s countered by a politics of reconciliation.  That will require a new federalism that enables state governments to fulfill the legislative priorities of a dysfunctional Congress that’s paralyzed by partisan polarization.



Notes:


Michael Luo has observed that the work of saving democracy must go on after Trump. “In the end, bigotry, mendacity, and narcissism lost. Decency and reason won. Despite Donald Trump’s refusal to acknowledge the election results, after four chaotic years, the country will escape the ordeal of his Presidency. Seventy-seven million people voted for Joe Biden, the most ever for a Presidential candidate—an estimable accomplishment in the face of an incumbent President. The 2020 election, however, failed to produce a thoroughgoing repudiation of Trumpism and its race-based, grievance-driven brand of politics. Even amid a devastating pandemic and economic downturn, roughly seventy-two million Americans voted for the President, nine million more than voted for him in 2016. 

Biden, in his victory speech on Saturday, in Wilmington, Delaware, pledged “to be a President who seeks not to divide but to unify, who doesn’t see red states and blue states, only sees the United States.” It is a message he staked his campaign on and now plans to make a central theme of his Presidency. “We have to stop treating our opponents as our enemies,” he said on Saturday. “They are not our enemies. They are Americans.” He is hardly the first politician to make such an appeal, and Republicans, inevitably, will view him as an avatar of the Party they loathe. But ordinary citizens, conveying Biden’s sentiment to their friends, neighbors, co-workers, and family members, might actually succeed in rekindling an American identity that is resolute against intolerance and injustice, promotes inclusion and respect for all, and brings us closer to the ideal of one nation, indivisible.  See https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-work-of-saving-democracy-must-go-on-after-trump?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_111220&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5f5a8c4869cec9020468b3fe&cndid=62111587&hasha=0fe23710d4520a049024cd25eaeb34cf&hashb=7052d9dc41f2e27d2bd706948c0675c4be94e3f1&hashc=bbe74f8cf1d48958619c351b844e1a3e36771bea8d1c1563e0ccd49d4062d49a&esrc=register-page&mbid=mbid%3DCRMNYR012019&utm_term=TNY_Daily.


Bill McCormack, S.J. has noted that Joe Biden said now is the time to heal.  But what if Americans don’t want reconciliatio?  McCormack went on to explain, “It is a common trope that the nation must transcend its divisions after a presidential election, that we need to achieve unity in order to face the challenges of the future. President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. said in his first speech after being declared the winner: ‘We are not enemies. We are Americans. This is the time to heal in America.’

But this election felt different for many Americans. The country was divided to the point that few were surprised by reports of family members cutting each other out of their lives.

David Roberts, a writer for Vox, suggested: “Instead of ‘reaching out,’ why don’t we take this opportunity to make very clear that racism, xenophobia, and authoritarianism are repugnant to a decent society. When someone expresses racism, xenophobia, or authoritarianism in public, they SHOULD face backlash.” U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat from New York, was not ready to forgive and forget, tweeting, “Is anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future?”

Perhaps Mr. Biden was wrong, and this is not the time for healing.

It can be unclear what the political elite means by words like reconciliation or unity. But Christians know that the aim of reconciliation is peace, the shalom or eirene that instantiates and points toward the kingdom of God. As Mr. Daniel Philpott writes, reconciliation fundamentally “restores and promotes the common good,” an effort made possible both by God as author of the covenant with his people and humans as God’s cooperators.

This is a beautiful image of reconciliation. But it also confronts us with some less-than-beautiful realities. If Christians are not oriented toward the kingdom of God, then they will not be able to participate in the work of reconciliation at its most profound levels. And if one discerns that others are not oriented toward the kingdom, perhaps attempts to reconcile with them are impossible or even wrong. See ”https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2020/11/12/joe-biden-election-2020-healing-america-reconciliation?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=6337&pnespid=1vM1sPxVBBKNdcF4DFifMR46x77igOKjRjXSpp2l.


Philip Kennicott seesTrumpism as a lifestyle disease, chronic in America. “No matter what happens to Donald Trump or who assumes the presidency in January, we can say this: He brought the truth of America to the surface. I’ll leave his policies and his politics — to the extent that he ever had policies or coherent politics — to the pundits. As a critic, I can say that he embodied, embraced or inflamed almost everything ugly in American culture, past, present and perhaps future. He made it palpable and tangible even to people inclined to see the bright side of everything. That this week’s election wasn’t a repudiation of Trumpism, that some 6 million more Americans believe in it now compared with four years ago, is horrifying. But it’s also reality, and it’s always best to face reality.

Trumpism is embedded in America and can be fought only through rigorous self-discipline, through constant surveillance of the thoughts we think, the words we use and the assumptions we make. There was white supremacy before we started thinking of it as Trumpism, but before Trump, there also was a tendency to think of it as “out there” rather than “in here.” Now we know it not as a perverse blemish on American culture but as foundational to American culture. That’s progress.

On a summer morning in 1861, holiday makers, the picnic crowd, the Washington swells went out to the For now, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’s election is what we have in lieu of miracles and healing wells. We’ll have to see if that’s enough.battlefield at Manassas to watch a quick and decisive battle bring an end to the Civil War. Head east past the battlefield on Interstate 66 and you’re roughly retracing the holiday crowd’s steps when they fled back to Washington in panic and disorder after Confederate troops routed Union forces. Some of them, safe again in the nation’s capital, were perhaps slightly less ignorant about the magnitude of the war that awaited them.

Disillusionment isn’t an event — it’s a process. It doesn’t arrive and do its work all at once, like an epiphany. It is a way of living, a perpetual vigilance, a habit of mind. We may wish that Trumpism could be defeated, like an external enemy. But reality requires that we think of it as a chronic condition of American public life — not a virus that can be quarantined and perhaps cured, but a lifestyle disease rooted in sedentary thinking.”  See https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/trump-trumpism-american-life/2020/11/05/93a08a4e-1f7d-11eb-ba21-f2f001f0554b_story.html.


Michael Gerson sees this election as a reflection of who we are as a country.  “Politics has become a function of culture. A factual debate can be adjudicated. Policy differences can be compromised. Even an ideological conflict can be bridged or transcended. But if our differences are an expression of our identities — rural vs. urban, religious vs. secular, nationalist vs. cosmopolitan — then political loss threatens a whole way of life.

Donald Trump was elected to the office once held by Thomas Jefferson because he understood or intuited the cultural nature of American politics. His 2016 election was proof that a presidential candidate can win without proposing specific policies. His 2020 campaign was proof that an incumbent can nearly win reelection without having performed basic public duties. Policy and performance are irrelevant when there is only one political question: Is he on our side in the great cultural conflict? 

Any political system that preempts the Golden Rule is an attack on the ideal of human equality at the foundation of democracy. If we hold to constitutional values, dehumanization is a dangerous and discrediting form of hypocrisy.

In a divided nation, Americans need to defend a space in their lives where cable news does not reach, where social media does not incite, and where the basic, natural tendency is to treat other people like human beings. This offers not just the prospect of greater tolerance, but the hope of healing. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-election-was-a-reflection-of-who-we-are-as-a-country/2020/11/05/91d660b6-1f97-11eb-ba21-f2f001f0554b_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_todays_headlines&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_headlines.


Alyssa Rosenberg reported that after the election Kamala Harris invoked joy, Joe Biden asked for reconciliation.  Can they get both?  “For many Americans, the idea of joy is not exactly compatible with the prospect of a return to the way things were, and reconciliation seems highly dubious.”  See  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/07/harris-invoked-joy-biden-asked-reconciliation/.


For previous commentary on states rights and the future of democracy, see Musings on Megalomania, States Rights and the Future of Democracy (#282, 4/18/2020) at 

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2020/04/musings-on-megalomania-states-rights.html.


Saturday, November 7, 2020

Musings of a Maverick Methodist on Good and Evil in Religion and Politics

     By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

The 2020 presidential election looks a lot like 2016, but it has yet to be decided.  It’s an accurate reflection of the forces of good and evil in America, and it revealed once again that the forces of evil in America have neutralized the forces of good in its politics.  America is not the beautiful nation we grew up believing that we were.


Almost 64% of South Carolinians are white; over 26% are black, with 10% are Hispanic. Over 78% of voters claim to be Christians, and most white Christians again voted for Trump and his Republicans.  Partisan politics continue to be defined by race.  Most whites vote Republican and most blacks vote Democratic; and that’s not likely to change anytime soon.


Most S.C. churches are segregated, making Sunday mornings the most segregated time of the week.  While Protestant churches are not becoming more integrated, there’s no evidence of racial discord among them.  The white and black congregations of the United Methodist Church in S.C. are not truly united; they are separate but equal churches in the UMC.


Cultural and traditional differences can explain why UMC churches are racially segregated; but white and black UMC churches could sponsor interracial meetings to discuss their divisive partisan differences and promote a politics of reconciliation.  Racial reconciliation should begin in white and black churches, and the S.C.UMC is a good place to begin.


God’s will is to reconcile and redeem, while Satan’s will is to divide and conquer; but Satan does a convincing imitation of God in the church and politics, and the election confirmed that Satan is winning the popularity contest in the battle between the forces of good and evil.  That’s bad news for democracy; but the church could change that dynamic.


The altruistic and universal teachings of Jesus are summarized in the greatest commandment to love God and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, including our neighbors of other races and religions.  It’s about reconciliation, and was taken from the Hebrew Bible, taught by Jesus and has been accepted as a common word of faith by Islamic scholars.


In politics, the greatest commandment is a universal and altruistic principle that requires balancing individual and partisan interests with providing for the common good.  If the church were to emphasize that altruistic principle in both faith and politics, it would promote a politics of reconciliation and counter the forces of evil that have dominated American politics since 2016.


The church has failed to promote the altruistic moral teachings of Jesus in politics and allowed evil to corrupt the power of God’s goodness in America’s church and its democracy.  To prevent the divisive forces of evil from further unraveling the fabric of American democracy, the church must engage the forces of evil in politics--even if it costs the church its popularity.



Notes:


Trump’s Language of Hate Has Deep Roots in American Religious Bigotry. (11/5/2020) “President Donald Trump’s influence on U.S. politics and society will last far longer than his tenure as president. Trumpism is not a coherent doctrine; there’s no grand strategy holding it together. Instead it is a combination of ideologies: judicial appointments to renew the culture wars and preserve Trump’s power; deep-seated corruption to benefit the Trump family and their allies monetarily; standard Republican ideas about taxes; and, most crucially, systems of violence, ideological and physical, against groups the administration defines as the Other. That’s an idea that goes back a long way in the United States, and which hasn’t entirely escaped its religious roots.Trump has repeatedly leaned on fear of and opposition to imaginary enemies to avoid responsibility for his own failures and to suggest who belongs and who doesn’t in U.S. society. The most recent example is his executive order establishing the 1776 Commission. Pitched as an counterpunch to the New York Times’ 1619 Project, which examines the consequences of slavery in the United States, it was in fact a declaration that the Other does not and has never existed in U.S. society, and that anyone who suggests otherwise has a nonfactual, un-American agenda.This is absurd.  

U.S. politics has a long history of weaponizing the fear and hate of the Other, one of the earliest of which was anti-Catholicism and the genre of symbolic language associated with it, “anti-popery.” Quakers accused the newly mobilized voters of having rigged the election and pretending toward greater freedom while secretly intending a radical agenda of egalitarianism and wealth redistribution. Sound familiar? Any abusive or corrupt actions by the state or its governing elite could be readily denigrated as “popish.” Yet, so, too, could elements of society seen as subversive, dissatisfied, or antagonistic to the godly society of the empowered. The beauty of this symbolism to those who relied upon it was that it could increasingly be detached from a specific meaning or grievance without losing any of its potency to mobilize the fearful and resentful within society. Think “socialist” among the right wing today.                                          Trump’s reliance on this same kind of religious symbolism have not been subtle. Trump overtly claims that Christians are under attack in the United States and that he is fighting back against their supposed oppression. Plenty has been written on the multiple branches of Christianity that support him in this endeavor—Christian dominionists, Christian Zionists, neocharismatic Pentecostals, and evangelicals in general. His travel ban on several majority-Muslim countries, his violent rhetoric about Muslims in this country and abroad, and the several performative laws banning “sharia law” by GOP state legislatures across the nation have been very clear. Trump’s embrace of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories such as QAnon, of explicitly white-nationalist groups, and repeated promotion of anti-Semitic propaganda about “cosmopolitan elites,” “globalists,” and protests “paid for by [George] Soros,” helped lead to the Tree of Life synagogue shooting and other incidents of anti-Semitic violence.                                                        To be sure, Trump did not invent this political language. It is exceedingly unlikely he is aware of its long presence in U.S. history and the language that informs it. But he stands in a long tradition of conservative political leaders that have embraced the conspiratorial style within U.S. society, a calculated language that strikes a careful balance between unspoken or understated inference and a current of anger and resentment toward anyone who might be to blame for the misfortune of the so-called silent majority. For Trump and his followers, however, subtext is often straightforward text. Even 19th-century nativist supporters didn’t resort to grave desecration.  Trump’s presidency will end, and there will be a rush to pretend we are back to normal. The horrifying truth, however, is that religious violence is historically the United States’ normal. And when he goes, it won’t disappear with him.” See https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/05/trumps-language-of-hate-has-deep-roots-in-american-religious-bigotry/?utm_source=PostUp&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=27204&utm_term=Flashpoints%20OC&?tpcc=27204.

On the evil of Trump’s politics up to the 2020 election, see

Biden May Win, but Trump Remains the President of Red America (11/4/2020)

https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-trumps-washington/the-worst-case-election-scenario-is-happening?.  See also, Trump may lose, but Trumpism hasn’t been repudiated (11/4/2020)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/04/trump-may-lose-trumpism-hasnt-been-repudiated/?utm_campaign=wp_opinions_pm&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_popns.


On good and evil in religion and politics since 2018, see related commentary at:

(4/28/2018): Musings of a Maverick Methodist on the Virtues and Vices of Christian Morality

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2018/04/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on.html.

(2/1/2018): Musings on the Sacrifice of Jesus on the Altar of Partisan Politics

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2020/02/musings-on-sacrifice-of-jesus-on-altar.html.

(6/2/2018): Musings on Good Versus Evil and Apocalypse in Religion, Legitimacy and Politics

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2018/06/musings-on-good-versus-evil-and.html.

(9/15/2018): Who Put Jesus on the Cross and Trump on the Throne? http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2018/09/who-put-jesus-on-cross-and-trump-on.html.

(11/3/2018): Musings of a Maverick Methodist: Has God Blessed Us or Damned Us?

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2018/11/musings-of-maverick-methodist-has-god.html.

(11/10/2018): Musings on the End Times: God’s Rapture or Satan’s Rupture?

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2018/11/musings-on-end-times-gods-rapture-or.html.

(2/9/2019): Musings of a Maverick Methodist on the Hypocrisy of American Christianity

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2019/02/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on_9.html.

(2/16/2019): Musings of a Maverick Methodist on America the Blessed and Beautiful--or is it?

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2019/02/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on_16.html.

(5/4/2019): Musings on the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2019/05/musings-on-good-bad-and-ugly.html.

(8/3/2019): Musings on the Dismal Future of  the Church and Democracy in America

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2019/08/musings-on-dismal-future-of-church-and.html.  

(2/1/2020): Musings on the Sacrifice of Jesus on the Altar of Partisan Politics

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2020/02/musings-on-sacrifice-of-jesus-on-altar.html.



Saturday, October 31, 2020

Musings on Supporting and Defending the Constitution

      By Rudy Barnes, Jr.


As an Army officer and an elected official I have pledged to support and defend the Constitution as the bedrock of the American rule of law.  I never imagined that anarchists would swear to the same oath, but The Oath Keepers do just that.  They revere the Second Amendment and show up at protests brandishing assault weapons and predicting civil war.


The Oath Keepers is an umbrella organization of radical-right militias that claim to support and defend the Constitution; but they are anarchists pretending to be patriots.  They promote Donald Trump’s demagoguery, and they oppose all who enforce legal restrictions on their right to bear arms at public protests as part of a corrupt deep state.


The militias of the Oath Keepers include the Boogaloos and Proud Boys.  They resemble the white supremacists of the KKK who terrorized blacks in the JIm Crow South, and the brownshirts who supported Hitler’s Nazis.  They make the Second Amendment the greatest commandment of the Constitution and have pledged to use force against any gun restrictions.


The radical-right militias of the Oath Keepers aren’t the only threat to the Constitution.  Antifa (for antifascists) includes radical leftist groups who have used violence at public protests.  These radical-right and radical-left groups come from opposite ends of the political spectrum, but they share an expectation of civil war and use force to promote their radical politics.    


Militant anarchists represent a formidable threat of domestic terrorism, and those militias on the right are especially dangerous since they have supporters in law enforcement and the military.  Their greatest danger is compromising the loyalty of those in the military and law enforcement who are the last bastion of defense for the Constitution and its rule of law.


The U.S. military is a paradox of an authoritarian regime within a libertarian democracy, but its military laws, values and strict chain of command provide accountability that resists corruption by local militias.  Local law enforcement agencies are more susceptible to corruption by local militias since they lack centralized rules of engagement on the use of lethal force.


The U.S. military has fought militias to promote democracy and the rule of law overseas.  It’s a sad irony that home-grown militias now pose a threat to U.S. democracy and its rule of law, and even more ironic that those militias seek to subvert the law enforcement agencies that are needed to support and defend the Constitution and its rule of law against anarchy.


The Second Amendment was passed as part of the Bill of Rights in 1791, and provides: A well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.  The Constitution also provides the legal foundation for the military and law enforcement agencies to provide for national security and public safety. Today brandishing weapons at public events is a threat to public safety and should be banned.



Notes:


Stewart Rhodes founded the Oath Keepers in 2009.  “It’s a pro-Trump militant group that has recruited thousands of police, soldiers and veterans. Rhodes has been talking about civil war since 2009. He once cast himself as a revolutionary but now sees his role as defending the president. He had put out a call for his followers to protect the country against what he called an “insurrection” to undermine Donald Trump.

Rhodes’s warnings of conflict only grew louder.  When a teenager was charged with shooting and killing two people at protests over police brutality in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Rhodes called him “a Hero, a Patriot” on Twitter. And when a Trump supporter was killed later that week in Portland, Oregon, Rhodes declared [on his blog post] that there was no going back. “Civil war is here, right now,” he wrote.

Rhodes’ blog post was both a manifesto and a recruiting pitch based on the oath that soldiers take when they enlist, to “support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”  Law enforcement officers swear a similar oath, and Rhodes wrote that both groups could refuse orders, including those related to gun control, that would enable tyranny. And, if necessary, they could fight.

Rhodes kept the nature of the Oath Keepers officially nonpartisan.  It was not a militia “per se.” “We don’t ask current-serving law enforcement and military to sign up on any kind of membership list,” he said in a radio interview. But eventually he did create such a list with members’ names, home and email addresses, phone numbers, and service histories, along with answers to a question about how they could help the Oath Keepers. Last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center provided the entries for nearly 25,000 people to the author of The Atlantic article.

Rhodes established the Oath Keepers as a registered nonprofit with a board of directors; members did relief work after hurricanes and spoke at local Republican events. They could walk into police stations or stand outside military bases with leaflets; they could meet with sheriffs and petition lawmakers.

When Trump warned of civil war, Rhodes voiced his assent. “This is the truth,” he wrote. “This is where we are.”  Rhodes wrote a creed listing 10 types of orders that members vow to resist. Gun-control laws are first among them. Then come libertarian concerns such as subjecting American citizens to military tribunals and warrantless search and seizure. After those come more conspiratorial fears—blockades of cities, foreign troops on U.S. soil, putting Americans in detention camps. Here Rhodes was drawing from the “New World Order” theory, a worldview that is central to the Patriot movement—and that can be traced back to what the historian Richard Hofstadter, writing in the 1960s, called the paranoid style in American politics. It linked fears of globalism, a deep distrust of elites, and the idea that a ballooning federal government could become tyrannical.

In 2016, when Trump had warned of election fraud, Rhodes put out a call for members to quietly monitor polling stations. When Trump warned of an invasion by undocumented immigrants, Rhodes traveled to the southern border with an Oath Keepers patrol. He sent members to “protect” Trump supporters from the protesters at his rallies and appeared in the VIP section at one of them, standing in the front row in a black Oath Keepers shirt. When Trump warned of the potential for civil war at the start of the impeachment inquiry last fall, Rhodes voiced his assent on Twitter. “This is the truth,” he wrote. “This is where we are.” But membership in the group was often fleeting.  The Oath Keepers did not have 25,000 soldiers at the ready. But the files showed that Rhodes had tapped into a deep current of anxiety, one that could cause a surprisingly large contingent of people with real police and military experience to consider armed political violence.  

“It’s not just about guns,” Rhodes said. But guns were at the heart of it. Liberals, Rhodes told me, want to see “a narrow majority trampling on our rights. The only way to do that is to disarm us first.” Rhodes had been using liberals’ “drumbeat of anti-cop sentiment” in his outreach to police. “That’s what we tell them: ‘Come on, guys. They hate your guts.’” 

Like Trump, Rhodes relentlessly demonizes Black Lives Matter activists as “Marxists”—a foreign enemy. And he dwells on imagined threats from undocumented immigrants and Muslims that fit his ideas about a globalist push to undermine Western values.

When protests erupted in Kenosha many of the demonstrators brought guns, and vigilante groups quickly formed on the other side. There was a confrontation near a gas station, and a teenager allegedly opened fire and killed two people. A man affiliated with antifa allegedly gunned down a Trump supporter in Portland later that week, and Rhodes declared that “the first shot has been fired.”  See

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/right-wing-militias-civil-war/616473/.


On the Second arrest of a ‘Boogaloo boy’ suspect made after violent Columbia demonstrations, see https://www.postandcourier.com/news/second-arrest-of-a-boogaloo-boy-suspect-made-after-violent-columbia-demonstrations/article_9e4fdf5c-a76f-11ea-8217-ef9830925b24.html.


On Charges: Boogaloo Bois fired on Minneapolis police precinct, see

https://www.startribune.com/charges-boogaloo-bois-fired-on-mpls-precinct-shouted-justice-for-floyd/572843802/.


Leftist antifascist groups known as Antifa are the polar opposite of the radical-right Boogaloo Bois and Proud Boys of Oath Keepers, but both Antifa and Oath Keepers are anarchists preparing for a civil war. “Trump is vowing to designate the Antifa movement as a terrorist organization. But its supporters believe that they are protecting their communities—and that confronting fascists with violence can be justified. To date, one American has been killed by someone professing an antifascist agenda; right-wing extremists, by comparison, have been responsible for more than three hundred and twenty deaths in the past quarter century. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, during the Trump Administration right-wing terrorists have carried out about a hundred and forty attacks, left-wing terrorists a dozen.The only known plot to “overthrow” the government in recent months was hatched by right-wing militia members, who, according to the F.B.I., planned to kidnap Michigan’s Democratic governor, Gretchen Whitmer. In June during a rally at Michigan’s capitol, a speaker yelled, “We are here demanding peace as these terrorist organizations want to burn down our cities!” In response to such right-wing events, some leftists have mobilized under the name Antifa, following a tradition with specific principles, among them a willingness to engage in violence.

The election of President Barack Obama galvanized the so-called Patriot Movement, composed of hundreds of far-right groups and armed militias hostile to Muslims, immigrants, and the L.G.B.T.Q. community. The Patriot Movement depicted the federal government as corrupted by un-American forces inimical to white Christians.  Despite this troubling ferment, antifascism remained a backwater of leftist activism throughout the Obama Administration, as progressives focussed on the rise of the Tea Party.

Then came Donald Trump, buoyed by a wave of white nationalism. In 2017, many Americans were stunned when throngs of white supremacists carried torches and Nazi flags through Charlottesville, Virginia, chanting “Blood and soil!” and “Jews will not replace us!” Antifascists, however, were prepared. Hundreds of them travelled to Charlottesville, in fidelity to the “We go where they go” credo. Clashes culminated in a neo-Nazi plowing his car through a crowd of counter-protesters, killing a woman. The former K.K.K. Grand Wizard David Duke told a reporter, “We are determined to take our country back. We’re going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump.” Later, Trump said that there had been “very fine people on both sides” in Charlottesville. Duke praised his “honesty” and “courage.”

Antifascist doctrine does not allow for avoiding confrontations: “They will not pass” is another precept, deriving from the Spanish Civil War. In the summer of 2018, several activists in Portland created PopMob, short for Popular Mobilization, which aimed to enlist a more diverse, and less militant, league of protesters to counter Patriot Prayer and the Proud Boys.” When an Antifa demonstrator asserted that “The pandemic had revealed the alarming depth of the government’s ineptitude” and was asked what’s the alternative,he said: “Anarchism.” And one simple way to get us closer to that is defunding the police,” 

The animating conviction that America’s economic, governmental, and judicial institutions are irremediable distinguishes Portland protesters from others around the country. Many of them view inequality not as a failure of the system but as the status quo that the system was designed to preserve; accordingly, the only solution is [anarchy] to dismantle it entirely and build something new.

In Minneapolis, marchers chanted, “No justice, no peace!” In Portland, they cry, “No cops! No prisons! Total abolition!” Occasionally you hear “Death to America!” The night after Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, at the Gus J. Solomon U.S. Courthouse protesters smashed the glass doors and cut down a flag that ha

d been lowered to half-mast. The flag was brought to the police headquarters, doused with hand sanitizer, and set ablaze. On a boarded-up window, a white man in black bloc spray-painted, “THE ONLY WAR IS CLASS WAR.” Popular chants at the protests include “A.C.A.B.—All Cops Are Bastards!”  See https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/11/02/trump-antifa-movement-portland? utm source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily.