zenpundit.com » Blog Archive » One more comparative, this one from John Schindler

One more comparative, this one from John Schindler

[ by Charles Cameron — Schindler is one of my regular reads, civil war is still avoidable ]

Notice the neat reversal in John’s “notwithstanding” comment. Very nicely done.

The far-left has faced less public scrutiny than their sparring partners after Charlottesville. Part of this is the habitual double standard about genocidal totalitarianisms in our country: Carrying a Nazi flag is considered unthinkably offensive, while brandishing a Soviet one is viewed as much less awful — and possibly only quirky — notwithstanding that Stalin murdered more people than Hitler did.

Indeed, in recent weeks quite a few mainstream liberals have gushed about the “anti-fascists” on the left who engage in violent street theater with the far-right.

murder hitler : murder stalin :: flag stalin : flag hitler — does that cover it?

Stalinists, Nazis, alt-left, alt-right — what a miniscule battlefield threatening to draw in so .many more from left, right, who are otherwise moderate.

Look, consider — calls for Trump to be impeached — according to USA Today, Americans split 42%-42% on impeaching Trump — wow — and Jim Bakker, reverend, declares Christians will start a civil war ifTrump is impeached

Y’all going to fetch pitchforks and tiki torches? I’ve never seen so many donkey and elephant sheep nearing a ravine, hungry for chaos.

Stay cool, folks.

11 Responses to “One more comparative, this one from John Schindler”

  1. morgan Says:

    One of the most successful propaganda coups by the left is to tie Hitler to the right. Hitler was a murderous socialist–the Nazis, after all, called themselves National Socialists–and socialism is a key ideology today of the left not the right.

  2. Charles Cameron Says:

    The name itself doesn’t convince me, Morgan, but I haven’t delved deeply into the matter. I imagine some profound minds must have wrestled with the question, Hitler, left or right?
    Any pointers, anyone?

  3. morgan Says:

    Well,Charles, if they called themselves that, you would think they knew what they were talking about.

  4. carl Says:

    Big trouble is avoidable IF the local police do their jobs. If they don’t, or are not permitted to, it is not. In Cville, on some college campuses and twice now in Berkeley a conscious decision was made NOT to keep the peace. If ever there were an occasion where an action by government in a field where government is effective could stop trouble in its tracks, this is it. The cops know how to do it, they just have to be permitted to do it. Every time they are prevented from doing so is an obvious proclamation that the rules of law will on occasion be suspended depending upon who is involved and how. That has effects far beyond Berkeley. That is adding accelerants to a pile of dry wood and it is civil authority that is doing it.

  5. Charles Cameron Says:

    Noting, but not answering either of you directly.. something else has come up that I’d like to comment on here,
    Bookhaven’s Cynthia Haven has a piece today -– Must we really “love one another or die”? -– on Auden’s poem, September 1, 1939, its title referring to the day World War II broke out. The poem contains at least two celebrated phrasings:

    I and the public know
    What all schoolchildren learn,
    Those to whom evil is done
    Do evil in return.


    We must love one another or die.

    — a line which Auden himself came to dislike intensely, and dropped from later printings, though many of his readers cherished it, and the piece argues for its continuing relevance.
    Regarding the first, Haven writes:

    Was it referring to eternal truths? Or claiming the Versailles Treaty that ended World War I justified the new invasion? Writing in the New York Times, Peter Steinfels asked: “One suspects that these characterizations would earn sharp rebukes if expressed in a poem titled ”September 11, 2001.’ More important, would a contemporary version of the 1939 poem be found guilty of what has come to be labeled ”moral equivalence’? Was Auden shifting moral responsibility from totalitarian evildoers to past misdeeds by those under attack and to a universal human egotism in which everyone was more or less equally complicit?”

    You’d have to read the whole poem to appreciate the issue here fully, but the question of moral equivalence is one which not infrequently haunts my own use of juxtapositions, and Steinfels’ questions, as applied to both September 1939 and September 2001, give me much pause for thought.
    The second, single line quoted above goes to the heart of my current exploration of the idea of radical forgiveness. Some of my posts here have had the key words forgiveness chronicles – and that’s where I’m slowly collating my thinking in this area. My current intent is to have a culminating chapter on radical forgiveness in my book on religious sanctions for violence and peace.

  6. Grurray Says:

    I believe there were different strains competing within the Nazis. There was the Volkisch faction on the right, and then the Strassers on the left. That may be a simplified version.

  7. carl Says:

    These are the words of a commenter over at Chicago Boyz regarding another instance of the police to selectively not keeping the peace. This instance was the tearing down of a statue of a Confederate soldier in Durham, NC.
    “Moving back to the destruction of the statue in Durham; the County Sheriff and deputies watched it happen and refused to interfere. To quote the Sheriff: “My deputies showed great restraint and respect for the constitutional rights of the group expressing their anger and disgust for recent events in our country. Racism and incivility have no place in our country or Durham.”

    THIS kind of attitude is what is going to trigger the Second American Civil War. If Leftists are above the law, and anyone not a Leftist is outside the protection of that law, there is no reason to obey that law.”
    The county made several arrests the next day on various charges related to the destruction of the statue the next day, but on the day, they intentionally chose not to keep the peace, chose to ignore criminal behavior occurring directly in front of them as it was occurring. And they did so, judging by the words of the sheriff for political reasons. If you want to set the stage for a civil war, one of the best ways to do it is to have the police make it clear that the law will be enforced for some, not for others and further make it clear that that depends upon the political stance of the persons involved.
    As far as those arrests being possibly viewed as the police doing their duty, let’s see how far they push the charges. What I’ll wager will happen is the county authorities will let the matter lie for a time, then drop the charges when they figure nobody will notice. That way they get to politically slant their law enforcement but pretend they don’t.

  8. Charles Cameron Says:

    Pendulum swing? I hate those things. But wasn’t it in living memory that the cops would turn a blind eye to a lynching, but get fierce if a black kid wanted to go to a white school?
    Since I’m a Brit, and didn’t get here till the early 70s, feel free to correct me if my history is weak..

    Me, I’d like policing to be even handed.

  9. Charles Cameron Says:

    More to my taste

  10. carl Says:

    “Pendulum swing? I hate those things. But wasn’t it in living memory that the cops would turn a blind eye to a lynching, but get fierce if a black kid wanted to go to a white school?”
    It appears to me your statement above is a more complicated way of saying “Shoe is on the other foot now whitey. Get used to it.” Or to shift across the ocean, isn’t it a bit like saying on July 21, 1982 “Remember Bloody Sunday. Get used to it Pommy.”
    No statement of that ilk is useful.

  11. Charles Cameron Says:

    I’d agree that any statement of the form “Shoe is on the other foot now … Get used to it” is (worse than) useless. But I don’t want whitey to get used to it. I don’t want the pendulum, with the extremes it brings. Fat chance of slowing it down, of course, with my little voice. But to the extent I can work towards something, it would be defusing the extremes.

Switch to our mobile site