Poisonous Political Violence Talk

Consequences beyond the ballot box

Well, we’ve all seen the many articles lately expressing concern by Leftists that Rightwing violence is on the rise, and that the current political atmosphere is reminiscent of that preceding the Oklahoma bombing of the Murrah building by Timothy McVeigh.  Any act of violence that can possibly be attributed to a right-wing attitude is being exhumed from the news files and trotted out as either a trend, or something to keep in mind when we see these crazy “Tea-Baggers” on the tube.

Former President Clinton, sitting proudly astride this particular hobby-horse, may or may not be aware that McVeigh was a devotee of the “Turner Diaries,” a Neo-Nazi screed.  In other words, McVeigh was a large-government Leftist.  (I know…the Nazis were supposed to be right wing screwballs, but they weren’t.  ”Nazi” is a German acronym for the “National Socialist Party” that Hitler rode to power.

So, what’s going on?

Well, the most plausible reason would be that our very own, would-be Democratic Socialist Party (Democrats, to you), certain to take a good ass-kicking in the fall, is lashing about for one or more narratives that will help to stanch the bleeding.  They tried branding their fellow citizens who were crazy enough to attend “Tea Partys” as racist, homophobic morons.”  Aside from seeming to always be obsessed with race, attributing every criticism or slight to it, they only had partial, temporary success with a race-bating  narrative that usually works pretty well for them  (white guilt and all).

They’ve also, for some time, been leaking out concerns that critics of the President’s policies (who just happen to be utterly fed up with Congress, as well), are either creating a climate that would be conducive to the attempted assasination of the President, or may even attempt it themselves (in the case of ‘militias.’)  And let’s face it:  most militias are just gun clubs with an attitude.  They have no intention of attacking anybody – unless maybe Bill Clinton and Janet Reno show up at their doorsteps with tanks and machine guns.

Now, setting aside that every President gets actual death threats routinely (dutifully checked out by the Secret Service and the FBI) and that any society composed of 300 million souls is going to have a certain number of crazies), why, considering the long history of contentiousness in this country’s politics, should this (hyped) apprehension be taken more seriously than usual?  Race?  First mixed-race President?  Could be.  A slight uptick there, to allow for the addition to the assasination crazy-pool of some possible racists.  But considering the massive number of white votes the President got, It’s not a very strong argument that he’s going to be killed for being either too black or not black enough.

Or that his policies are racial, rather than allegedly foolish and irresponsible.  No, he could get killed because his supporters are foolish and irresponsible.  You keep talking this stuff up, throwing around your notion of clever innuendo and subtle inference, and one of our nation’s crazies just might carry out your fantasy.  And, on examination, it’ll turn out that his/her motive was so off the wall-crazy that no one could even imagine a plausible political (or racial) reason for the act.  Loose lips sink…civilizations.

OK, there’s another, historically accurate scenario, and that’s one where someone from either the President’s own party or someone sympathetic to its causes decides to martyr him.  The goal would be to blame the opposition, consolidate power and unite the faithful.   It would arguably – but not provably – be the first time such a motive was employed in American history, but not even unusual in world history.  And if such a dreadful event were to occur, you know that there would be conspiracy theories – particularly if it can’t be pinned on a ‘lone gunman.’

When that happens, aren’t some of the politicians and media folks currently spinning this crap just a little bit concerned that it’s their doors that the FBI would be knocking on, wondering why they were so prominent in the pre-assasination hate-mongering.  And the investigation would have to proceed to establish the identities of all who would benefit by such a deed.  President Biden and Vice-President Pelosi?  Ironic that they would then be suspected of being power-hungry, racist conspiracists.  Far fetched?  Back when JFK was killed, one of the first public suspicions was that there was a conspiracy led by his Vice-President (from Texas, scene of the assassination), Lyndon Baines Johnson, his replacement as President and an icon of the Democratic Party.  Using the tactic of telling lies in order to encourage distrust of your political opponents has consequences, among them, voter cynicism and distrust of government in general.

It would probably be a good idea if we all stopped considering vicious, nationally-divisive attacks as desirable political tactics.  Maybe a dash of civility – not for your political opponent, necessarily, but for the sake of what’s left of our national unity.