I recently stumbled onto a clip on YT of Tucker Carlson using this term “the radical violent left”. The data is clear.. the right is getting far more violent (and far more violent than this “radical left”), I suspect the media is getting ahead of that narrative and pre-labeling the left what they’re becoming themselves as a method of cutting off any debate. Think McConnell at the start of Obama labeling him the most obstructionist president ever, and them republicans being the most obstructionist. It’s an attempt to destroy any credibility to the evidence by some weird form of um… pre-poo flinging?
If there is far more violent rhetoric coming from the left, then you would expect to see the rise of said nutjobs committing murder and what not.
Yet curiously, we've seen the rise of mass murders and hate come from the far right. How does that work with the idea that the left is somehow more violent than the right? Why is it okay for the right to normalize violence?
This is true, though for awhile in the past few years, the Far Left was catching up, though the Far Right surged ahead in this year. However, in terms of numbers of events of violence, intimidation, and minor assault, the Far Left has been quite busy. The left leaning media just shows an extreme bias in discussing these events.
"They (who?) have a higher headcount so our violence is OK"
Conservatives call out and distance themselves from the far-right and violence. A few deranged lunatics on the fringes of society do not represent conservative views. By attempting to disenfranchise conservatives, as the media are constantly doing, then it's no accident that there are an increased number of incidents coming from the mentally unstable who are the most misrepresented.
The media are complicit in enabling and encouraging far-left violence, and are attempting to push the culture further and further to the left, even disenfranchising moderate liberals in the process who no longer want anything to do with them (who in turn get labeled "far-right Nazi's" for the non-conformance.)
Left/Right violence is still dwarfed by Islamist terror incidents. Christians are still the most persecuted peoples on Earth. There are indeed problems on both the political extremes that we should all be working to tackle together, but apparently, there's no such thing as going too far to the left, as the current democrat candidates are competing for the title of who can go furthest. (I think we know the outcome, but if you live in the bubble of a college campus or in SV, you might not have an accurate gauge on reality).
I can understand why someone who watches Fox News, and/or listens to a lot of Ben Shapiro / Lauren Southern / Charlie Kirk / Candace Owens, and/or is subbed to r/The_Donald might believe this. (Sorry if I'm being presumptuous) These sources push the narratives that "The Left" is trapped inside of their own radicalizing echo chamber, but don't go far enough to acknowledge that "The Right" is not immune to that problem either. What's dominating US political discoure is the bases of both sides focusing their outrage on a small percentage of the other. Both sides say that the other is becoming more radical every day. When it comes to the Democrats, however, the vast majority of candidates vying for the nomination are really the "centrist" (translation: "swampy") types.
You might want to look at crime statistics rather than watching CNN. Yes, there is violence on the right. But there are plenty of violence on the left. The only difference is that the violence one side isn't shown on too much.
And the current outrage today is primarily driven by one side's anger at Trump. Just like the outrage 8 years ago was driven by one side's anger at Obama.
But you are exactly what I'm talking about. You watch CNN, MSNBC, NYTimes, WashingtonPost, etc and think all the violence and hate is coming from one side. Just like people who watch foxnews think all the violence and hate is coming from the other side. There is plenty of violence and lying on both sides.
But when it comes to outrage, usually the side that loses the presidential election tends to be the more outraged.
I think I asked you this before, but you aren't even american. Why are you so invested in american politics and particularly spinning the politics towards one side? I hear russians are foreigners causing division, but online, I've only come across british, canadian, etc injecting themselves into american politics.
Correct, the left is the one that does the violence. You can look at jails and murder stats for that if you like, but in general is pretty obvious who the very intolerant ones are and it's the left.
Pretty sure we're in violent agreement here. The claim I took issue with was that the left is somehow an order of magnitude worse. I think it's a shared problem.
The abject denial of left-wing violence in the media and the correlating hysteria about right wing violence is disturbing and is obviously fueling the false sense of self-righteousness that is driving that very violence. Anyone with a shred of integrity denounces ALL violence, even if the perpetrators share your ideology.
To help burst anyone's delusions, here's just a few recent left-wing violent incidents off the top of my head.
> I've noticed there is a tendency among folks on the left (and for all I know it's also true of folks on the right) where people who do as you say are cast out and labeled "centrists", creating a dynamic where internal criticism is silenced.
As to whether the right also does it, Eric Greitens literally released an ad showing him "RINO hunting" with a rifle (RINO meaning "Republican In Name Only"). Leftists may infight, but at least we know how to use our words.
(As compared, for example, to the 1960s and 1970s, where bombing was a much more common tool of the left. I'll definitely take the verbal infighting.)
Its not false. I see plenty of calls to violence from the left on reddit. Some of it is overt, like calling for summary execution of conservatives and religious officials in the same vein as in many communist revolts. Much of the time it's slightly more subtle, like calling for violence against "Nazis" while simultaneously calling large segments of their political opponents "Nazis".
Just browse a left leaning subreddit like LateStageCapitalism or even just /r/politics and you'll see calls to violence from the left.
Right wing and left wing violence and divisive rhetoric is at an all time high and each side wants to act like it's not happening despite clear evidence to the contrary.
Generally it gets lost in the "who is worse than who" and some unmentioned desire for a regression to the mean. The problem is that a regression to the mean is either prompted by an event or time.
Among other things, this says the belief that "violence against the government can at times be justified" is far more prevalent on the white right than among other people.
It definitely was not always this way in the USA, this is very different than what you would have found even 20 years ago.
In addition to seeming possibly threatening for those of us not on the white right, I think it demonstrates that people "mad as hell who aren't going to take it anymore" are largely finding a home on the right and not the left. Again, it wasn't always this way. Somehow what anti-systemic left may exist is no longer visible or accessible.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/20...
I recently stumbled onto a clip on YT of Tucker Carlson using this term “the radical violent left”. The data is clear.. the right is getting far more violent (and far more violent than this “radical left”), I suspect the media is getting ahead of that narrative and pre-labeling the left what they’re becoming themselves as a method of cutting off any debate. Think McConnell at the start of Obama labeling him the most obstructionist president ever, and them republicans being the most obstructionist. It’s an attempt to destroy any credibility to the evidence by some weird form of um… pre-poo flinging?
reply