Are FRC, Sikh shootings, Occupy Wall Street warnings of more Leftist violence?
(Page 2 of 5)
The political Left has a horrendous record of committing acts of political violence. Or, as Reagan specifically noted, “crimes.” This record is both historic and ongoing. From the French Revolution to Occupy Wall Street, from the blade that took the head of Marie Antoinette to the bullet that wounded Family Research Center security guard Leo Johnson, violence or the threat of violence is a singularly identifying trait of left-wing movements.
The question is: will this violence occur yet again in the course of the fall presidential campaign?
And the follow-up: Will the American Left, already venomously foaming and writhing at the rise of capitalist Mormon Mitt Romney and his distinctly pro-capitalist Catholic running mate Paul Ryan, take to the streets for the specific purpose of disrupting the campaign? By whatever means necessary?
Let’s be quite specific on this history of violence, shall we? Let’s name names and cites causes.
And let’s begin this history with a 21st-century style video tour of the Left doing their typical violent thing.
There are countless examples of this kind of violent display from recent years alone. And as mentioned, it’s a huge mistake to think this urge to violence is related only to the American Left. To pick a few examples at random, here’s this clip from Leftist riots in Athens in 2012 or these scenes from the 2001 G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy or, yes, all the way back to Paris in 1968 when Leftist students launched a general strike, leaving hundreds injured.
Which is why it’s important to understand the long — very long — historical pedigree violence and murder have with the Left. It is a decided mistake to think when some terrible thing happens (like the Sikh shooting) or almost happens (the FRC shooting) that what ensues is some inane political blame game that involves tagging the American Left for behavior for which the Left is historically blameless.
This is simply historically untrue. From presidential assassinations to labor strikes to race riots to protests against this or that war or free trade, not to mention genocidal assaults on Jews, Russians, Chinese or Cambodians, the Left uses violence just as Ronald Reagan said was true of the Communists who then ran what was the Soviet Union. As a tool to commit a crime in furtherance of a cause.
Why? Why is violence so much a part of the Left’s very essence?
Arguably one could start with this bit from the 18th century’s Jean-Jacques Rousseau:
The first person who, having fenced off a plot of ground, took it into his head to say “this is mine” and found people simple enough to believe him, was the true founder of civil society. What crimes, wars, murders, what miseries and horrors would the human race have been spared by someone who, uprooting the stakes or filling in the ditch, had shouted to his fellow men: Beware of listening to this imposter; you are lost if you forget that the fruits belong to all and the earth to no one.
Right there, in the famous words of Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his Discourse on the Origins and Foundations of Inequality is the modern idea that drives Leftists to violence.
Class warfare. A disdain for private property. A bitter hatred for the rights of individuals. All these things became the underlying bedrock of all things Left. Notice Rousseau’s words: the world needs people who will go about “uprooting the stakes or filling the ditch.”
Which is to say, his suggestion of the need for physical violence.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?