An important step in mainstreaming and normalizing political violence is suggesting the victim is partly to blame for provoking the attack with free speech or legal actions. The victims are told to find some compromise with the demands of the attackers.
This is the goal of all political violence and terrorism: to acquire legitimacy, secure concessions, and force the victims to surrender some of their freedom. This is done by making that freedom seem impossible to protect, or unworthy of the effort.
As soon as moral equivalency is drawn between victims and terrorists, the terrorists are on the road to victory. A government unable or unwilling to protect the lives and property of its citizens is bound to excuse its failure by questioning the moral standing of the citizens.
"You people have no moral authority to demand protection against the violent party," the elite will argue. "Think about their grievances, your long history of injustice, and the systemic bigotry of your society. You should understand their rage and avoid provoking them."
Violent political actors know the political elite of free countries WANT to say such things. They look down on their citizens and sometimes openly loathe them. They're eager to demonstrate they are enlightened globalist Citizens of the World, not grubby "nationalists."
Also, the elite have a vested interest in trashing their own national history and impugning their own society. They want to present themselves as transformative leaders who can bring fundamental change. They need to convince their citizens there is nothing worth conserving.
Western elites have a habit of saying things like "I've never been proud of my country" or "we've never lived up to our ideals before now." Terrorists correctly sense an opportunity to merge their demands with this professed self-loathing and urge for transformation.
Political violence is quite simply indispensable for putting freedom on the chopping block. Demands for the sacrifice of free speech, property rights, and other core liberties will never be taken seriously if made politely. Polite groups are never treated as protected classes.
But if you burn things down and kill people, suddenly the political elite become willing - perhaps even eager - to discuss the possibility of limiting freedom for the victims, and even punishing them, to avoid offending your sensibilities. Doors are opened. Negotiation begins.
That is why the Western political elite that spent decades praising the "wall between church and state" suddenly thinks blasphemy laws are worth discussing. People who joyously vented savage hatred against the "religious right" suddenly think "hate speech isn't free speech."
And that is why a nation that once warned against the dangers of prejudice and dreamed of a color-blind future is suddenly ALL ABOUT judging people by the color of their skin, complaining about "systemic racism" while embracing systemic racism against the "bad" race.
Political violence is the secret sauce that makes such ugly transformations possible. It is the only way to make a society concede that it lacks the moral stature to insist on absolute respect for its core principles. It calls the bluff of civilization.
Once that bluff has been called, the use of political violence is likely to become more commonplace - both by the original instigators and other groups that realize they must use violence to be taken seriously, to assert their "right" not to be offended, to demand "justice." /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
