1/ The Radical Left has used political violence to advance their cause for decades. What's new is the progressive left's professional class building a permission structure to justify the use of political violence
It's called Assassination Culture, and we need to talk about it
🧵
2/ To understand what's happening, you need to understand that the line between progressive-left professional class and radical left has been blurred. The extremist radical left and the socially progressive "bluesky left" are increasingly intertwined both socially and politically
3/ This is because many of the extremist radical from the 60's and 70' who advocated for, and participated in, the use of political violence have been welcomed into the mainstream institutions that are run by the progressive left professional class.
Let's look at examples:
4/ In 1974 a terrorist group called The Whether Underground released a paper arguing directly for armed struggle, and then carried out 25 bombings.
One of the groups founders, Bill Ayers, became a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and worked with Barack Obama.
5/ Another founder, Bernadine Dohrn, went to prison before ending up as a law professor at Northwestern University.
Jeff Jones, also part of The Weather Underground, ended up as a reporter, and then as a consultant working in a mainstream environmental non-profit organization.
6/ Notice the pattern here: Radical leftists who engaged in political violence are integrated and assimilated into mainstream social institutions run by the progressive left's professional class.
Let's take a loot at a few more examples so we can see how widespread this is
7/ Susan Rosenberg joined the May 19th Communist Organization (which bombed the United States the Capitol building in 1983). She was convicted in 1984 for illegal possession of firearms and explosives.
She sat on the board of the parent organization for Black Lives Matter.
8/ Rasmea Odeh was a convicted terrorist who admitted bombing an Israeli supermarket back in 1969, killing 2 civilians (see pic ). She helped found "The Women's March," and co-wrote a manifesto that got published in national outlets to great applause. (pic 3)
9/ It is common knowledge in Academic circles that Marxists, communists, and radical leftists are welcomed into Universities and often end up in positions of power and influence.
Isaac Gottesman says this explicitly in his book "The Critical Turn in Education."
10/ The institutions which are staffed and run by Progressive leftists, and which credential the professional class, have spent decades welcoming radical leftists with extremist views. The result is that those extreme views are spreading through the leftist professional class.
11/ The result has been entire disciplines have been developed in Universities which are dedicated to studying and developing radical leftist critiques of society and it's institutions. Post-colonial Theory, Queer Theory, and Critical Race Theory are just three examples.
12/ Additionally, the radical leftists have taken over the education colleges, so now almost all of Americas teachers are trained to bring radical leftist politics into the classroom.
I did a thread explaining that entire process here👇
13/ This entire process repeats itself across the credentialing institutions of the professional managerial classes.
The result of this is that the extremist politics of the radical left are being normalized across the institutions and of the progressive left.
14/ This radicalization can be seen on bluesky, where radicalized members of the progressive leftist professional class tend to congregate.
There you can see lawyers, doctors, teachers, and journalists post political thinking that sounds just like "The Weather Underground."
15/ The result of this has been that the professional disciplines end up sympathizing with the causes of people who assassinate CEO's, and making them out to sympathetic figures (or even outright martyrs) for whatever leftist cause is at hand.
16/ By lowering the social opprobrium and disapproval directed towards those who kill CEO's or engage in other forms of violence, they end up destroying the stigma associated with violent crime, and thus encouraging anti-social people to engage in such violence.
17/ The fact that political violence against the right is not against the norms of the professional left and the fact that they sympathize with those who engage in political violence, creates a permission structure which allows them to justify violence against conservatives.
18/ The result of this is the "assassination culture" which Charlie Kirk was talking about in the post I quoted to start this thread.
This is a huge problem, and we need to do something about it.
Now.
/fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Look at the number of pro-athletes posting condolences about Charlie Kirk, and you'll see what a huge cultural figure he was.
He wasn't just famous in conservative circles, his clips debating college students were a loadbearing pillar of online political pop-culture
His willingness to calmly and politely debate all comers on any issue (at the very moment when cancel culture was strongest and people were afraid to say what they think) made him a sort of lovable internet folkhero.
He was an indelible piece of the online landscape.
Charlie was not quarantined to the "conservative ghetto" of online content; he broke contain and became a mainstream cultural figure.
Charlie became the cultural symbol of free debate, free speech, and settling differences in public with words
What he is describing here is the deconstruction of America as an ideal. The goal is to destroy America by subverting the conception of America as a force for good which sustains American confidence, and attacking the founding narrative from which America derives it's legitimacy.
They will try to redefine America in a way which subverts the legitimacy of America as a national project. They want to erase the current American narrative, and replace it with a new one which grants them the right to inherit America's wealth, power, prestige, and influence.
They will attack America the same way they attacked Universities: by undermining legitimacy, authority, and self-confidence by asserting that the whole project is just racism, colonialism, and oppression in disguise.
2/ on racist resentment against white people and racialist identity politics, complete with the racist stereotyping.
This shows a continuity of thinking over a period of a decade, and there has been no take back, or explanation for the disgustingly racist tweets she made.
3/ Chris said he didn't care if she was fired, the point was to use her posts to force the New Yorker to choose between equal enforcement of bans on hiring racists who make racist content, or to be explicit that racism against Jews and whites is allowed...
The game being played by the "sex is a spectrum" people is to engage in a sleight of hand between the ontological question (what makes this thing what it is), epistemological question (how do we know this thing when we see it), and linguistic question (how do we define the word)
The tactic is to attack the definition by blurring the lines between the primary features that make the object what it is and define its function and the secondary features we use as proxy's for identifying the object when we encounter it "in the wild".
For example, the primary features of a pencil are the fact that it has a graphite tip that can be used to write erasable and that it is sized correctly for handwriting.
The secondary features are that it is yellow (on the shaft) and pink (on the eraser)
1/ Leftist activism uses exactly this dynamic as a strategy. The goal is to create hot-takes that generate enormous outrage (IE: Syndey Sweeney ads are fascist) which bait people into reacting by writing response pieces or by dunking on it
2/ By using the negative engagement and dunking as free advertising, the leftists is able to provoke more outrage.
They repeat this process until people have outrage fatigue, and the hot take no longer provokes strong reactions, and stating the hot-take no longer causes outrage.
3/ Once the hot-take no longer causes outrage, leftists repeat it until people are sick of it and it becomes background noise. At this point the hot-take becomes banal, and people begrudgingly accept that the hot take is now just another part of the landscape of public opinion