Something leaped out at me in Gil Troy’s Time essay on the “alt-left”:
Although the label “alt-right†originated with “alt-rightists,†Hillary Clinton mainstreamed use of the term. In a sweeping attack a year ago, Clinton condemned Trump as representing the “paranoid fringe in our politics, steeped in racial resentment.†Introducing an unfamiliar term, she explained: “Alt-right is short for alternative right.†She failed to connect the growing familiarity with the word “alt†to the computer keyboard. She quoted the Wall Street Journal’s description of this “loosely organized movement, mostly online, that rejects mainstream conservatism, promotes nationalism and views immigration and multiculturalism as threats to white identity.â€
Clinton’s analysis proves why “alt-left†is a useful term. The “alt-left†is also a “paranoid fringe… steeped in… resentment,†and some of the resentment is “racial,†although moral, in that it is resisting racism. It too is “loosely organized, mostly online,†wallowing as the alt-right does in Internet-fueled hysteria and harshness. It too rejects “mainstream†ideology, in this case, liberalism. And it is broader than Antifa, the violent anti-Fascist fringe that combats neo-Nazis and the KKK.
The emphasis is mine. The attitude being explored is an instrumental one. For a deontologist some things are inherently wrong. What renders something moral is its means as well as its ends.
Dr. Troy should either abandon his instrumental views or embrace them. A deontologist would see both racism and employing violence to achieve your goals as immoral. An instrumentalist on the other hand believes that the benignity of your motives renders your actions moral.
The essay is ludicrous. If you think there’s such a thing as ‘Just War’ then surely there’s ‘Just Antifa Violence’, unless you believe that only the state is authorized to conduct violence, which is what the author obviously believes, but is too chicken to say. This is the center-left’s main problem with everything. They love MLK’s message about non-violence, as long as it confined to being beaten by white cops. But applying it to the Vietnamese or Iraqis or to someone in Yemen is hysterical conspiracy-mongering, as is applying it, like Dr King, to the rights of striking garbage workers.
There’s a real reason why centrist liberals love to imagine what the world would be like if the Kennedy brothers were alive, but nobody does counterfactuals on what would have happened had Dr King not been shot by whoever it was who actually shot him.
That was my inference. He’s trying to take a position without taking responsibility for its implications.
I look at this in practical terms. Violence only works when it is able to compel the state or existing authority to change. Historically, this rarely happens, particularly when it comes to marginal groups like Antifa. Their violent actions are probably counterproductive.
I’ve said before that MLK jr. was one of the greatest strategists of the 20th century. Unlike the Antifa agitators, he had a clear understanding of the relationship between goals, actions, organization and resources and, most importantly, understood what was the actual “center of gravity” around which his strategy was implemented. He understood that the use of violence or its promotion was anathema to success.
The failure of so many “movements” since his time is due to poor or nonexistent strategy as well as leaders who lack the necessary skills.
Few surpass the influence of a mere lobby group. Even the civil rights movement has reverted to incrementalism and resting on MLK’s laurels.
So I’m not really worried about Antifa just as I am not worried about the White Supremasists/Nazi’s. They are back assward on the strategy continuum and will not go anywhere in their present state, except maybe to jail.
I would largely agree with Andy, especially the part about violence seldom working, but I would note one difference between the two groups. The alt-right actively supports Trump. They are big supporters, and Trump has been loathe to disassociate himself from them. The antifa do not support the Democrats. Democrats have been lukewarm on condemning the antifa. So, does the alt-right’s willingness to work on the behalf of Trump mean that they can make inroads into the mainstream of politics? I hope not, but winning at any cost seems to be part of the playbook now.
Steve
PS- Cato summation of violence, death and injuries for left and right wing groups over the last 25 years or so.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/30/us/fire-ants-harvey-hurricane-storm.html?mcubz=1
Steve,
I think that the theory that fire ants are ultimately responsible for political violence is a compelling one. 😉
Illegal alines from south of the border. The source of all of our problems Andy!
Steve