I blame the violence in South Carolina on BOTH sides

Clearly the violence in South Carolina could not exist if both sides had not gone there looking for a fight.  

If the most radical White Supremacists shouted Nazi slogans, and ugly racist slurs as they marched down the street the only headlines we'd have seen would have been how stupid they made themselves look.  I rather doubt that news would improve their recruiting among their most likely prospects.

 

Instead a large number of equally stupid people went there to violently confront them and not surprisingly provided the news-media with exactly what they pray for, fights, violence and even enough death to perk up their otherwise dull network ratings and get the attention of other violent people who would love to join the next fight.

 

Oh now the show is glorious, the news-media ratings have improved and people on both sides are inspired.  Congratulations, by taking up arms and portraying imagery that inspires even more nutcases to want to become part of the fray, we've done more to help both sides recruit people with violent tendencies and give us the show we deserve.

Comments

Dino Manalis Added Aug 15, 2017 - 9:09am
The violence should not have been permitted by the police, the two groups of protesters had to be kept separate.  
Dave Volek Added Aug 15, 2017 - 9:10am
Well said, Rusty. The rally would have probably gone unnoticed outside of Virginia had the counter-protesters stayed away. There were other ways anti-racists could have confronted this ideology of a very small minority.
Leroy Added Aug 15, 2017 - 9:26am
I agree in principle.  There must be a news blackout about the event around here.  I haven't heard a thing about it.  What would happen if you held a counter demonstration and no one showed up? 
 
There are violent groups like BLM who would destroy property to ensure their voice was heard, regardless where or not there were counter protesters.  Most others would demonstrate without fanfare.  There would be no use to have nationwide events if no counter protesters showed up.  It is like a car race.  It would be uninteresting without the prospect of a car crash.
wsucram15 Added Aug 15, 2017 - 9:28am
Rusty I see the multiple postings happened to you also. I tried to get Autumn to fix it.
In regards to this, the problem was the town was ordered by a judge to allow this to happen, the town tried to divert the convergence of the people and the ACLU and a judge at 8pm on Friday allowed this to happen.  Since Virginia allows open carry, the police did little to stop the fighting and something was bound to happen.
 
Also many towns in the south are taking down the confederacy statues, this town was picked for its size and progressive nature. It was a statement.  The first I am sure of many to come.
Rusty Smith Added Aug 15, 2017 - 9:23pm
Dino Manalis I wasn't there but heard people say the local police were not up to the job.  
 
Too many violent protesters on both sides in a town where an occasional speeding car is and an instance of domestic violence is usually the worst crime they have to deal with.
Rusty Smith Added Aug 15, 2017 - 9:29pm
Dave Volek  I despise the White Supremacists and think the go there hoping for a fight but also believe that handing them the fight and news coverage they savor so much is the worst way to discourage them from trying to do it again.
 
If I were among those who want them to go back into the hole they climbed out of I think my strategy would be to encourage the police to only permit them to protest in places that are relatively unpopular and keep the public at least a half a block away.  
 
If I passed by about all I'd do is shake my head in disgust because doing anything more, any engagement, only encourages them.  
 
If they didn't get the reaction they wanted I doubt they would return.
Rusty Smith Added Aug 15, 2017 - 9:37pm
wsucram15 Yes I got multiple postings and couldn't take them down too, and I did try many times.  
 
I hate White Supremacists but at the same time wish cities would quit erasing so many of our historic monuments in the name of political correctness, doing so doesn't change history.
 
I am not proud of the Civil War but I am proud to be an American and want my very rich history to be a visible reminder where we came from.  In this instance they are destroying a national treasure, a monument created in memory of the man who led the Confederate army to defeat.  From all I can see he was one of the most honorable people who played a big part in that war.  
 
I am saddened when they destroy historic monuments, and think we as a country are worse off each time they do.
wsucram15 Added Aug 15, 2017 - 10:19pm
Rusty..
Thank you for your honest answer in a time where I really dont think people have any idea what they think or feel. 
Just look at it this way, history is history..in some ways we can preserve that and keep it alive and it is really important to do that, without our history, we are just a country of consumers and our flag is just a sponsors flag with stripes.
History makes a person, family, city, town..etc.. and its interesting that what is coming is probably going to be history.
 
But we cant replace human life, and its very fragile.  Is it really worth all the death we as Americans have had, all that blood on our flag to be proud?   I can see independence, I can even see succession of states (maybe not over slavery though) for political reasons, but not all the dead that continue to pile up.
 
Rick Fontes Added Aug 16, 2017 - 12:13am
Free speech is guaranteed by our constitution and unpopular speech is more in need of protection than popular speech. 
As repugnant as the Nazi dudes might be, they jumped through the hoops and received a permit to protest, the anti-protestors did not. 
It was the duty of law enforcement to keep the groups separated once it was clear that there would be an armed and potentially violent protest to the protest. 
The bigger picture, as yet unproven, is that there might be master puppeteers organizing and funding both sides in order to further their anti-Trump agenda.
In my opinion these clashes are far too well organized, funded and promoted to be just local spontaneous, ad hoc occurrences.  Someone is making the payroll and it is their agenda that is important to discover. 
 
Dave Volek Added Aug 16, 2017 - 1:02am
Rick: You might be interested in watching Hypernormalization 2016. It is a 2.5 hour documentary about how we got to the state where we are currently at (can't blame Trump). One of the vignettes is about one of Putin Right-hand people. This fellow funds factions who oppose Putin, but oppose each other. He gets them to protest at the same place and same time. Chaos ensues, and who comes in to save the town? Why, the Russian police force with orders from Putin. It just might be possible Charlottesville was too choreographed for a certain result.
 
Rusty: I would leave the local people to decide which local monuments stay or go. You have given good reasons to keep the monuments, but they locals should make the decision. I suspect more monuments are going to come down after Charlottesville.
 
Rick Fontes Added Aug 16, 2017 - 10:24am
Dave, thanks for the link.  From the beginning my problem with so many of the "spontaneous" protests across the nation, those that seem to always involve some degree of violence, is that they have an eerily similar appearance.  The flashmob narrative is belied by much of the signage.  Although being carried in states far removed from one another, it all looks as if it was produced by the same manufacturers. 
I wouldn't know how to begin to orchestrate a gathering of several hundred of my nearest neighbors to protest an event in downtown Houston, the transportation and parking alone would be a daunting task.  You see competing mobs in Charlottesville and ask, "where did they leave their vehicles?"  When told that they arrived on buses the question of financing rears its head. 
Whoever is scripting these violent encounters is not working very hard to conceal the fact that they are orchestrated, relying on the passion and heat generated by the events themselves to obscure the light of truth.
I am also curious as to why no one, law enforcement or government, seems to be interested in discovering who is controlling the purse strings and calling them out for the resultant injuries and destruction they cause.    
wsucram15 Added Aug 16, 2017 - 11:24am
ot all protests involve violence, I have been to many that do not, recently. However, I think this may change now. Sad but true.
Dave Volek Added Aug 16, 2017 - 5:04pm
Rick: When you put it that way, there just be might a powerful entity funding and supporting both sides--just like the Russian choreographer.
 
I'm not a believer in conspiracy theories, but this one is growing legs in my mind. Maybe WB Writer "The Burghal Hidage" needs to write a satire on this possibility.
Rick Fontes Added Aug 16, 2017 - 6:07pm
Dave, I'm a believer in Occam's Razor, the solution with the fewest elements is the best (or truest).  For these clashes to result from so many elements coming together spontaneously stretches credulity.  These events are as well choreographed as the battles between the Jets and the Sharks in West Side Story.
Gregory S. McNeill Added Aug 16, 2017 - 8:10pm
Rusty, The violence in Virginia was caused by the Alt-Right! Trump is being a coward for not addressing the issue. Give me a break.
Rick Fontes Added Aug 17, 2017 - 12:03am
Holy snappin' synapses Dannl.  My earliest conspiracy theory has Eve colluding with the serpent because she was bored and wanted to sample life outside the garden.  Adam was a patsy.
Tamara Wilhite Added Aug 17, 2017 - 10:42am
The Antifa assaults on people in Berkley, Seattle and Vancouver against mostly liberal neighbors prove they attack anyone who isn't as extreme as them. They just prefer conservative targets because they get support from fellow liberals for doing so.
Bill Kamps Added Aug 17, 2017 - 11:36am
In these situations it is difficult to know what the facts are.  I have seen the  "fact" that only the right had a permit, as well as the "fact" that both sides had a permit.  I have seen the "fact" that these statues were erected in the early 1900s as historical symbols, and I have seen the "fact" that these statues were mostly erected in the 1960s as a protest to the Civil Rights movements.
 
Both sides seem to have the "facts" on their side.   For many of us, it is impossible to decide about the matter, because it  takes too much effort to determine the real facts.
 
Im not a fan of the stupid things that Trump says.  However, we now are in a position where the economic policy of the US is being affected by the parsing of the President's statements, and whether or not he is politically correct or not. 
 
We  are too willing to fight over anything, and too willing to judge people based on the statements that they make over these incidents.
Rick Fontes Added Aug 17, 2017 - 12:49pm
Incrementalism. 
Under the system of a New World Order those which are individual nations today would have to surrender their constitutions in favor of a single overarching system of governance for the entire planet. 
I suspect that the end game of what is now afoot in america is to discredit all those who founded this nation and who gave us our "supreme law of the land" thereby rendering their thoughts and ideas invalid.
We start by eliminating all remnants of the confederacy and once that ball is rolling and gaining momentum we segue into attacking any and all historic figures who were slave owners.  This paints a target on the majority of the framers of our constitution. 
The narrative would go something like this: "They were slave owners and therefore evil men.  The fruits of their ideas can be nothing other than evil therefore we need to shred that constitution they wrote and craft something more politically correct, something drafted by an international consortium."
Mt. Rushmore must be re-carved to represent Big Brother flanked by Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum and one major nation (your choice) must be excluded from the New World Order so that there will be a perpetual enemy to fuel the military industrial complex.  
Just sayin'  
John G Added Aug 17, 2017 - 4:17pm
Somebody has been absorbing Tucker Carlson's script writers.
LOLz.
Rusty Smith Added Aug 17, 2017 - 9:42pm
Dannl Yoder The police are charged with keeping us safe and preventing people who want to demonstrate to some extent from disrupting the communities normal routine.  Safety is number 1.
 
Communities often close streets for parades but generally with the presumed ok from the vast majority of the community, in fact in most places established community organizations can close the street near them for celebrations, provided they file the right permits.
 
However about the only people I know of who can successfully obtain a permit to occupy a public place other than something like a reservation in a public park, is the movie industry, and only in places where residents seem to generally agree the compensation to the city is worth more than the inconvenience.
 
Hate groups that want to do public demonstrations have to pass the same bar, they have to convince the police their gathering will be safe and generally they aren't unless the police keep the people who want to pick fights with them far away.  
 
Personally I'd like to tell the police to step aside and let the people from both sides who want to beat the tar out of each other go at it, but I think the civilized thing to do is keep them apart.  
 
The police are not out of line when they prevent fights.
Rusty Smith Added Aug 17, 2017 - 10:03pm
Rick Fontes I'm a believer in free speech but don't approve of violent behavior from either side and in this case people both sides showed up looking for a fight.
 
You must realize that allowing the community to decide will result in the removal of every monument on both sides.  Over time politics and opinions cycle, and if the people in power had the right to remove what they dislike, over the years all the monuments will be  gone.
 
I happen to think historical monuments, especially ones that are in historically memorable places, are valuable public reminders of our past.  Not every memorial needs to be a modern vision of righteousness.  When I've stood at the edge of Civil War battlefields and see statues of the opposing generals I thought it added a tremendous degree of realism that I appreciated, on both sides of the battlefield.  Those monuments put a face on the conflict, taking it from an empty field of dirt to something real.
 
The enhancement I'm talking about is not imaginary, journalists and advertisers use that power all the time to add feeling to their written statements.  This is no different.
 
The Bible doesn't admonish slavery, should we burn all the Bibles because they remind us of our ancestor's ambivalence towards that horrible institution?
Rusty Smith Added Aug 17, 2017 - 10:12pm
Gregory S. McNeill if anti protesters had not showed up looking for a fight, and been allowed to get within close proximity to the supremacist pukes, there would not have been a fight.
 
I detest what the supremacists stand for, but only have a slightly less horrible opinion of the people who who up hoping to pick a fight in public with them.  
 
If the anti protesters really wanted to deny the supremacists a GREAT DAY, they would have not fought with them because doing so handed the supremacists exactly what they wanted and is sure to inspire them and help their recruitment.  
 
The anti protesters who showed up looking for a fight are as bad as people who run outside when they see a riot on TV because it's an opportunity for them to rob and pillage local stores.  They really don't care about the cause, they just take advantage of an opportunity to do what they like doing.
Rick Fontes Added Aug 18, 2017 - 12:51pm
As West Side Story teaches us, you can't choreograph a fight scene involving the Jets without involving the Sharks.  Without regard to how many actors are in the cast there is only one director.
Gregory S. McNeill Added Aug 21, 2017 - 2:02pm
Rusty that is pathetic. Both you and Trump are wrong. The Alt-right and their ilk carried torches and shouted racist language out loud! The Nazis had done that in 1933 in Germany! Listen to what Dr. West had said and he knew Ms. Heyer! 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4i61_12SGY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPefdL-SPcY
 
 
Gregory S. McNeill Added Aug 21, 2017 - 2:03pm
Rusty,
Here are more links that prove your argument to be incorrect:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEhC4AByODE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTkQ9BzJCis
Rusty Smith Added Aug 21, 2017 - 9:14pm
All your video's proved to me is that there were bad people there and I've always said that, even in my forum topic statement.  
 
A black buddy at work recently told me he'd never get hurt in one of those scuffles because the second he sees people acting violent he leaves.  I think anyone even the most innocent bystander could get hit with a brick before realizing things went bad, but people who go there to fight even after they absolutely know it's violent are all scum on both sides.
 
The people who fought and stayed to fight more, wanted to be there and wanted to fight, and there were plenty on both sides.  
 
It's just far too easy to leave if that's not what you want.  If one of your kids went there and didn't want to get hurt or fight, what would you tell them?
 
Please be much more specific when you say I'm wrong?  What is it that I said that is "wrong".