As news came in from Pittsburgh yesterday many Americans, after their initial horror, had one of those increasingly familiar moments when what mattered most was the identity of the person who killed eleven people in a synagogue. Many no doubt felt relief when the killer proved to be a white man. For some, the worst case scenario would have been for the killer to have been a person of color, a Muslim and a recent immigrant. That would have been bad news, according to this line of thinking, because it would have been used to vindicate suspicion toward those categories or justify harsher measures against them. People on the other side of the political divide no doubt felt the same way. Now that both the Pittsburgh shooter and the would-be mail bomber who targeted liberal celebrities have been identified tentatively as almost stereotypical angry white men, many right-wingers fear understandably that these crimes will be used to discredit the Trump movement and the Republican party close to the congressional elections. Their fears are justified, as Democrats will most likely treat Republicans the way they wouldn't want Muslims or migrants to be treated had circumstances have been different. It's clear already that they want to hold the President rhetorically responsible for the past week's crimes, especially since it appears that the Pittsburgh shooter's anti-Semitism was exacerbated by anger at a Jewish organization that assists refugees.
On the far right, the defense mechanism against anticipated assertions of collective guilt is to spread a counternarrative portraying the mail bomb attempts, for starters, as "false flag" attacks, actually perpetrated by the other side specifically to discredit an entire movement or party. I haven't yet seen anyone claiming that the Pittsburgh amoklauf was a false-flag shooting, but modern times have taught us that sufficiently motivated people are capable of believing anything. False-flag paranoia isn't exclusive to the right, of course; that thinking dates back to the anarchist habit of blaiming all discrediting actions on agents provocateurs in their midst. It just seems to be more popular lately among those who seem to see humanity itself as a conspiracy against their liberties. False-flag thinking in general is grounded on a justified resistance to sweeping assertions of collective responsibility after individual atrocities. Donald Trump is no more personally responsible for the past week's crimes than the Muslim who lives down the street is responsible for the crimes of any self-styled IS soldier. If he has any responsibility as a person or a President, it's not to admit guilt but to warn against anyone claiming his kind of populist (if not nativist) nationalism as an entitlement to kill those who seem subversively un-American. And if there's a false flag flying anywhere in this country it's the one that presents the traditions and prejudices of one group of people as the standard of the nation itself.
5 comments:
The Pittsburgh shooter was identified in the press as anti-Semite, which makes this a hate crime of the worst order. The mail bomber? Well, I wrote a piece of my own a few hours before he was caught on Friday, and figured him to be an extremist who thought Trump would approve of his actions.
The real question is, when will this nonsense end?
It's funny that you mention the shooter was an anti-semite, since the koran preaches anti-semitism, yet no one seems to hold that against islam, the religion based on "the most perfect of books". The koran also preaches homophobia, misogyny and that women are not equal to men, which is why they only get to inherit half of what their male siblings inherit; their testimony is only worth half that of a man's in a court of law, and wives are forced to walk behind their husbands, not beside them.
Also, who give you, or anyone else the "right" to decide who is worthy of hate? Any group of people who refuse to fully assimilate - including interbreeding - should be denied entry into ANY nation that actually gives a damn about its future.
I find it ironic that during the 2016 election, the recount vote in Pittsburgh (or was it Phili) had to be stopped when it became apparent that more people had voted for Clinton than were registered to vote.
The right's continued attempts at voter suppression are bad enough. The left's counter - allowing multiple vote or allowing illegal aliens and non-citizens to vote is tantamount to treason.
Finally, the "racism" in this country is nothing compared to that in many other countries - especially most of Africa and most islamic countries. The preference for being around one's "own kind" is part of human nature. And, given how much of the rest of the world feels about Americans, it's pretty fucking hypocritical to lambaste American right-wingers, as if they were the only racists on the planet. Human nature is human nature and, goddammit, there are some groups of people on this planet who deserve nothing more than hatred and contempt.
By the way, you do all understand the shooter was a Clinton supporter, yes?
Post a Comment