|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Anarchism is in no way opposed to rightwing or reactionary ideals, the less violent, libertarian anarchists that do the anarcho-capitalism thing are diametrically opposed to a number of core ideals of a large swath of leftist schools of thought, namely use of collective action via government to do large-scale things and moderate the behavior of populations.
That's not to say that anti-government sentiment isn't extremely strong among some segments of the far left, rather that basic clues of association tell you that Caserta is not an anti-fascist anarchist, especially not because he's vehemently anti-government because being anti-government is in no way dissociated from right-wing sympathies. Antifa doesn't make youtube videos with the Gadsden Flag in the background.
Add in the history of the Michigan Militia and cultural background of weapons toting 2nd Amendment "don't take our freedoms" Midwestern folk, and its really not even close lol. We're talking the cultural progeny of Timothy McVeigh after all.
Here's some reporting from a local Michigan site, they collected some of Caserta's social media stuff.
|
On October 09 2020 10:01 farvacola wrote:
Anarchism is in no way opposed to rightwing or reactionary ideals, the less violent, libertarian anarchists that do the anarcho-capitalism thing are diametrically opposed to a number of core ideals of a large swath of leftist schools of thought, namely use of collective action via government to do large-scale things and moderate the behavior of populations.
That's not to say that anti-government sentiment isn't extremely strong among some segments of the far left, rather that basic clues of association tell you that Casserta is not an anti-fascist anarchist, especially not because he's vehemently anti-government because being anti-government is in no way dissociated from right-wing sympathy.
Add in the history of the Michigan Militia and cultural background of weapons toting 2nd Amendment "don't take our freedoms" Midwestern folk, and its really not even close lol. We're talking the cultural progeny of Timothy McVeigh after all.
Good points. I understand that these militia types are strongly anti-government and that extremes on both sides can share that view. I suppose I don't quite see exactly where that untangles with right-wing sentiment, and I'm not trying to convince anyone that they're wrong about it, but rather help me to understand it if my reasoning is misguided.
|
Some of it is emergent stuff, the Boogaloo Boys in particular are a recent development and there seems to be some variety in terms of what exactly its adherents think it stands for. Exremism can be an awful kind of melting pot in that way.
Some things to look for are attitude towards government and the rule of law, use of localized national identity as an organizing concept, and attitude towards the use of weapons in public. I know a few freegan antifa kids who love guns, but they would literally never march in the street alongside anyone wearing fatigues or bearing historical American symbols.
As for whether some of the blame for this lies with the American political right, well, the alignment is certainly there with attitudes towards coronavirus measures and Trump's tweet that Michigan be liberated; in general, the left is big on increased government right now, and the right is not (aside from all of the CARES Act stuff and all the typical hypocrisy like huge military and all that lol). Yes, Caserta professes that he dislikes all government and Trump, but I don't think that means he can't be encouraged by Trump's words.
|
On October 09 2020 09:51 NrG.Bamboo wrote:Hm, I just listened to one of these "far-right militia" fellas' (Brandon Caserta) videos talking for about 30 minutes. Can't really speak for the others included in the scheme, but this dude is certainly an anarchist rather than right-wing. It's mostly him speaking to the immorality of any and all government and disregarding their authority based on initiation of force, which is all the government does. He talks against Trump and points out that he is not a friend to those who support him, and refers to Trump as a tyrant. He points out that it makes no sense to allow certain people to enforce rules and initiate violence upon the rest; equates supporting the police to supporting slavery-enforcement. Rejects the existence of laws and the legitimacy of democracy to pick a ruling class. Supporting/participating in the government in is supporting/participating in slavery; legitimizing authority is legitimizing slavery. His personal motivation doesn't seem to be that of limited government, but rather no government. His stuff was yanked off of YouTube rather quickly so I'm just assuming TL wouldn't want me posting links here; research if you don't trust my summary :p I think there are a few clips on twitter if you don't want to listen to the whole thing (it's sort of interesting, not necessarily compelling.) Thought it might be worth pointing out that this guy didn't seem to be operating as a supporter of right wing-ideals. That said, again, I can't speak for the motivations of the others in the group (or the group as a whole,) but maybe the label of right-wing extremism isn't the appropriate title. If Caserta's views reflect that of the others involved, it seems possible to me that these people were against what they saw as abuse of power by the governor, police, and government as a whole rather than attacking leftist ideals specifically. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought it interesting enough to bring up. And before anyone thinks I'm defending the far-right: I'm not. I don't support that bullshit. I'll attach the articles posted by Erasme and DPB in the presidential debate thread for reference (I was about to post there before it got locked xd): https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/10/08/feds-thwart-militia-plot-kidnap-michigan-gov-gretchen-whitmer/5922301002/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-michigan-whitmer-idUSKBN26T2ZF
It looked more anarchist than anything right wing to me. That’s one of the failures of the classification dipole. Opposition to a left wing tyrant does not make one right wing, particularly if the “philosophy” is equally applied had she been a pro-lockdown Republican in the seat.
Anarchist flag in the background to boot. And the targeting of police officers to kill is not properly right-wing.
|
|
|
On October 09 2020 10:39 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2020 09:50 WarSame wrote:
Yeah, it's weird GH. I still think you're a bit out there sometimes, but I'm slowly coming to see the truth in a lot of what you say. It's like I'm moving from a JimmiC default Canadian centre-left position to maybe a bit more left, with more distrust in the political process.
This is especially true of American politics. I feel like Canadian politics is still generally giving me good options in the general election, though I'm going to be giving the NDP and Green party much closer looks this time around (and I was a CPC member for their second most recent leadership race). It depends on the issue if I'm center left or not, in Canadian politics maybe but green is a little complicated on where you put them. For this thread I'm probably quite left, I'm just really pro democracy even when its incontinent or sucks.
Naturally the Canadians will tend to be left wing compared to most of the American Politics thread 
I agree with you about Greens in general, including in the US, but ours tends to squabble with the NDP over their progressive bases in Vancouver area so socially the party remains left.
It's been sad to see the decline of opinions of democracy in America. At the same time, there's been a rotting sickness in the country since probably the 90s. I think once the Russians collapsed and America remained the world's only superpower they started to compete internally much more fiercely(Gingrich) than externally, leading to a neglect of their national self-optimization. It seems like America can't complete any sort of large projects without incompetence and corruption and self-dealing. Trump is (hopefully) the culmination of this, but it's been building for a long time.
|
On October 09 2020 09:51 NrG.Bamboo wrote:
Hm, I just listened to one of these "far-right militia" fellas' (Brandon Caserta) videos talking for about 30 minutes. Can't really speak for the others included in the scheme, but this dude is certainly an anarchist rather than right-wing. It's mostly him speaking to the immorality of any and all government and disregarding their authority based on initiation of force, which is all the government does. He talks against Trump and points out that he is not a friend to those who support him, and refers to Trump as a tyrant. He points out that it makes no sense to allow certain people to enforce rules and initiate violence upon the rest; equates supporting the police to supporting slavery-enforcement. Rejects the existence of laws and the legitimacy of democracy to pick a ruling class. Supporting/participating in the government in is supporting/participating in slavery; legitimizing authority is legitimizing slavery. His personal motivation doesn't seem to be that of limited government, but rather no government.
Was he one of the leaders or what? The number of logical fallacies in this summary makes it hard to believe he could've gotten a sizable number of followers.
The bolded makes him soundslike an individualist anarchist. They're basically unicorns outside of the US.
Individualist anarchists are usually put on the right side of the spectrum, though they don't fit perfectly well on either side (think of them as extremist libertarians in belief... though it varies massively depending on the person in question). The OKC bombings are perfectly compatible with them, for instance - they have very few problems advocating or committing violence against representatives of the state because it's inherently unjust in their mind. Libertarians can be friendly with the police though, while they can't. Depending on your perspective, they're either the furthest right together with ancaps or are south on the left/right line (if chaotic neutral had a political philosophy, it would be it).
(I'm not sure why the US has so many, relatively. Their numbers a limited because, imo, there are so many logical flaws in the basic setup of the philosophy and the only notable thinker they have is Max Stirner, who can be equated with Nietzsche in how easy it is to misread him, and most of the stuff putting him with them is equivalent. They also can sound like fascists sometimes. They don't get along with other anarchists, which is uh, true of most groups of anarchists, actually, but more intense. It's negative rights vs positive rights, individual anarchists believe that no rights should ever be constrained while socialist anarchists believe that all possible rights should be granted).
The flag he has would probably answer my question for sure (each group of anarchists has their own flag... not that it's actually kept track of very well...) , but I can't find any pictures at a cursory glance through articles. Seeing a video of him, he dresses like an ancap or individualist anarchist (yes, they have styles).
|
On October 09 2020 11:31 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2020 09:51 NrG.Bamboo wrote:
Hm, I just listened to one of these "far-right militia" fellas' (Brandon Caserta) videos talking for about 30 minutes. Can't really speak for the others included in the scheme, but this dude is certainly an anarchist rather than right-wing. It's mostly him speaking to the immorality of any and all government and disregarding their authority based on initiation of force, which is all the government does. He talks against Trump and points out that he is not a friend to those who support him, and refers to Trump as a tyrant. He points out that it makes no sense to allow certain people to enforce rules and initiate violence upon the rest; equates supporting the police to supporting slavery-enforcement. Rejects the existence of laws and the legitimacy of democracy to pick a ruling class. Supporting/participating in the government in is supporting/participating in slavery; legitimizing authority is legitimizing slavery. His personal motivation doesn't seem to be that of limited government, but rather no government.
Was he one of the leaders or what? The number of logical fallacies in this summary makes it hard to believe he could've gotten a sizable number of followers. The bolded makes him soundslike an individualist anarchist. They're basically unicorns outside of the US. Individualist anarchists are usually put on the right side of the spectrum, though they don't fit perfectly well on either side (think of them as extremist libertarians in belief... though it varies massively depending on the person in question). The OKC bombings are perfectly compatible with them, for instance - they have very few problems advocating or committing violence against representatives of the state because it's inherently unjust in their mind. Libertarians can be friendly with the police though, while they can't. Depending on your perspective, they're either the furthest right together with ancaps or are south on the left/right line (if chaotic neutral had a political philosophy, it would be it). (I'm not sure why the US has so many, relatively. Their numbers a limited because, imo, there are so many logical flaws in the basic setup of the philosophy and the only notable thinker they have is Max Stirner, who can be equated with Nietzsche in how easy it is to misread him, and most of the stuff putting him with them is equivalent. They also can sound like fascists sometimes. They don't get along with other anarchists, which is uh, true of most groups of anarchists, actually, but more intense. It's negative rights vs positive rights, individual anarchists believe that no rights should ever be constrained while socialist anarchists believe that all possible rights should be granted). The flag he has would probably answer my question for sure (each group of anarchists has their own flag... not that it's actually kept track of very well...) , but I can't find any pictures at a cursory glance through articles. Seeing a video of him, he dresses like an ancap or individualist anarchist (yes, they have styles).
I'm not sure if he was a "ringleader," he was one of the six charged with conspiracy and they cite a couple of his videos. Promo guy? lol I don't know.
I didn't know there were variations in flag, that's interesting. In fact, all of this is interesting, thank you for providing insight. Pics in the spoiler.
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](https://media.breitbart.com/media/2020/10/Antifa-Suspect-Brandon-Caserta-640x480.png) ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/aHlRbeD.png) (pretty sure this is the logo of a band lol)
|
double post please forgive ;_;
|
|
|
On October 09 2020 11:52 NrG.Bamboo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2020 11:31 Nevuk wrote:On October 09 2020 09:51 NrG.Bamboo wrote:
Hm, I just listened to one of these "far-right militia" fellas' (Brandon Caserta) videos talking for about 30 minutes. Can't really speak for the others included in the scheme, but this dude is certainly an anarchist rather than right-wing. It's mostly him speaking to the immorality of any and all government and disregarding their authority based on initiation of force, which is all the government does. He talks against Trump and points out that he is not a friend to those who support him, and refers to Trump as a tyrant. He points out that it makes no sense to allow certain people to enforce rules and initiate violence upon the rest; equates supporting the police to supporting slavery-enforcement. Rejects the existence of laws and the legitimacy of democracy to pick a ruling class. Supporting/participating in the government in is supporting/participating in slavery; legitimizing authority is legitimizing slavery. His personal motivation doesn't seem to be that of limited government, but rather no government.
Was he one of the leaders or what? The number of logical fallacies in this summary makes it hard to believe he could've gotten a sizable number of followers. The bolded makes him soundslike an individualist anarchist. They're basically unicorns outside of the US. Individualist anarchists are usually put on the right side of the spectrum, though they don't fit perfectly well on either side (think of them as extremist libertarians in belief... though it varies massively depending on the person in question). The OKC bombings are perfectly compatible with them, for instance - they have very few problems advocating or committing violence against representatives of the state because it's inherently unjust in their mind. Libertarians can be friendly with the police though, while they can't. Depending on your perspective, they're either the furthest right together with ancaps or are south on the left/right line (if chaotic neutral had a political philosophy, it would be it). (I'm not sure why the US has so many, relatively. Their numbers a limited because, imo, there are so many logical flaws in the basic setup of the philosophy and the only notable thinker they have is Max Stirner, who can be equated with Nietzsche in how easy it is to misread him, and most of the stuff putting him with them is equivalent. They also can sound like fascists sometimes. They don't get along with other anarchists, which is uh, true of most groups of anarchists, actually, but more intense. It's negative rights vs positive rights, individual anarchists believe that no rights should ever be constrained while socialist anarchists believe that all possible rights should be granted). The flag he has would probably answer my question for sure (each group of anarchists has their own flag... not that it's actually kept track of very well...) , but I can't find any pictures at a cursory glance through articles. Seeing a video of him, he dresses like an ancap or individualist anarchist (yes, they have styles). I'm not sure if he was a "ringleader," he was one of the six charged with conspiracy and they cite a couple of his videos. Promo guy? lol I don't know. I didn't know there were variations in flag, that's interesting. In fact, all of this is interesting, thank you for providing insight. Pics in the spoiler. + Show Spoiler + (pretty sure this is the logo of a band lol)
That's a punk anarchist flag.
It's basically meaningless for political beliefs. It is used to indicate sympathy for underground/rebellious/counterculture movements, and is frequently seen in things like Nirvana's Smells Like Teen Spirit video. No one would have one if they didn't either want to seem very edgy, think it's stylish, or have at least some sympathies, but it isn't a true flag anymore.
It was spread in the 1970s by Crass (an anarcho-syndicalist pacifist punk band) and was originally based on the IWA symbol from the 19th century, and was distinctly against many of the things he outlined. But it's spread throughout the punk movement as stylistic thing, so it's no surprise to find it misappropriated.
Spoiler : example of the original :
+ Show Spoiler +
In case you're wondering, the A obviously stands for anarchy, but the circle is supposed to represent togetherness, and combined they are supposed to represent looking for togetherness with anarchy. It's commonly used by pacifists like Crass, who are explicitly against violence in all forms. It should probably only be interpreted that way in the non-stylized form though - the punk flag makes it jagged and red, making it look edgier and stylish.
Here's the small little article on it and it's history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_symbolism#Circle-A
Each version of anarchism has its own flag. The only commonality is a pure black flag, which was one of the original versions and can be thought of as generic. Red flags were the first used, but died out after 1917 for well, obvious reasons. A red and black flag (divided diagonally) is probably the most commonly used by socialist anarchists (ie leftist anarchists). Individualists are cornflower blue and black. There are also half black stars that can be used instead of flags, but those are super obscure.
There are tons of varieties though, check out the collection from wikipedia if you're really interested.
Warning : big picture
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Didn't know anarchists were such flag nerds. That's kind of funny.
|
Well, what kind of anarchist would let others tell them what flag to fly? Logically every anarchist has their own flag design.
|
That makes sense. It's just seeing those well aligned flags all similar but each with their neat little colour code is kind of funny, considering 😆
|
Flags are simple, cheap, and effective propaganda. It's why every country and so many groups of all stripes have them.
|
This thread wouldn't be such a lefty echo chamber, if the US wasn't so deeply right wing compared to the rest of the western world. If I wanted to be considered right wing in the US, i'd have to vote lepen or further right since she doesn't want to build the kingdom of God in France.
|
On October 09 2020 17:44 GreenHorizons wrote:
Flags are simple, cheap, and effective propaganda. It's why every country and so many groups of all stripes have them.
They are symbols, not propaganda.
Just putting there the meaning of propaganda from the Webster dictionary:
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause
also : a public action having such an effect
Hardly see how flags qualify.
|
Northern Ireland27236 Posts
On October 09 2020 11:31 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2020 09:51 NrG.Bamboo wrote:
Hm, I just listened to one of these "far-right militia" fellas' (Brandon Caserta) videos talking for about 30 minutes. Can't really speak for the others included in the scheme, but this dude is certainly an anarchist rather than right-wing. It's mostly him speaking to the immorality of any and all government and disregarding their authority based on initiation of force, which is all the government does. He talks against Trump and points out that he is not a friend to those who support him, and refers to Trump as a tyrant. He points out that it makes no sense to allow certain people to enforce rules and initiate violence upon the rest; equates supporting the police to supporting slavery-enforcement. Rejects the existence of laws and the legitimacy of democracy to pick a ruling class. Supporting/participating in the government in is supporting/participating in slavery; legitimizing authority is legitimizing slavery. His personal motivation doesn't seem to be that of limited government, but rather no government.
Was he one of the leaders or what? The number of logical fallacies in this summary makes it hard to believe he could've gotten a sizable number of followers. The bolded makes him soundslike an individualist anarchist. They're basically unicorns outside of the US. Individualist anarchists are usually put on the right side of the spectrum, though they don't fit perfectly well on either side (think of them as extremist libertarians in belief... though it varies massively depending on the person in question). The OKC bombings are perfectly compatible with them, for instance - they have very few problems advocating or committing violence against representatives of the state because it's inherently unjust in their mind. Libertarians can be friendly with the police though, while they can't. Depending on your perspective, they're either the furthest right together with ancaps or are south on the left/right line (if chaotic neutral had a political philosophy, it would be it). (I'm not sure why the US has so many, relatively. Their numbers a limited because, imo, there are so many logical flaws in the basic setup of the philosophy and the only notable thinker they have is Max Stirner, who can be equated with Nietzsche in how easy it is to misread him, and most of the stuff putting him with them is equivalent. They also can sound like fascists sometimes. They don't get along with other anarchists, which is uh, true of most groups of anarchists, actually, but more intense. It's negative rights vs positive rights, individual anarchists believe that no rights should ever be constrained while socialist anarchists believe that all possible rights should be granted). The flag he has would probably answer my question for sure (each group of anarchists has their own flag... not that it's actually kept track of very well...) , but I can't find any pictures at a cursory glance through articles. Seeing a video of him, he dresses like an ancap or individualist anarchist (yes, they have styles).
It took many a moon, but finally my boy Max Stirner getting a shout out. Spooks yo.
They do seem rather more prevalent in the States than elsewhere, to a huge degree. I suppose the US is more culturally/structurally right libertarian-leaning to begin with, so it's probably fertile ground from which right-libertarianism is taken to its extremes vs other places? Would be my only instinctive guess anyway.
|
Northern Ireland27236 Posts
On October 09 2020 16:34 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Didn't know anarchists were such flag nerds. That's kind of funny.
Go look up Ego balls or whatever they're call, tons and tons of amusing comics featuring anarchists of various kinds bickering. Not sure where you'd actually find them when hunting, they're usually something I just come across on Facebook
|
If one checks out the third video in the Bridge article I posted above, one can see two iterations of the Gadsden flag in the background of Caserta's bedroom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2a/FRE-AIT.svg/1024px-FRE-AIT.svg.png)
![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Anarchist_flags_and_stars-2019.svg)
