right wing violence

Violent protesting:
  • Right-wing: *runs over people protesting*
  • Right-wing: *has been killing/bombing pro-choice for decades*
  • Right-wing: *has massive armed standoffs with government*
  • Right-wing: *still celebrates the KKK and southern secession*
  • Right-wing: *elects president who promoted political violence*
  • Right-Wing: Left-wing protesters are too violent! They're a threat to the Republic:

The next right-wing “libertarian” that advocates the NAP, and all its illogical, bullshit, bourgeois, classist, reactionary, evil connotations in front of me, is getting fucking decked. I’m done.

Anyone who supports the “non-aggression principle” needs to be aggressively and violently shown the error of their ways - or otherwise stopped from perpetuating or spreading such ideological filth.

Labour MP Jo Cox has died after a white male radical far-right extremist shouted ‘Britain First!’, shot her 3 times and stabbed and kicked her as she lay on the ground.

The media are portraying the white male attacker as a “loner” and a neighbour states “he is a quiet man”.

Fuck these double standards. I’m not doing this.

Jo Cox wanted to find an ethical solution to the situation in Syria and supported the ‘Remain’ campaign for the EU Referendum.

She was brutally murdered on the streets and she leaves behind two children and a husband.

I don’t want to hear the excuses.

Call the attacker what he is: A TERRORIST.

He’s not an inch better than ISIS and we must treat him like that.

omgexactlychoppedstudent  asked:

Aren't most of your posts about social justice like this recent one about trump supporters just Whataboutism? Like, the thing you rebloged multiple times about when mocking people who use it? Aren't you doing the exact same fucking thing as people who say "Well America has problems but WHAT ABOUT X"? And as a result, aren't you just as insufferable as the people you reblog as insufferable?

You know I’m tempted to respond to this with nothing more than the dril tweet that seems to perfectly encompass the entire “YOU’RE JUST AS BAD AS THE RIGHT” line of reasoning:

But more to the point, you seem to be under the impression that any attempt I make at mocking reactionaries is intended to intellectually engage with them. What you fail to see is that when I sarcastically add “leftists are violent thugs” to a post documenting right-wing violence, I’m not actually trying to debunk that argument, nor am I implying that all right-wingers are violent. I’m simply laughing at the cognitive dissonance it takes to think leftists are inherently violent because of a few anti-fascist demonstrations but not think right-wingers are inherently violent because of right-wing terrorism.

If I were actually trying to argue the point, I could put forth a more nuanced response. But sometimes there’s no good reason to bother arguing, especially if you’re just preaching to the choir and not really likely to change anyone’s mind. Sometimes it’s better to just laugh at the ridiculousness of it.

Is that “insufferable?” Maybe, but I don’t really care if I’m disrespectful to reactionaries when the past year has proven that they’re utterly dedicated to making the world worse for everyone else.

anonymous asked:

One question, through: if the left making anybody from the right-wing to not talk is censorship, then what would the people from the right-wing who don't let people from the left-wing to talk doing? Or the second thing is good? Because if you think so, you're providing an example of "it's only good when our side does it".

Name a single college campus where right wing students used violence to stop left wing speakers.

It’s horrible when either side does it. But only one side is doing it vastly more and with much more violence than the other side.

Politically-motivated crime hits record high in Germany amid tensions over refugee crisis, Turkey and terrorism

The level of politically-motivated crime in Germany has hit an all-time high as the left and right wing clash over the refugee crisis, terror attacks and the coming election.

Thomas de Maizière, the German interior minister, said total of 41,500 political crimes - 4,300 of them violent - recorded last year was “unacceptable”.

“We will use the full force of the law again those who reject our legal system,” he added, in an apparent reference to the radical Reichsbürger anti-government movement.

“A reduction in the number of politically-motivated crime is not expected. Security agencies are prepared for upcoming events including the G20 meeting in Hamburg and the election campaign and will take decisive action when necessary.”

German crime figures for 2016 show the vast majority were committed by the right rather than the left, with right-wing violence up by 14 per cent and the left down by a quarter.

The refugee crisis is among the issues increasing tensions, with pro and anti-migrant protesters clashing at demonstrations and extremists attacking asylum seeker accommodation.

A police car was set on fire during protests in Cologne on Saturday, as thousands of demonstrators converged on the anti-immigration Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party conference in Cologne.

Attacks on refugee accommodation fell for the first time since 2014 last year but still stood at around 1,000 incidents, with the interior ministry calling the fact that “those who have fled terror and war in their homelands are the focus of right-wing violence” shocking.

Violations of immigration law including illegal entry into Germany and overstaying visas contributed to an increase in crimes committed by foreign citizens, which rose by 4.6 per cent, constituting 40 per cent of all suspects.

But when immigration and asylum offences were excluded, the proportion of non-German suspects fell to 30 per cent.

Mr de Maizière said the “disproportionate” rise in crime by those classified as immigrants, including asylum seekers, refugees, illegal immigrants and people awaiting deportation, had risen to 174,4000 cases – up 53 per cent.

“As unpleasant as these figures are as a whole, they validate our course, to clearly make distinctions according to each individual’s need for protection,” he added.

“Those who need no protection have no right to remain in our country, and those who commit serious crimes have forfeited their right of residence.

“But neither will we allow all refugees living with us to be put under suspicion.

“The vast majority live alongside us, with our values and the rules of a peaceful and democratic co-existence.”

Mr de Maizière said one reason for the high crime rate among asylum seekers and refugees – who committed 9 per cent of all offences in 2016 - was likely to be their accommodation situation, seeing fights break out in makeshift shelters and overcrowded rooms.

Right-wing political parties and movements have blamed Angela Merkel’s decision to open Germany’s borders to refugees in 2015 – sparking the arrival of more than a million asylum seekers – for a series of deadly terror attacks and mass sexual assaults in Cologne.

An Afghan asylum seeker injured four people in an axe attack on a train in July, while days later a Syrian refugee blew himself up in Ansbach.

A rejected Tunisian asylum seeker who Germany had attempted to deport killed 12 people in a lorry rampage at a Christmas market in Berlin. All three attacks were linked to Isis.

There was also a significant increase in crime motivated by “imported” ideologies – up 66 per cent - including Isis supporters and jihadis, and over Turkey and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) terrorist group.

Federal prosecutors have initiated numerous cases against suspected Islamists and former foreign fighters from Isis, al-Qaeda and the Taliban, as well as against suspected spies acting on behalf of Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government in Turkey.

A referendum on expanding the President’s powers has increased tensions, as well as a failed coup in July and the ongoing crackdown on Kurdish separatists, political dissidents and alleged supporters of exiled cleric Fethullah Gulen.

When excluding immigration-related crimes, the largest group of non-German suspects were Turks, followed by Romanians, Poles and Syrians.

Figures from the German interior ministry also showed that violent crime had increased by 7 per cent, but a spokesperson emphasised that with immigration offences excluded the overall national crime rate fell.

I’m probs too down on internet activism but I’m just so fucking tired of people turning their social capital game into radicalism and vice versa. I’m so fucking tired of seeing posts that imply the real way to stop Trump is to reblog some post or who think that saying kill Nazis on their microblog gives them license to talk over the people targeted by right wing violence

There’s an acceptance now of the idea that the threat from jihadi terrorism in the United States has been overblown. And there’s a belief that the threat of Right-wing, antigovernment violence has been underestimated

Dr. John G. Horgan, who studies terrorism at the University of Massachusetts Lowell

Read more: America’s Biggest Terror Threat Is Not Who You Think


My Parents Open Carry is Merica’s #1 book. Hundreds and Hundreds of copies have been sold world wide. Why just look at some of the reviews the book has gotten on Amazon.com. There are already talks of multiple sequels in the works. Here are some of the tentative titles:

“My Daddy loves Me and his AR-15”
“Grandmas and Gun Safety”
“Uncle Jed Joined a Militia”
“Jack and Jill go shooting together”
“Date Night at the Gun range”
“Back to School Gun shopping”
“Timmy’s first Glock”
“How to explain to your friends why Daddy shot someone….again.”

Orlando shooting angles you haven’t thought of yet:

If republicans are so concerned with stopping Isis, but unwilling to alter gun laws after a man pledged allegiance to Isis before committing mass murder, then republicans are A-OK selling guns to Isis.


The Taksim Square massacre relates to the incidents on 1 May, 1977, the international Labour Day on Taksim Square in Istanbul, Turkey. The event came within the scope of the wave of political violence in Turkey of the late 1970s.

Rumours that Labour Day 1977 would turn out bloody were circulated by the Turkish press before the rally, once again organized by DISK. The leadership of DISK known to support Workers Party of Turkey, the Socialist Workers Party of Turkey and the then-illegal Communist Party of Turkey had banned the participation of the so-called Maoist block (at the time acting under names such as the Liberation of the People, the Path of the People and Union of the People). It was expected that these groups would clash with each other.

The estimates on the number of participants in the Labour Day celebrations on Taksim Square in 1977 is usually given as 500,000 citizens. Many participants and in particular the so-called Maoist block had not even entered the square when shots were heard. Most witnesses stated that they came from the building of the water supply company (Sular İdaresi) and the Marmara Hotel, the tallest building in Istanbul in 1977. Subsequently the security forces intervened with armoured vehicles making much noise with their sirens and explosives. They also hosed the crowd with pressurized water. Most casualties were caused by the panic that this intervention created.

The figures on the casualties vary between 34 and 42 persons killed and 126 and 220 persons being injured.

None of the perpetrators were caught and brought to justice. After the incident, over 500 demonstrators were detained, and 98 were indicted. Among the 17 defendants, who had been put in pre-trial detention, three were released before the first hearing and nine were released at the first hearing on 7 July 1977. The remaining prisoners were released soon afterwards.

Since the beginning, the CIA has been suspected of involvement. After the incident, Ali Kocaman, chair of the trade union Oleyis, stated that police officers and Americans had been in the Intercontinental Hotel that had been closed to the public for that day. Bülent Uluer, the then Secretary General of the Revolutionary Youth Federation said on 2 May 1977: “Most victims were among us. About 15 of our friends died. This was a plan of the CIA, but not the beginning nor the end. To solve these incidents, one has to look at it from the angle.”

If we say that the ends justify the means, how do we know we’re really on the side of good? We all say we fight for equality and freedom: anti-racists, white supremacists, Democrats, Republicans, feminists, MRAs, LGBT activists, Right-Wing Evangelicals, abortion-rights activists, pro-life activists. What separates us from what we say we stand for and what we actually stand for are our actions.

MRAs who say that they’re the ones truly fighting for equality show their truth when they threaten women with violence. Right-Wing Evangelicals who say they’re protecting their religious freedom show their truth when they work to suppress the religious freedoms of others. But in social justice, the ends don’t justify the means: The means are everything. There is nothing more than what we are actually doing right now. If our pursuit of justice means that a few innocent people are subjected to injustice due to our actions, can we actually say that it’s justice we are fighting for?