Days of Rage

“People have completely forgotten that in 1972 we had over nineteen hundred domestic bombings in the United States.” — Max Noel, FBI (ret.)

Recently, I had my head torn off by a book: Bryan Burrough’s Days of Rage, about the 1970s underground. It’s the most important book I’ve read in a year. So I did a series of running tweetstorms about it, and Clark asked me if he could collect them for posterity. I’ve edited them slightly for editorial coherence.

Days of Rage is important, because this stuff is forgotten and it shouldn’t be. The 1970s underground wasn’t small. It was hundreds of people becoming urban guerrillas. Bombing buildings: the Pentagon, the Capitol, courthouses, restaurants, corporations. Robbing banks. Assassinating police. People really thought that revolution was imminent, and thought violence would bring it about.

One thing that Burrough returns to in Days of Rage, over and over and over, is how forgotten so much of this stuff is. Puerto Rican separatists bombed NYC like 300 times, killed people, shot up Congress, tried to kill POTUS (Truman). Nobody remembers it.

Also, people don’t want to remember how much leftist violence was actively supported by mainstream leftist infrastructure. I’ll say this much for righty terrorist Eric Rudolph: the sonofabitch was caught dumpster-diving in a rare break from hiding in the woods. During his fugitive days, Weatherman’s Bill Ayers was on a nice houseboat paid for by radical lawyers.

Most ’70s of the bombings were done as protest actions. Unlike today’s jihadists, ’70s underground didn’t try to max body count. And ’70s papers didn’t really give a shit. A Puerto Rican group bombed 2 theaters in the Bronx, injuring eleven, in 1970. NYT gave it 6 paragraphs.

Protest bombings started on college campuses. The guy who moved them off-campus was a dude named Sam Melville. Melville was an older radical (mid-30s). He’d thought idly about bombings before, but in February ’69 he hooked up with two Quebecois separatists on the run. Melville was fascinated by their knowledge of revolutionary tactics. He admired them so much, he even drove them to the airport so they could hijack a plane to Cuba.

Logical next step for Melville: emulate them. Specifically, find an explosives warehouse, steal dynamite, start a bombing campaign against United Fruit. Except United Fruit had moved their warehouse, so he bombed a tugboat company instead. Whoops. Next: a bank, injuring 20. A bombing spree ensued, but the FBI had an informer, and Melville was busted red-handed with a sack full of bombs. He became a hero to the movement, and later a martyr: he was one of the inmates shot in the Attica uprising.

After Sam Melville, bombings were A Thing.

One thing Burrough makes clear: the 1970s underground was not primarily focused on Vietnam. It was domestic. Focused on the black cause. Burrough traces black radicalism through guys like Robert Williams, Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael, H. Rap Brown, and Huey Newton, but for me this particular thread really takes off when it gets to Eldridge Cleaver, whom I haven’t read and really feel I should.

Cleaver, born in Arkansas, moved to California, attained his fame based on two things: 1) he was a rapist and 2) he could write. Leftists have this weird thing about deifying criminals who can write. Norman Mailer and Jack Henry Abbot being the most famous example. In Cleaver’s case, he viewed the rape of white women by a black dude like himself as a revolutionary act.

Cleaver wrote to a radical attorney, impressed her, and seduced her; she secured his release & promptly set him up with a gig at RAMPARTS. White radicals fell hard for Eldridge Cleaver. This became an trend, part of a couple of uneasy dichotomies that you see a bunch of.

Example #1: Huey Newton, Malcolm X used the idea of violent resistance mainly as a recruiting tool. Eldridge Cleaver believed that shit.

Example #2: Some white leftists (like SLA) worship black revolutionaries, crave their leadership. Others (like the Weathermen) want to lead.

Cleaver hooked up with the Black Panthers, so we’ll see him again when we talk about them. For now, let’s look at Weatherman.

The Weathermen (technically, the name of the group was Weatherman, singular) came out of a group called Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). SDS was a college organization with a bunch of campus chapters. That meant existing machinery that worked, and membership numbers. A fantastic resource, if you want to mine it to build a guerilla movement.

SDS started radicalizing in ’66. By ’67, Burrough notes, an SDS leader is saying in the New York Times, “We are working to build a guerilla force in an urban environment.” He backed down quickly, but the genie was out. And then 1968 happened, and things went completely batshit.

You have to understand: in 1968, many radicals absolutely believed that the United States was getting ready to collapse. One Weatherman puts it: “We actually believed there was going to be a revolution. We believed 3rd World countries would rise up and cause crises that would bring down the industrialized West, and we believed it was going to happen tomorrow, or maybe the day after tomorrow, like 1976.”

They believed the revolution was imminent. BELIEVED IT. Like Alex Jones’s audience believes in chemtrails. That level. Absolute, apocalyptic. The SDS got angrier and angrier, and wound up doing an occupation at Columbia University, which got attention. At the same time, they read up on the foco theory of Che’s buddy Regis Debray: that small guerrilla groups could overthrow the US.

If you think this sounds completely insane and crazy, you’re absolutely right. But think about it this way: who’s in SDS leadership?

SDS leadership is disproportionately well-off Jewish kids at elite universities. The kind of people who create Facebook.

Well, in 1968 you can’t go to the Bay Area & create a killer app, so if you want to disrupt stuff you literally have to start a revolution. And that’s the equation: Paranoid fervor of chemtrail-sniffers + Silicon Valley’s faith in its ability to change the world = the Weather Underground.

When it shakes out, two of the big SDS movers and shakers are John “JJ” Jacobs and Bernadine Dorne. Their goal: to take over SDS entirely. Because, remember, organization is critical. SDS is a nationwide organization. And college campuses are receptive to radical messages.

How receptive? In fall of 1968, there were 41 bombings and arson cases on college campuses. We’re not talking letters under doors or vandalism, here. We’re talking about Molotov cocktails setting shit on fire. Here’s how radical SDS was: Burrough notes that Weatherman’s opponents for leadership in SDS elections were “Progressive Labor,” who were literal Maoists. To distinguish themselves, Weatherman called for white radicals to live like John Brown: ie, to kill the enemies of black liberty.

The election was nuts; Weatherman literally expelled their opponents from the party before the vote, so SDS split. But Weatherman occupied the national office, which meant they could evaluate SDS members as potential recruits.

The FBI was up SDS’s ass, and Weatherman’s. They harassed the core cadre. Beat them. Threatened them. This does not dissuade revolutionaries. Weatherman started doing crazy stuff with SDS: street brawls, public nudity, sexual orgies, ordering established couples to break up. If you think it sounds like a cult, you’re right. This is literally cult indoctrination stuff. They were remaking people, seeking the hardest of hardcore.

The Black Panthers, erstwhile allies, thought Weatherman was nuts. But Weatherman, despite pro-black rhetoric, didn’t care. (Weatherman’s pro-black rhetoric was mainly Phariseeism, done to win acclaim from other whites. Basically, they’re Tim Wise.)

Just to skim through some of the stuff Burroughs addresses: Weatherman’s Bernadine Dohrn goes to Cuba, meets a North Vietnamese delegation, and literally discusses forming an American VC (!!!). Weatherman-controlled SDS chapters around the country are taking over classrooms, running through schools yelling, promoting Days of Rage. As commies, Weatherman is into in fomenting revolt among the working class. Their problem, they keep discovering, is that working class wants to beat the shit out of them.

But Weatherman kept molding their people. They did Maoist “criticism/self-criticism” sessions, lambasting people for weaknesses. If you think the Maoist self-criticism technique sounds like it bears a resemblance to privilege workshops, you’re not wrong. But Weatherman went farther.

They planned to get thousands of people in a massive protest: October 8, 1969, the Days of Rage. But only a couple hundred showed up, so they decided to turn being small into an asset. Weatherman abolished SDS, and went underground.

At about the time they were doing this, the Chicago police stormed Fred Hampton’s apartment and shot him to death in his sleep. Bernardine Dohrn’s reaction to Hampton’s murder included (infamously) praise for the Manson family murder of Sharon Tate.

It’s about this point where you would think even the most dedicated of hard leftists would realize that things are going off the rails.

But Weatherman is locked in, and getting increasingly insular and cultish. Eventually, there are maybe 150 Weathermen left out of all of SDS. And now they turn to a new organization: the underground, which offered (among other things) a market for new identities. If you’re thinking “hey, I bet that market has something to do with Vietnam-era draft dodgers,” spot-on. They established covers.

And then they started bombing.

Bill Ayers claimed that Weatherman never meant to hurt anyone; this is absolutely a lie. Their first bombing (which they never officially claimed, but which members admitted to Burrough) was a police shift change in Berkeley. Weatherman remains the prime suspect in a police station bombing in the Haight that killed a police officer, though they deny this. In 1970, Weatherman planned to kill a bunch of people at a dance at Fort Dix… but instead blew up their own NYC safehouse in a work accident.

This up-close encounter with death made Weatherman realize they had no stomach for it, and they decided to not try to kill people anymore. (Okay, they did try to kidnap a Rockefeller, but they fucked that up and couldn’t find their victim. Because they were shit.)

Weatherman is facing a few problems at this point: 1) they’re on the run 2) flower children are now dominant in the movement, not hard left 3) people are less supportive of bombings after a postdoc was killed by a Wisconsin car bombing of a university math building that did army research 4) as Burrough very amusingly points out, Americans had decided they actually liked the counterculture in parts: they liked the music and the fashion and a lot of them discovered they liked weed; what they didn’t care about were the radical politics — i.e., literally the only thing Weatherman was trying to sell them.

So Weatherman tried to suck up to the flower children by helping Timothy Leary (doing 10 years for 2 joints) escape from prison and to Algiers. They thought about freeing Huey Newton, but Leary was in minimum security and Newton was in max and WELP (Newton was free soon, anyway).

But none of it mattered. Nobody cared.

Weatherman had fucked themselves. They’d abandoned the Black Panthers, who now looked down on them. They were leading nobody. They could have made a difference with the organization of SDS, but they’d set it on fire to build Weatherman. And now they’d decided they weren’t going to kill people any more.

So if you’re a radical who’s willing to kill, but decide you won’t… what does that leave? How long can you keep bombing bathrooms until it gets boring? Well, Weatherman is about to find out. Enter the long suck.

A reminder: during this period Weatherman is being hunted by the FBI. So how are they staying fed, sheltered, alive? Part of it is fake I.D.s. The other part of Weatherman staying alive and free is: they are being funded and supported by the National Lawyers’ Guild.

I just want to emphasize this: radical lawyers are literally giving fugitive domestic terrorists who are still bombing money and support.

And it’s harder for hippies to sneak bombs into places. What’s great cover? Parents with children. Weatherman used radical lawyers’ kids. Dohrn actually convinced a radical lawyer’s wife to leave her husband and take the kids and go under with the Weather Underground.

Weatherman bombed the Pentagon in ’72, but by 1974, they’re fighting among themselves, arguing about feminism (hence their name change to Weather Underground). And this is where Weather Underground becomes incredibly relevant to 2016 again: because they decided to re-enter mainstream politics. To do this, they decided, they would take over the radical left, and use that as wedge/entry point to change society.

This was the plan: 1) Publish a manifesto (Prairie Fire) 2) Make an aboveground group, the Prairie Fire Distribution Committee — not Weather! oh, no! not Weather! — no, just people who admired Weather 3) Turn the PFDC into a permanent group, the PF Organizing Committee 4) Hold a PFOC conference to unite the entire radical left under PFOC 5) Weather’s people deals with their legal issues, then officially take PFOC over, ta-dah!

Weather prints Prairie Fire themselves, distributes thousands of copies to radical organizations and bookstores, does bombings to promote it. This is, Burrough notes, a pretty impressive achievement just in terms of logistics, especially considering they’re on the run from the FBI.

Everything goes smoothly in Weather’s plan until the PFOC conference happens, which looks stunningly like what we’re seeing emerge in today’s Democratic party politics. The white leftist elites (Weather) are stunned to discover that the diverse radicals (black, American Indian, Puerto Rican) they’ve imagined leading actually have opinions of their own, and perfectly rational desires for their own power, and no desire to be ruled by Weather’s upper-crust radicals.

One of Burrough’s Weather interviewees notes that she was very upset and rattled to continually be called racist. This was before white leftists started to unpack their invisible knapsacks and bewail their whiteness as original sin. She couldn’t grasp it.

In the end, Weather was ignominously expelled from their own conference by a Communist who had been one of their former members. (Said Commie later got arrested himself by the Feds when he tried to start a bombing campaign of his own).

Meanwhile, the DOJ, searching FBI files in response to an unrelated civil rights lawsuit, found evidence of black bag jobs and illegal wiretapping against Weather Underground. So at the end of all this, who faces legal trouble? Not Weather. The FBI. Not big trouble, mind. The FBI guys got fined for the black bag jobs against Weatherman. They served no jail time, and President Reagan pardoned them in April 1981.

In the end, the Weather’s fugitives turned themselves in with little trouble. To give you an idea: Bill Ayers was scott-free. Cathy Wilkerson did a year. Bernardine Dohrn got three years probation and a $1500 fine. The radical lawyers, accessories to Weather’s bombings? Nada. Zip. Zero.

They did pretty well afterwards. Bernardine Dohrn was a clinical associate professor of law at Northwestern University for more than twenty years. Another Weatherman, Eleanor Stein, was arrested on the run in 1981; she got a law degree in 1986 and became an administrative law judge. Radical attorney Michael Kennedy, who did more than any to keep Weather alive, has been special advisor to President of the UN General Assembly. And, of course, Barack Obama, twice President of the United States, started his political career in Bill Ayers’s living room.

This is the difference between the hard Left & hard Right: you can be a violent leftist radical and go on to live a pretty kickass life. This is especially true if you’re a leftist of the credentialed class: Ph.D. or J.D.

The big three takeaways for me about Weatherman, when it comes to political violence in America as we might see it in 2016:

  1. Radicalism can come from anywhere. The Weathermen weren’t oppressed, or poor, or anything like that. They were hard leftists. That’s it.
  2. Sustained political violence is dependent on the willing cooperation of admirers and accomplices. The Left has these. The Right does not.
  3. Not a violent issue, but a political one: ethnic issues involving access to power can both empower and derail radical movements.

Moving from the white Leftists to the black revolutionaries, let’s talk for a second about George Jackson. Massive criminal history, seriously violent dude: his own father actually testified against his parole. Jackson was in Soledad prison in 1970 when a fight between white and black inmates broke out in the yard. With no warning, a white guard ended the fight by shooting three black prisoners dead. In retaliation, George Jackson and two other inmates murdered a guard by throwing him off the tier. They became known as the Soledad Three.

Fay Stender, who’d defended Black Panther Party founder Huey Newton, also defended Jackson. She got the radical community backing his freedom and published a book of his letters. So George Jackson got famous.

This is where radical professor Angela Davis comes in. Davis, if you don’t know, is so dedicated to communism that she literally got her Ph.D. behind the Iron Curtain. From a moral perspective, that’s a little like somebody getting a Ph.D. in old South Africa specifically because they dig apartheid.

On August 5, 1970, Davis had a long meeting with George Jackson in prison. After her meeting with George Jackson, Davis bought Jackson’s little brother Jonathan, still in high school, a shotgun. Two days later, Jonathan took hostages in a courtroom and demanded the release of the Soledad Three.

Jonathan killed the judge before being killed himself. Two other hostages were badly wounded. As for George, on August 21, 1971, somebody — prison officials held it was Jackson’s lawyer — gave him a gun. Jackson took seven hostages before he was killed by snipers while trying to escape prison. Five of the hostages were found dead in his cell.

Jackson wasn’t the only black radical of the period to meet a violent end. The contrast in the fates of 70’s black radicals and white radicals is pretty stark. A lot of white radicals came out okay. A lot of black radicals came out dead.

But Angela Davis did great. She’s had a successful career and remains celebrated. Arrested for her part in Jonathan’s plot, Davis was acquitted, and became a radical icon.

I think an underappreciated factor in Angela Davis doing so well afterward is her position as part of the credentialed class. Like the Weathermen — and unlike most black radicals — Angela Davis had access to Institutions.

Institutions are one of two major assets that the Left has and the Right lacks. The other is Shock Troops.

Institutions are organizations the Left controls that operate for the benefit of the Left’s people. The Right doesn’t really have these. As an example, there are occasional hard right lawyers, but so far as I know there is no such thing as the Reactionary Lawyers’ Guild.

The other thing that the Left has that the Right doesn’t are Shock Troops: unshameable actors.

Institutions and Shock Troops are important resources for the Left. They work together. The Left’s Institutions accept, cater to, train, and/or employ its people, including Shock Troops. And, in the cases of several Weathermen (and Davis), give them cushy jobs in their Shock-Troop retirement.

What happens when you have Shock Troops, but no, or few, or short-lived Institutions? That’s the story of black radicalism in the USA.

Burrough’s Days of Rage provides a quite good overview of several parts of black radicalism. We’ll review three groups here: BLA, the Symbionese Liberation Army, and the Family. (There’s also a little mention of the NWLF, who aren’t a black radical movement but fit in timewise with the SLA.)

Odd fact: in 2016 we saw a lot of news stories about police being targeted for murder, including a spectacular attack in Dallas…and I didn’t seen a single news article mentioning the Black Liberation Army. That’s how forgotten this stuff is!

The short answer to “Who were the BLA?” is “they were a splinter group of the Panthers.” The longer answer requires a little bit of backstory.

In January, 1969, 23 Black Panthers attempted a combination of bombing and sniper attacks on police and at a board of education office. As in a lot of these cases involving radical groups plotting violence, two of the Panthers in question turned out to be undercover NYPD. The actual Panthers involved became known as the Panther 21.

The Panther 21 were found not guilty after an 8-month trial — pretty impressive, because while the undercover cops gave them two fake bombs the Panthers also got real dynamite from another source, so their third bomb actually went off! With the informants and acquittal, in some ways it’s similar to the Malheur Occupation thing, only with an actual murder plot attached.

But can you imagine if a famous conservative like, I dunno, Gary Sinise had tried to raise money for the Malheur Occupation dudes? Okay, well, exactly that happened, but it was Leonard Bernstein raising money for the Panther 21, who actually tried to murder people! Tom Wolfe wrote a classic article about Bernstein’s party and the period’s radical chic.

The main reason Burrough discusses the Panther 21 episode: it showcases a growing problem for the Black Panthers. Namely, for a good number of their members, the Black Panthers are not nearly militant enough. And there are a LOT of Panthers at this point. When Huey Newton gets out of prison in 1970, he finds a Black Panther Party that’s grown bigger than his ability to run. Meanwhile, Eldridge Cleaver (remember him?), who’s been running stuff with Huey inside, has set himself up in Algiers with, I shit you not, a nice stipend and an actual embassy paid for by the Algerian government, which I guess really means by the Russians. (The Panthers didn’t have their embassy long. It was gone by the fall of ’72, probably bc some Soviet beancounter said WHAT.)

As you can imagine, at this point Newton and Cleaver absolutely loathed each other, so clearly the smart thing for the party to do was have a phone call between them Live. On. Television. On a local San Francisco talk show.

Sadly, this is not on YouTube.

The TV chat went as well as you’d expect, which means it ended with Cleaver and Newton literally expelling each other from the party. The factionalism was so bad that a Cleaverite Panther was murdered by a Newtonite. The Black Panthers expected a civil war.

If you’re going to have a war, it makes sense to organize for one. So a NY Panther named Dhoruba Moore organizes the Black Liberation Army. One of Moore’s BLA recruits is a young woman named Joanne Chesimard, later known as Assata Shakur. Another is a fellow named Sekou Odinga.

But the Panther civil war never actually happens. And then cops stop three Panthers on the street, it turns into a shootout, and a Panther is killed. The Panthers are understandably enraged, and — wouldn’t you know it? Dhoruba Moore has his new wing of hitters just sitting there.

So the BLA shrugs: eh, forget the civil war; let’s go kill some cops.

In May 1971, BLA started going out shooting cops in NYC. Two cops were killed with a submachine gun fired from a car. Then two more were brutally short down in the street (Burrough gives the details; they are horrifically graphic). Moore’s group claimed both killings. In truth, a copycat Panther group killed the second two.

The challenge for the BLA is that, while Weatherman has radical lawyers willing to fund and abet them, the BLA, like most radical groups, does not. So the BLA takes to robbery to secure funding. Founder Dhoruba Moore is arrested in one of these attempts, but the BLA keeps rolling.

Eldridge Cleaver, BTW, is totally down with this mayhem. But he does not want to coordinate it. Cleaver’s instruction calls for autonomous cells. In theory: autonomous BLA cells cannot be rolled up wholesale by the cops. In practice: none of the cells know what the other is doing. This leads to batshit crazy things like two BLA cells trying to rob the same bank at the same time.

The point of the robbery, though, let’s not forget, was to enable BLA to better kill cops. BLA used robbery money to establish training camps down South. They killed cops there, too. Within nine months of start-up, BLA had attacked ten cops, killing seven, in four different states. Not a furious pace, but steady.

Chesimard’s cell was finally arrested in 1971, after a massive car chase and gunfight in South Carolina. They were caught with a gun that belonged to one of the murdered cops.

So, of course, they were back walking the streets in NYC by fall ’72.

Yeah: in 1971, you could get in a gunfight with cops, shoot a cop, be carrying a gun stolen during a different state’s double cop murder — and get out of prison in less than a year!

Ever wonder why the American public got behind the idea of mandatory minimums and stiff sentences? The Seventies. The Seventies are why!

As BLA attacks continued, a lone wolf perp in New Orleans, a black radical named Mark Essex, shot 19 people, killing 9, 5 of them cops. Then NYC saw two BLA attacks on cops in 53 hours, and people started thinking that there was a nationwide conspiracy. (It wasn’t that huge.)

In 1973, Chesimard was shot and captured following a shootout on the New Jersey Turnpike in which a policeman was killed. Not much later, the police finally landed an informant, and after a few stakeouts and gunfights they arrested or killed BLA’s shooters. Sekou Odinga got away. But that’s basically the end of the BLA. Except…

Except this flurry of activity and press has all the radicals who weren’t involved thinking, “Dang, I missed out!” And guess where there’s been a ton of radicalization? In U.S. prisons!

Weatherman had tried to rally the working class. No luck. They weren’t into being radicalized. But black prisoners really, really were.

And white radicals — many the kind who’d be really into privilege confession today — started getting into the idea of black leadership. I mean: really into the idea of black leadership. To the point of fetishizing it. Fetishizing black convicts, especially.

I told you this gets crazy, right? Well, here’s a little taste of the stuff Burrough gets into. Check this out:

In 1972, a group called Venceremos, from the Bay Area, literally broke out a black convict named Ronald Beaty during a prison transport so he could train them in guerrilla tactics and lead a revolution.

That was their actual plan. That was their entire actual plan.

Exactly that one bit from South Park, but a bunch of ’70s white Bay Area radicals going, “Token, you’re black; you know guerrilla tactics.” (Spoiler: when Beaty got arrested again, he promptly rolled over on the white radicals.)

But where there’s a demand, a supply will surface, and in 1973, a black inmate named Donald DeFreeze capitalized on the trend. To better explain Donald DeFreeze: imagine that Eldridge Cleaver & George Jackson are YouTube stars, ok? Well, DeFreeze is the comments.

DeFreeze escaped prison and hooked up with a Berkeley, CA radical named Patricia “Mizmoon” Soltysik. DeFreeze and Mizmoon assembled a small cell of eight men and women. Say hello to the Symbionese Liberation Army. Slogan: “Death to the fascist insect that preys on the blood of the people!

So their first target, of course, is Oakland’s first black school administrator, superintendent Marcus Foster!

I know. You’re thinking, “Wait, what?”

Foster had dared suggest ID cards for kids and using police to curb in-school violence. For this, the SLA murdered him, on November 6, 1973. In 1974, the SLA kidnapped 19yo heiress Patty Hearst, demanding her family do massive food giveaways (which they did). The food giveaways actually got the SLA some favorable attention in the radical press, for forcing the rich to give to the poor. Meanwhile, the SLA was indoctrinating Hearst and raping her repeatedly. Then the SLA offered her a choice: to join them, or be released.

Let me ask you a question: in the shoes of 19-year-old Patty Hearst, how much would you trust the assurances of Donald DeFreeze and the SLA? That’s exactly how much Hearst trusted them when they said they’d let her go. So she said of course she’d join them. Hearst famously robbed a bank with the SLA and went on the run with them. The account I’ve given of her decision is hers, which I believe.

The press was going nuts. Imagine a Kardashian were kidnapped, then resurfaced having become a terrorist. That’s what this was like.

The SLA’s darkest day came when they were busted for shoplifting in L.A. It turned into a gunfight. They split up: Hearst and a couple in one direction, DeFreeze & the rest in another. Hearst’s party got away. DeFreeze’s took over a random house, and was indiscreet about it. Cops closed in. There was a massive gunfight and a fire. DeFreeze and his party died horrible deaths.

Hearst’s survivors sought the help of a radical named Kathy Soliah, who had championed the SLA at a rally that got newspaper attention. Literally, I think that’s it: they’d read her name in the newspaper, and looked her up. And of course she helped them. Soliah not only arranged shelter for them, she helped them re-recruit. #the70syall

Soliah also started a study group called the Bay Area Research Collective, publishing a radical paper called Dragon. Dragon published bombing news, how-to bomb manuals, communiques from underground groups. You could send them letters to claim your bombings. The Bay Area Research Collective also had its own terrorist group: the New World Liberation Front. More on them in a minute.

The SLA, now restaffed, robbed a bank in Sacramento, murdering a bank patron, Myrna Opsahl. This turned the heat on them again, hard. They returned to San Francisco and started bombing for revolution and fighting among themselves. The cops picked most of the SLA up (Hearst included) not long after, and that chapter was concluded.

But what about that NWLF thing?

NWLF was an oddity: domestic terrorism by creative commons. If you wanted to detonate bombs in their name, you could! That was its thing. And people detonated bombs in the name of the NWLF. Regularly. For three years.

In 1975, NWLF bombs went off in San Francisco once a week for nine months. They targeted local politicians, including Dianne Feinstein’s house. NWLF bombed a trial, country clubs, the opera. The bombings didn’t wholly stop until 1978. The reason NWLF bombings stopped: the guy who did most of them went insane and killed his girlfriend with an axe.

But to return to the black radicals, and Institutions: one of the most insane stories is that of Lincoln Detox and the Family. July and November of 1970, a gang occupies the South Bronx’s Lincoln Hospital and presents demands to administrators. The demand: Lincoln Hospital facilities are shitty. The gang demands a drug treatment center, and they demand to operate it.

They got nearly a million bucks from the government to do it. That’s what the 1970s were like. This was Lincoln Detox. It was run by militant leftists. (They gave the BLA medical supplies, to give you an idea.) Methadone came coupled with Marxist education, paid for by the city. Political education as a cure for heroin addiction.

I’m not kidding! This really happened! New York City was paying for it all!

Lincoln Detox was, in short, an Institution for leftist radicals, paid for by city tax dollars. And it was robbing the city blind. Burrough’s accounting of how blind is stunning: in 1973, Lincoln Detox was treating half the patients its contract called for, at rates *four times* those of other city clinics. In 1976 HHC found nearly $1 million in unsubstantiated payroll, with staff absentee rates up to 71%. The clinic refused to share its personnel records, but during an auditors’ visit only half the 45 listed staff were on duty. Despite this remarkable absenteeism, the staff were still managing to make thousands of dollars in personal phone calls.

NYC’s Addiction Services Agency was supposedly in charge, but when Detox refused to give required information they’d cut all funds in 1973. So Lincoln Detox got money from Health and Hospitals Corporation, another city agency, which gave money with no strings. Any effort to control the clinic caused massive protests — the clinic staff occupied HHC’s offices and smashed stuff at one point.

Clearly, the only logical thing to happen at this point in the story is for Tupac Shakur’s future stepfather to study acupuncture.

Look, I told you today’s installment gets crazy.

It turns out that Marxist education is not actually helpful in curing drug addiction, so clinic staffer Mutulu Shakur learns acupuncture. He learns from a doctor working at Lincoln Detox, but his education is interrupted when the doctor dies of a heroin overdose. IN THE CLINIC.

But he finds a new teacher and he and others eventually get doctor of acupuncture degrees from the Acupuncture Association of Quebec. Naturally, with a cushy city gig and a growing acupuncture practice, Shakur comes to the same decision you would in such a situation: “I should use this place and its connections to start robbing banks so I can raise money to start a revolution.”

“Also,” he doubtless added, “to pay for a cocaine habit that is already considerable *fnorrrrrrrrkkkkkk*

Reminder: this is all happening at a drug treatment clinic that is fully funded by the tax dollars of the City of New York!

But Shakur has never robbed a bank. He needs an experienced bank robber and oh look here comes Sekou Odinga, formerly of the BLA! Naturally, Shakur and Odinga need some logistical support, and what better place to find this than a bunch of white communist feminists —

Look, I told you this story gets crazy.

The feminists are the May 19 Communist Organization, whom Odinga knows through a white radical named Marilyn Buck, who had bought ammo for BLA. Black leadership fetishization is in full effect, so May 19 looks at Shakur and Odinga and assumes OF COURSE they know WTF they’re doing. This union of Lincoln Detox, the last of the BLA, and a bunch of feminist commies gives birth to the radical group known as the Family.

It came at an opportune time. Ed Koch was elected Mayor of New York in 1978, and he had no patience for the Lincoln Detox radicals. Koch evicted them, closed the clinic, and reopened it in a new location under complete city control.

This left Shakur a bit adrift, but bank-robbing was going well. Shakur and his white feminist allies decided: hey, let’s jailbreak radicals. They broke a FALN bombmaker out first (more on that in a moment). Then they went for Joanne Chesimard.

Chesimard, aka Assata Shakur, was serving life for the murder of the cop killed during her capture. But under little security. How little?

Sekou Odinga — who was a wanted fugitive at the time — went to visit Chesimard, and brought her a gun. That was it. Chesimard sheltered in Pittsburgh for 9 months, then managed to get to the Bahamas, and after that Cuba, where she lives today.

So now the 1980s roll around, Mutulu Shakur has a new acupuncture clinic in Harlem, and the Family’s robbing banks for revolutionary funds. This is a great set-up. Or it would be, if the revolutionary funds weren’t going straight up Shakur’s nose. If you believe the May 19 crowd — and it’s embarrassing enough to be plausible — the feminist commies had no idea about the cocaine; they just naively thought Shakur & his fellow black revolutionaries (cokeheads all) had tons of wonderful revolutionary energy. It goes back to the white ’70s radical black leadership fetishization. “It’s all right, they’re black, they know what they’re doing!”

Turns out massive amounts of cocaine and firearms are never a good mix. The Family killed a Brink’s guard during an NYC armored car robbery, which drew serious NYPD attention. And then October 20, 1981 happened. An armored car robbery. White radicals driving, black radicals shooting.

During the robbery, the perpetrators opened fire, killing one guard, wounding two. They took 1.6 million (leaving 1.3 more). The shooters made rendezvous with the switch vehicle, driven by David Gilbert and Kathy Boudin, formerly of Weatherman. But the switch vehicle parked in the wrong spot. A line of sight was left open. A witness saw everyone, all the cars, the cash, the guns. The witness called the cops, and the police pulled over Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert. In the back of their U-Haul trailer, under a blanket: Mutulu Shakur, and four more Family members, heavily armed and coked to the skies.

Boudin and Gilbert were asked to get out of the vehicle and sit beside the road. The police went around back to search the U-Haul. Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert proceeded to create a distraction, drawing the police’s attention. And the shooters came out of the U-Haul and murdered two police officers.

Two Family members carjacked a doctor’s car and drove off. David Gilbert hopped in another of the getaway cars. Kathy Boudin was nabbed by an off-duty corrections officer as she ran down the highway. The local police chief followed the two escaping cars. One crashed, and he rounded those people up (including David Gilbert).

Marilyn Buck, of May 19, escaped, but the cops found her apartment. She was the logistics officer, so she had the records of the safe houses. And the building superintendant had the license plate numbers of a bunch of their cars. Further round-ups were only a matter of time.

But because I keep coming back to the power of Institutions to shelter leftist radicals, to close our time with the Family: Kathy Boudin, accomplice and facilitator to multiple murders, was paroled in 2003.

She is now an adjunct professor at Columbia University’s school of social work.

So, looking at the BLA, SLA, the Family, wth a detour to NWLF — what do we learn about political violence? Looking, in particular, through the lens of our the concepts of Institutions and Shock Troops, and why these matter:

Institutions are crucial to the longevity of organized campaigns of political violence by Shock Troops.

Shock Troops that don’t have Institutions fare worse and have shorter careers than Shock Troops that do.

Shock Troops without support from Institutions tend to turn to crime, often violent crime, for money.

Doing violent crime to raise money eventually bites Shock Troops in the ass.

The bigger a Shock Troop army, the more financial support it needs, whether from an Institution or from criminal activity.

The Shock Troops that succeed without Institutions have as few members as possible & avoid violent crime (the NWLF guy didn’t do robbery; he grew tons of reportedly amazing weed), and keep a low profile outside of their Shock Troop actions.

Having an Institution is no guarantee of keeping it; Institutions can be attacked by adversaries or other outside forces (see: Lincoln Detox).

All of which is to say: in some respects, a resurgence of political violence in the United States would look similar to previous versions — but in others, it’d look very different.

The last story I’ll share from Days of Rage is, I’m not gonna lie to you, the craziest of the lot. How crazy? Let me ask you this:

What if fanatics made a serious and nearly successful attempt on the life of the President of the United States?

What if those fanatics got into the Capitol building and committed a mass shooting on Congress while it was in session?

What if those fanatics conducted bombing sprees, for years, in multiple American cities?

And what if people really did do every one of those things, and you’d never heard of them? That’s the story of Puerto Rican separatists.

I’m not kidding.

The President they tried to kill was Harry Truman, in 1950, as told in the book American Gunfight. They shot up Congress in 1954, wounding five Congressmen (who recovered). They bombed American cities like mad in the 1970s.

The ’70s bombing campaign was done by a group called FALN. The FBI’s working theory is that the FALN was a creation of Cuban intelligence.

I’m still not kidding.

FALN starts from a couple of different places. One path goes back to a dude named Filiberto Ojeda Rios, a Puerto Rican communist.

Ojeda Rios trained in Cuba, worked for their spy service, and then went back to Puerto Rico to start a revolution. It didn’t work. Plan B: go underground & start bombing. Castro approved. so Ojeda Rios formed a group, MIRA, to attack in Puerto Rico & the US mainland. It didn’t last. MIRA was rolled up when the police caught their NYC bomber. Ojeda Rios was arrested in PR, but he skipped bail and vanished.

The second path to FALN traces back to Chicago, and a young Puerto Rican named Oscar Lopez Rivera. He and his high school buddies were young activists.

The story is Oscar Lopez Rivera & friends were recruited by Filiberto Ojeda Rios. Raising the q: …so, uh, could FALN be considered an act of war?

It’s murky. Per Burrough, there’s no evidence Cuba gave FALN operational orders. More that they wound them up, let them go.

That said, FALN had an amazing set-up in the hard left. Not only were they trained in bomb-making by Weather Underground, they had possibly the best Institution any radical group has ever had: the Episcopal Church.

I’m still not kidding.

FALN started bombing in ’74. Their demands were 1) Puerto Rican independence 2) release of PR separatist prisoners. Their deeds were nasty. FALN targeted cops with a fake call and a boobytrap, disfiguring one. They bombed a restaurant on Wall Street, killing 4, injuring over 40. Outrage at the deaths changed their approach. They started bombing at night, setting off department store fires — nonlethal, but harrowing. More harrowing: FALN opened new fronts in Chicago and in Washington, D.C. Bombing in three cities demonstrates serious logistics.

Eventually cops lucked out: a Chicago guy robbing his new neighbors found shitloads of explosives, and tried to sell them to a police informant. Using building records, the Chicago PD and the FBI got a name: Carlos Torres, a Puerto Rican community organizer whose wife worked for the feds — she was an equal employment specialist at the EPA.

The FALN safehouse also yielded a copy of a business letter to one Maria Cueto, of the National Commission on Hispanic Affairs. The NCHA was a charitable organization affiliated with the Episcopal Church. When the FBI started looking into it, their hair stood on end. Basically, every. single. person of interest in the FBI’s FALN investigation was, or had been, on NCHA’s board of directors.

Maria Cueto was FALN. She had used her position to put a half-dozen FALN members, including chief bombmaker Guillermo Morales, on the NCHA board. Let me emphasize how amazing this was: these were *paid positions.* Puerto Rican terrorists were being paid thousands of dollars by the Episcopal Church. Like cannibalizing and repurposing a nonprofit. It may be the greatest Institution in American radical history. FALN was literally using a charity run by the Episcopal Church as a front.

Yeah. It gets crazier.

You would think the Episcopal Church would be outraged. Horrified to be dragged into the legal proceedings. You’d be wrong. Liberal Episcopal bishops were enraged — with the FBI! Claimed govt was out to stop the church from funding progressive Hispanic groups! The institution the FALN had compromised went full-force to defend them and mobilized mainstream institutions on FALN’s behalf!

Cueto and a colleague were hauled before a grand jury. The National Council of Churches (!!!) rallied behind them even as FALN went on a new bombing campaign specifically demanding the grand juries be halted.

Progressive ministers accused the FBI of illegal harassment. FALN radical actions were being supported by mainstream legal lawfare. And the various cases against FALN wore on through 1977, getting nowhere.

On August 3, 1977, FALN called in bomb threats to seven sites, causing mass evacuations in downtown Manhattan. But they weren’t just threats. Carlos Torres’s wife left a bomb at Mobil Oil HQ’s employment office. The explosion killed one person and injured several more. The Torreses and Oscar Lopez Rivera were indicted based on fingerprint evidence, but they were in the wind.

And now the story gets even crazier. As 1978 rolled around, the FALN cases were falling apart. Several suspects were freed, even as the bombs continued. Then, on 12 July 1978, FALN’s chief bombmaker Guillermo Morales had a work accident. With a bomb. Morales blew off nine fingers, his lips, and his left eye. The explosion broke his jaw to boot. Devastating injuries. Knowing the cops were coming, a crippled, bleeding, disfigured Morales still tried to flush incriminating FALN documents and rig a gas explosion trap for the cops to get the police when they showed up. With. No. Hands. (The trap didn’t work, thank God.)

All of that is not yet the crazy part.

This is the crazy part: Remember Mutulu Shakur and the Family? Who jailbroke radicals?

If you think a bunch of coked-up black radicals and feminist commies can’t come up with a plan to spring a handless Puerto Rican bomber all I can say is, you don’t know the Seventies, brother. Check this shit.

By May 1979, Morales is as healed up as he’s gonna get. He’s down to one eye and one thumb. He’s in custody, under 24-hour guard. He has a window. But there’s a metal grate on it. And it opens onto a sheer forty-foot drop. He’s not going anywhere.

Radical attorney Susan Tipograph, who insisted that attorney-client privilege exempted her from search, visited Morales on 18 May 1979. Mysteriously, after that, Morales had wire cutters. Tipograph was never charged.

Laboriously, with basically no hands, Morales cut through the grate over his window. Punched out the screen. The Family had brought a ladder. But ladders look longer when you’re coked out of your gourd, or they just fucked up, because the ladder was only twenty feet long. The distance to the ground was forty feet.

Morales had no rope. And no fingers. He had a ten-foot length of bandage. And brass balls. Somehow, this dude with no fingers lowers himself from the window on the bandage. It snaps. Morales falls 20 feet onto an air conditioner, then another 20 feet to the ground. Injured, but alive. The Family and FALN whisk him away.

The guard on Morales’s door slept through the whole thing. Morales was not missed until an hour after dawn. Their bombmaker returned to them, FALN embarked on a new campaign of robberies, bombing, and interfering with elections.

Wait, what? Yeah. In 1980, the FALN attacked the NYC campaign HQ of George H.W. Bush in an effort to destroy voter-registration lists. Another team smashed up the Carter-Mondale HQ in Chicago. The FALN even threatened delegates to the party conventions. Nobody remembers!

The FALN round-up, when it came, happened by accident as they were getting ready to rob an armored car near Northwestern University. The FALN stole a panel truck to use as a switch vehicle. A campus cop spotted it, and police put it under surveillance. They nabbed 2 FALN. Another call led police to 2 more vans: the ambush awaiting the armored car. The people in the vans were disguised: wigs, false moustaches. The cops took them in. The arrestees were totally silent. The cops began to wonder if this was above their paygrade, and called the FBI. An FBI agent recognized several of the suspects.

Just like that, most of the FALN had been rolled up. All the suspects refused to mount defenses at trial. They were found guilty, sentenced for eight to thirty years. Another indictment for seditious conspiracy piled decades on top of that. But Oscar Lopez Rivera and Guillermo Morales were still free.

In Christmas 1980, a new group called the Puerto Rican Armed Resistance bombed Penn Station in NYC during rush hour. No one was hurt. In May 1980, the PRAR called in bomb threat to JFK. A Pan Am handyman found their bomb, and alerted people, but the bomb killed him. Two more bombs at the airport were found in the aftermath. It was all getting going again. And then, just like that, it ended two weeks later when Oscar Lopez Rivera and a new recruit got stopped for an illegal U-turn. Lopez Rivera got 55 years.

Guillermo Morales was arrested — in Mexico, which refused to extradite him to the US. He eventually emigrated to Cuba. Got clean away.

Let me ask you a question: how the hell did I not know this story? Forget the presidential assassination attempt. Forget the mass shooting in the Congressional chamber. Just look at the FALN stuff: a years-long bombing campaign in multiple American cities, by perpetrators trained and initiated by a foreign power. A terrorist organization that parasitized a church so effectively, it got the church infrastructure to act on its behalf. A stunning escape from custody almost too astounding to believe.

Why is this not a movie? Why is this not two or three movies? This story is amazing! And it’s just totally memory-holed. Here’s how memory-holed it is: I didn’t even know that, in 1999, seeking Puerto Rican voter support in New York for HRC’s senate run, President Clinton offered clemency to 16 imprisoned FALN. 14 accepted. Congress condemned it at the time. But people remember the Mark Rich pardon. Not FALN.

What does it mean for us? First, let’s be blunt: most political violence is not going to be as well-trained & highly disciplined as FALN. You’re not going to see that level of skill again, unless the Cubans decide they want to come to play. What you might see, on both sides, is what to me is the most amazing part of the FALN story: its parasitization of the Episcopal Church.

Organizations don’t have to fully capture institutions. They can latch onto them, and come to be seen as limbs. One person in a position to hire effectively suborned the Episcopal Church to give violent radicals jobs, stability, and even protection. As with everything, the Left will be much better at this kind of operation than the Right will. But the Right might do it on occasion.

The other takeaway: again, Lefty radicals have more opportunities and more acceptance from their mainstream than Righty ones. I don’t see Eric Rudolph getting clemency, no matter the administration. He shouldn’t. Nor should have FALN.

Of course, that didn’t stop President Obama, in the last days of his administration, from commuting the sentence of Oscar Lopez Rivera. The decision caused ecstasies of delight in Lin-Manuel Miranda, celebrated author (and former star) of HAMILTON, who pledged to reprise in the role in a Chicago performance especially for Lopez Rivera, whom Miranda referred to as “Don Oscar.”

That’s everything I want to cover from Days of Rage. There’s more in it. Buy the book; read it; you won’t regret it. It’s amazing history.

But it’s the implications of Bryan Burrough’s book that scare the willies out of me.

I am afraid that the United States is in for political violence in 2017. It could be as bad as or worse than the 1970s. I have some ideas as to what some of it may look like. It really isn’t pleasant to think about.

Political violence is like war, like violence in general: people have a fantasy about how it works. This is the fantasy of how violence works: you smite your enemies in a grand and glorious cleansing because of course you’re better.

Grand and glorious smiting isn’t actually how violence works. I’ve worked a few places that have had serious political violence. And I’m not sure how to really describe it so people get it.

This is a stupid comparison, but here: imagine that one day Godzilla walks through your town.

The next day, he does it again.

And he keeps doing it. Some days he steps on more people than others. That’s it. That’s all he does: trudging through your town, back and forth. Your town’s not your town now; it’s The Godzilla Trudging Zone.

That’s kind of what it’s like.

I’m going to talk about some nasty things here. I do not want any of it. But some or all of it could happen. Some of it already is. In 2017, I am very pessimistic about America’s future, to the point that I think the country should seriously consider a National Divorce.

Everyone feeling nice and at ease now? Good, let’s get started.

Let’s not mince words: the United States of America is currently engaged in a cold Civil War.

In North Carolina, the Republican governor lost re-election, so the Republican legislature convened a special session to limit powers of the post. Democrats nationwide howled with justified outrage; as we all know, legislators who dislike a governor should flee the state to block quorum, facilitate occupation of government buildings by mobs, and have allies execute secret raids on homes on the governor’s supporters. All of those are things that the Democrats did to oppose a Republican governor in Wisconsin, and the Democrats were pretty cool with it.

This isn’t a cutesy “both sides” argument. Nor am I calling out the press for bias, or politicians for hypocrisy (that’s later).

My point is: did you notice the Left and the Right use fundamentally different tactics?

This is no accident. They’re different cultures. The Left and Right don’t just want different things. They also have different abilities, goals, resources, and senses of propriety. Meaning contemporary political violence from the Left and from the Right will look very different.

Now, 2017 isn’t going to be the 1970s. Goals, situations, and cultures change. The actors want different things. But we can look to the ’70s for hints.

Like: what kind of people will do this stuff?

The mental model we have for domestic terrorism in 2017 is shaped by what scares us: mass shooters and jihad. ’70s radicals were different. ’70s radicals wanted to get away with their crimes. They wanted to avoid detection, they didn’t want to get arrested, and they didn’t want to die. Most ’70s bombers had no moral objection to killing people, but they also didn’t go to any great lengths to maximize body count. That’s pretty different from 21st-century mass shooters (who tend suicidal) & jihadists (for whom a high body count is part of the message).

Some suicidal mass murderers choose political targets, though it’s uncommon. Overseas jihadists draft depressives, but that takes organization (and willingness to use suicide attacks). When we’re talking about domestic political violence, we’re mostly talking about stuff that is coldbloodedly plotted by serious people.

So maybe we can hope that political violence in the US, ’70s-style, won’t go all-out for massive numbers of deaths? Well… maybe. The way I see it, domestic conflict in the United States could operate in basically four stages:

  1. cold Civil War
  2. targeted political violence, mostly short of murder
  3. political violence with murder as the default
  4. Civil War II

The United States should start seriously talking about National Divorce before we get to stage 3.

We’re in Stage 1 now. Stages 2 and 3 are what we’re concerned with: the public getting mobilized. What would that look like, on Left and Right?

People tend to think that the Right will be an awesome, horrific force in political violence. The SPLC’s donations depend on that idea. Righties tell themselves that *of course* they’d win a war against Lefties. Tactical Deathbeast vs. Pajama Boy? No contest. Why, Righties have thought about what an effective domestic insurrection would look like. Righties have written books and manifestos!

It’s horseshit.

The truth: the Left is a lot more organized & prepared for violence than the Right is, and has the advantage of a mainstream more supportive of it.

You think that’s unfair? Okay, well: imagine an abortion clinic bombing ring getting presidential clemency.

Imagine an abortion clinic bomber getting a comfortable job at an elite university.

Outrageous, right? No way the Right could get away with that. But the Left does! And the press gives them cover.

(This is the “hypocrisy and media bias” section, by the way.)

The press freaked out and called for a National Conversation every time some shithead punched a protestor at a Trump rally. If Trump fans pulled a Portland, running through the streets, intimidating motorists, smashing windows, what would press reaction be? You don’t need me to tell you: pants-shitting hysteria fascism OMG Hitler. When Lefties really did that: “meh, that’s what Lefties do.” No need for a National Conversation. Certainly not a Clinton disavowal.

Organizing protests like Portland and the other cities takes experience, efficiency, and a lot of people you can call out. The Left can do that. The Right can’t. That is a logistical advantage that is enormous, and it matters. Because a Left that can tell that many people to do that stuff in that many places can also tell at least some of them to do something else.

The hard Left selectively uses violence, normalizes it with weasel words: “Direct action.” “Diversity of tactics.” “Nonviolent property damage.” “Antifa.” If you want to know why Righties will get down with streetfighting, if it comes to that: take a look at Antifa. A good long one.

Part of the bargain of civilization is ceding the authority to commit violence to the State. (Has its own problems. Beats the alternative.) Lord knows there are people I’d love to beat the shit out of in the street, but if I don’t get to then neither do you. No, I don’t give a flying fuck who they are; you don’t get to do that.

Lefties say, “Well, that’s Nazis, they only do that to Nazis; Nazis are different, you have to shut that shit down, etc.” Great. Except that Lefties pull the same “shut this shit down!” stuff on mainstream Righties on college campuses, all the while calling them Nazis.

Hell, Lefties said Ted Cruz was a Nazi, Mitt Romney was a Nazi, George W. Bush was a Nazi. I’ve done human rights work that had me working in proximity to the U.S. military, so at a professional meeting a Lefty called me a Nazi.

So if you tell me that I’m a Nazi, and tell me people I respect are Nazis, and tell me you’re in favor of going out and beating up Nazis, guess what? I am suddenly very interested in the physical safety of Nazis.

And I’m Jewish.

Lemme tell you a true story.

In 209 BC, two Qin Dynasty army officers, Chen Sheng and Wu Guang, were ordered to lead their troops on a march to provide reinforcements. Massive flooding delayed them. They couldn’t make their rendezvous time. In the Qin Dynasty, this carried the death penalty. No excuses.

“What’s the penalty for being late?”

“Death.”

“What’s the penalty for rebellion?”

“Death.”

“Well — we’re late.”

And that’s the story of the Dazexiang Uprising.

How does full-on streetfighting start in the United States of America? My guess is: pretty much like that. “What’s the penalty for kicking the living shit out of Leftist protestors?” “Oh, Jesus, we’d be demonized as Nazis.” “…what’ll they do if we don’t kick the living shit out of Leftist protestors?” “They’ll — hmmmmmmm….

So, what’re the odds of Righties kicking the living shit out of Lefty protestors actually happening? Depends on what happens January 20th, and after. Before the inauguration, the movement DisruptJ20 announced plans to screw up the inauguration.

Here’s a pre-inauguration article on DisruptJ20. Notice the variety of things they had on the agenda at that point.

Now reread that article, and think about how the national press would react if instead of a commie it were Richard Spencer.

The thing about commies is you have to pay attention to what they don’t say: “This is a nonviolent protest and we will not attack anybody.” Instead, it’s: “We are preparing for the possibility of sporadic fights breaking out because people are very emotional about this.” Cute, huh?

Protests like DisruptJ20 operate on a sliding scale from disruption to violence. This is deliberate. They harass their opponents, and try to bait opponents into attacking them. One tactic you often see: if one of their protestors does get violent, other protestors will loudly call, “Peaceful protest! Peaceful protest!” This is not an attempt to dissuade the violent person, but to persuade onlookers that they are not seeing what they are seeing. At the very least, the protestors figure, onlookers will assume “they’re not all like that! They’re trying to stop the bad one!” Of course, that’s a scam.

If at any point in 2017 Trump supporters are harmed or harrassed like the rally in Chicago, expect Righties to get very interested in forming street defense leagues: goons and headhunters to make Black Bloc spit teeth. And they’ll be purely defensive. For a while. But they’re human. So then they’ll think about getting proactive.

Bluntly: this is dangerous. The people who do it for the Left are literal Communists. What kind of Righties will it draw? Oh, I dunno, I’m guessing people who’re comfortable with violence, who don’t mind breaking norms or being arrested…

…if you’re now thinking, “Oh shit,” well, guess what? So am I.

If streetfights start happening on a regular basis on American streets, our democracy will corrode very quickly. We’ll see rapid radicalization at both poles, meaning normalization of political extremists.

The usual story American politics tells of how extremists get politically normalized is, to say the least, inaccurate. “Extremists get normalized bc the mainstream says things so beyond the pale it invites extremes.” ie, “Republicans make Nazis.” Bullshit.

How extremists really get mainstreamed: because the extremists have organization, logistics, and manpower that the mainstream finds useful.

Mainstream Lefties happily go to protests they favor that are organized by the literal Stalinists of ANSWER & the Worker’s World Party. Why? The commies are really good at getting people signs and making sure there are enough port-a-potties. When you’re great at organizing signs & port-a-potties, Lefties overlook that you’re into an ideology that murdered a hundred million people.

So how far would this go? Would mainstream Nazi-hating Righties be ok w/ literal Nazis on the streetfighting squads that keep them safe?

I dunno; how’d you feel about folks who voluntarily get their bodies between your peaceful gathering and a crowd trying to intimidate you?

Lefties could keep that very human thing from happening. But they’d have to de-escalate. And they won’t. Mellow out on college campuses? Quit disrupting righty events? No chance. It’s too much fun. So the hard Left is going to do more to normalize literal Nazis in America than anyone since Charles Lindbergh.

Let me be blunt, though: with or without literal Nazis, if Lefties pull another Chicago, Righty defense groups will happen. I honestly don’t think think the literal Nazis are going to be as involved in streetfighting as you might think. It’d be a distraction. The big thing the hard Right is trying to do right now is create organization and infrastructure. They have, historically, sucked at it. The hard Left has great infrastructure. Look at DisruptJ20: they know enough lawyers to have 2 teams dedicated to getting them out of jail! Think any Righty group has gotten around to organizing lawyers on tap like that? Nope.

Why are the Lefties so good at this? Communism. The American Communist Party got fantastic hand-me-down Russian-facilitated training, and shared. But hard Righties learn from overseas compatriots now, too. And a bunch of overseas hard Right movements are aided by the Russians. It’s not gonna happen overnight. But in ten or twenty or fifty years, you could have a superbly organized hard Right movement in America.

Now, you can do two things with radical infrastructure: use it to nudge the mainstream (SDS) or use it for radical action (Weatherman). I think Righties have to go SDS, while Lefties have room to go Weatherman. This is not from any innate philosophical difference, but purely practical. Effective Righty infrastructure is too rare & valuable to risk. (Also, any Righty organization or conspiracy is going to be stocked to the gills with snitches. Look at Malheur. Literally 25% snitches!) So I cannot stress this enough: any righty organization designed from the ground up to be violent is doomed to fail.

What this means: hard Left violence will be coordinated. Hard Right violence will be distributed.

Terrorists are basically mass murderers, or people who want to be. If you think about it, there are three kinds of mass murderers, and the typology applies to political violence too. The first kind is loners. The second kind is conspiracies (which have to be very tight-knit, or somebody narcs). The third kind is guys from the murder factory. A murder factory is a self-perpetuating machine that brings in recruits and spits out killers. Islamic State: that’s a murder factory.

Murder factories are hard to build. Weatherman tried to build one. They failed. The hard Left is bigger with fifty years more experience now, and I still doubt they could make a murder factory without support from a foreign power. That leaves conspiracies for Lefties, and loners for the Right.

So if Lefty violence will mostly be the result of conspiracies, while Righty violence will mostly be the work of loners, there will be differences in the kinds of things that Lefties and Righties will be able to do. A lone perpetrator can pull off a bombing, for example, but not a riot.

Left and Right also have different vulnerabilities. The Left is far better at allowing its people, esp radicals, to rise and mainstream. As a result, way more new Lefties attain prominence and effective leadership status than Righties. This makes for a deeper activist bench. With a sea of effective, prominent Lefties, Lefties who are lost will be mourned but not irreplaceable. This is emphatically not the case for Righties. To be perfectly blunt: the Right would be extremely easy to disrupt with targeted assassinations. The Left would not.

Once political violence starts, the smart move is to keep your violence low-level and try to provoke the other guys into serious violence. This, as with everything else, favors the Left. The Left can absorb a hell of a lot of serious violence. Martyrs are fuel for Leftism. Look at the history of unions. So these are the tactics I see the Left using for early political violence:

  1. use as many different nonmurderous but disruptive-to-violent tactics as possible — “shut it down,” occupations, property damage, riots
  2. weaponize Institutions against Righties, when possible
  3. drag events out — long, very low-level conflict works in Lefties’ favor
  4. target individual Righties for intimidation/disemployment, to discourage others
  5. target the most effective Righties for Unpersoning, lawfare, and (only if absolutely necessary; this would be very rare) assassination

Yes, the Left is doing almost all of this stuff already. But it could be ramped up. Take disemployment: Lefties clamoring to get somebody fired. The way it works now is reactive, news-cycle driven. It doesn’t have to be. Political donations are public record. So are voter registrations. It would be trivial to set up a Disemployment Committee to scrape these. HR departments tend to have a lot of Lefties in them. They could bring back a coordinated blacklist. You’d never know it.

Expect expansion to second-order targets, too. If you can’t target someone (bc they’re self-employed, and unshameable), go for their family — that’s already happening, by the way. Remember: most Americans are a paycheck or two from financial calamity. I’m surprised disemployment hasn’t yet been repaid with murder.

Setting up fake petitions to get your enemies to sign themselves up on your Enemies List is a tactic I expect to be pretty bipartisan. Lefties’ enemies lists will have fewer prominent Righties and Righty infrastructure types on them, just because there are fewer of those.

If you notice who Lefties really tend to go after, it’s two kinds of people:

  1. Righties who might be growing in popularity and/or influence, to make them radioactive and make others afraid to associate with them
  2. regular people, who have employment and social fragility, to make them scared to admit WrongThink.

So Lefties will target more people on top and on bottom, status-wise. Righties will target more in the middle, go for the Lefty NCO corps. That’s because the biggest impact the Right can make at this stage of conflict is to destroy, damage, or neutralize Lefty Institutions. But Lefty Institutions are massive cultural power centers. Universities, Media, Bureaucracies, Organizations/Foundations, Cities.

The Right is not big enough or organized enough to really destroy Lefty Institutions. Like the Left, they’ll be looking to intimidate people out of the game and take away enemy tools. Example: Institutional and media bias means radical Leftist tactics are accepted, which means radical Leftist tactics become normalized. Ergo, the only way the Right can delegitimize Lefty tactics is to use them, at which point they’ll become The Worst Things Ever Done By Man. My guess is the Right will start using Leftist tactics against members of Leftist Institutions: “This is what you ordered. Eat it.”

Some of this could actually be constructive for campus civility. For instance, I’ve long argued that if a Righty speaker is disrupted on a college campus, then campus Righties should *disrupt every single Lefty speaker for the remainder of the school year.* Of course, Righties can’t get away with what Lefties get away with, so no swarming, no intimidating people, no pulling fire alarms. What Righties can get away with: standing up and chanting, at the top of their lungs, “THIS IS WHAT YOU DO TO US.” In multiple stages, for maximum distraction. Leaving peacefully, of course. The bad news is that’s about as cheerful as these face-offs are going to get. They can and probably will get much nastier.

Specifically, I think the hard Right is going to discover the joys of “nonviolent property damage,” which the Left has foolishly normalized. I’m always puzzled when Lefty journalists praise “nonviolent property damage” as if they don’t have offices, homes, and personal property. University administrators who let Lefties disrupt Righty speakers with impunity also have offices, homes, and personal property. Heck, when Lefty rioters get arrested, papers print their names and mugshots. And they have homes, and cars, and … you know the drill.

The advantage of “nonviolent property damage” for Righties: one person can do it without trying to put together a conspiracy. Nor does it injure people. But let’s be blunt: though no people are hurt it is, despite what Lefties say, violence and it would get very ugly, very fast. And it wouldn’t be entirely effective. The Institutions wouldn’t be destroyed. They’d still be there.

But what happens if the Trump administration is a player? No, I don’t think the Trump administration is going to be putting people in camps, or offering free helicopter rides. What the Trump admin might do is use the full force of the federal government to take a chainsaw to Leftist Institutions’ funding and power. Which threat, of course, could spur radical Lefties to violence. (Remember: provoking your enemy to violence is a goal.)

It gets really nasty if government and non-government factions combine, whether by design or merely taking advantage of each other. What could that look like? Imagine this sequence of events:

President Trump goes to hold a provocative rally in a Leftist area of a Leftist city, inviting a “shut this shit down” Lefty riot. The riot happens. Righties show up… and join the rioting Lefties, ensuring that as much damage is done to local property as is possible. Trump’s DOJ blames the Lefty rioters for the damage, prosecutes for conspiracy to riot, and tears apart their funding structure under RICO. The federal government delays for ages, and finally (on the start of a holiday weekend) denies the city recovery assistance for damages, motivating other cities to avoid that fate by proactively shutting down any Lefty radicals who show signs of organizing.

I dunno if that’d work, or what hell it’d unleash. But I can see something like that happening.

Ultimately, what nongovernmental actors can do depends on their capabilities, organization… and money. Money was the big thing that hampered radical groups in the ’70s. People died or killed people or were arrested trying to get it.

In the 70s, radicals were basically limited to 3 options:

  1. parasitizing existing institutions (like FALN and the Episcopal Church),
  2. leeching off organizations of well-off radicals (Weatherman and the National Lawyers’ Guild), or
  3. robbing banks (everyone else).

Robbing banks isn’t a great strategy long-term. That’s how people got police attention, and occasionally gunfights and murder charges. In 2016, I’d expect radicals to use electronic crime options: ransomware, identity theft, that sort of thing. Less risk of detection. On the Left, though, most violent plots would be funded in the same manner as the FALN: parasitization.

Given the sea of Lefty foundations, nonprofits, and professions, parasitizing a few organizations to fund terrorism would be very doable. Nor would it be hard for YouTube stars or Leftists with Patreons — or, hell, the National Lawyers’ Guild — to turn money toward radicals.

On the Right, funding would be more of a challenge. It always is. Bitcoin would make funding anonymously easier. Also, many righties would be acting alone, so they wouldn’t have huge budgets. Still, the Left, again, has an absolutely massive structural advantage.

There will also be efforts to target each others’ funding. Note that Lefties already do this to Righties, and Righties to Lefties. Righties want to not give their own money to their enemies. Lefties want no one to give any money to their enemies. You can see some of this going on now re: defunding Planned Parenthood. For the pro-life groups, it’s about abortion, full stop, but for Steve Bannon, I’m guessing it’s about a powerful institution that uses money & political organization to support enemy politicians. Of course he’d look to stop taxpayer dollars from going to Planned Parenthood. If you think of politics as a war, that’s a no-brainer.

This is a rare area where Lefties are more vulnerable than Righties, because Lefty organizations get more taxpayer support than Righties do. Lefties are great at mobilizing boycotts and targeting advertisers, though, as we’re seeing them currently do with Breitbart. Could issues over some of this turn violent? Yeah. People could be threatened for advertising, showing support, etc. Any violence would be attention-getting threats/demonstrations, rather than murders. Breaking windows, bombs in offices at night, and the like.

Mostly, though, Americans who turn to political violence will target gatherings of their enemies, and people on their enemies’ lists. Because people are angry at their enemies. They want to punish them. All this godawfulness gets even wackier if the factions of the government get involved. Which, uh. They sort of already are.

The Left has the Bureaucracy and the Deep State. To judge from the press, the CIA is already at war with the Trump administration. So if there are any Righties still dreaming of smiting, lemme point out again: the Left is better placed to go at it than the Right is.

Righties might go, “Yeah, but the military!” Yes, the military runs very heavily Righty. As do the cops. To which my answer is: if we get Civil War II, how many Americans do you think the U.S. military is willing to run over with tanks?

At some point, there’s going to have to be a negotiated settlement for either strong federalism or national divorce. But we’re not gonna do either, because Americans want to rule each other, so.

If you’re asking, no, I don’t know how we’re going to stop this. I don’t even know why you’d ask me. Maybe CalExit could take some pressure off, but I dunno. I feel that bad times are coming.

All right, I’ve yammered more than that game theory guy. Let’s recap and wind up:

The Left wants to disrupt the Right’s power, organizations, celebrations.

The Right is sick of Leftist disruption and wants to punish it with force.

The hard Left has an effective infrastructure. The hard Right is looking to build one.

The hard Left will use the tactics it’s already using.

The hard Right will use Leftist tactics, at which point the Press will become very interested in denormalizing those tactics.

I’m guessing the Trump administration will try to eviscerate Lefty Institutions with budget cuts and the hard Left infrastructure with RICO.

Look for lots of property destruction, by everyone. I would not be surprised to see innovative tactics used to destroy property.

The press is a Lefty weapon and a Righty target.

Everyone will have enemies’ lists. All of us are already on somebody’s.

Effective Righty violence will be, by necessity, by loners or by really close conspiracies (think family members).

Effective Lefty violence will be by capable, fully operating cells.

If we get political violence between civilians, it’s mostly going to be low-level until it abruptly isn’t.

Some suicidal mass murder types may copycat political violence and choose political targets.

You do not want white people to riot. You Do Not. Want. White People. To Riot.

Nobody wants Civil War II. That doesn’t mean we won’t get it anyway.

I feel a little sick writing about this stuff. And a little stupid for talking about it. It sounds crazy in daylight. But every place I’ve been that had this happen thought it sounded crazy, too. And I have a bad feeling that right now what Americans want is to chop each other down like trees.

You want to know what I’m really terrified of? Imagine a few dozen iterations of this story:

There’s a famous case where a shadowy group was after a high-value, high-status target who used his considerable resources to retreat. The group couldn’t get to him. So they targeted everybody associated with him: Friends. Family. Staff. Lawyers. Sympathetic journalists. Eventually, that utter devastation of infrastructure led to the death of the high-value, high-status target, whose name was Pablo Escobar.

That’s what I’m really scared of. Killing like that, on repeat. It’s my nightmare scenario. I know it’s unlikely. But — and this is the stupidest part of this whole thing — after 2016, I’m a little superstitious, and I’m wary of omens.

The shadowy group that unleashed carnage on Pablo Escobar’s Institutions had a name.

They were known as Los Pepes.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

170 Responses to Days of Rage

  1. Anonymous Coward says:

    Typos: “Dorne”, “Burrough”. Fix and delete this comment 🙂

    Like

  2. Andrew says:

    Does the book cover AIM as well? They weren’t bombers from what I recall, but they had no shortage of shootouts with police. And Malheur-style acquittals for some of the leaders.

    Like

  3. a scruffian says:

    I’m curious. ‘Davidzhines’ is not listed on the authors page of this blog, and this is the only post under that name. It reads like the work of ‘Mencius Moldbug’. (If not, disciple davidzhines is emulating him very well indeed.) But why the lack of explanation? Is this a cross-post from somewhere I’m not aware of? (Sorry if this is obvious to everyone else, but I don’t follow the NRx scene so I wouldn’t know.)

    Like

  4. Pingback: Days of Rage

  5. Anonymous says:

    This doesn’t read like Mencius Moldbug because it’s clear, readable and makes sense, unlike Moldbug’s jargon-infested walls of text. It was taken from the Twitter and Storify of a guy named David Hines (@hradzka on twitter), who presumably wrote it.

    Like

  6. Disposable Account says:

    So I was linked this from another blog, and while I agree with the essential thrust of your post I think that you are seriously underestimating the potential effectiveness of right-wing violence.

    Maybe it’s just the “Bitter old Vet” or “Tactical Deathbeast” in me but my own experience has been that being “organized & prepared for violence” paradoxically makes violence less likely, as the actual act of organizing and preparing often forces one to confront the sobering reality of it. Fact is that I have given serious thought to what an effective domestic insurrection would look like, and that is precisely why I don’t want to go down that road.

    Timothy McVeigh would consider the Weather Underground “cute”.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. MacComie says:

    What do you mean by National Divorce? A mutual secession of left and right-wing states?

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Just4Lulz says:

    Meh,

    There are obvious problems with you present worldview as evidenced by some of the following:

    1. It is the right that has suddenly become enamored with anti-Western Russian propaganda primarily as of late. This is new in the US and coincides with the rise of Trump, but it’s a pattern Russia has been following.

    2. The “right” such as it is, is highly organized through networks of think tanks, PACs, state legislatures, and various activist groups. See the TEA party groups, religious right, and so on, and they do perpetrate violence, and witness the mainstreaming of anti-abortion groups that count terrorists among their leadership. These groups are also well funded.

    3. The divorce premise has problems in that a lot of this false left/right dichotomy is partly bases on a difference in values between urban, suburban and rural citizens, I seriously don’t see how a “divorce” in which most of the major cities split off from the rest of the Union.

    4. The non-violent protesters are just that. Their tactic is non-violent resistance. Black bloc anarchists and other elements–it is true–attempt to use these events as cover for their own mischief, but pretending they are affiliated in any way other than they are just used for cover by violent elements is–at best–largely self-deception.

    5. The willing abandonment of facts is more mainstreamed among the 20+% of the electorate that calls themselves “right”. Global Warming denial, they co-opted vaccine denialism from the left, birtherism, chemtrails, and Trump just issued a press pass to the dumbest man on the internet, Jim Hoft, apparently who has written such gems as “Obama building a death star”. Alex Jones, and half the crazy crap that has been mainstreamed on Fox News, alone, discredits the idea that a detachment for reality is a left-wing thing, and the whole Jill Stein nuttiness of the left is–at best–marginalized by the mainstream Western political establishment and most folks that would embrace labels like “liberal” or “progressive”.

    I am not saying extremism does not exist on the left: there are militant animal rights folks, there were folks calling for “a revolution” on the left too, but sovereign citizens have ranked “top cop killers” as a group for some time now.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Erik says:

      Your evidence is unconvincing.

      Point 1 is a red herring. I disagree that “[i]t is the right that has suddenly become enamored with anti-Western Russian propaganda”, but even stipulating it for the sake of argument, you haven’t shown how this is a problem for the post.

      Point 2 is a goalpost shift. David Hines talks about how the hard Left has institutions willing to back their terrorists. You respond that the [no-modifier] Right has institutions [sentence stop]. Moreover, there’s a deceptive sleight of hand between “anti-abortion” and “terrorists”. Possibly this was unintentional, but I think it’s still worth noting as a counterpoint that the Left rage terrorists in this post alone murdered more people than there have been murders by Right anti-abortion terrorists in the entire history of the United States.

      Point 3, if anything, should only reinforce Hines’s worldview. He says a lot of thought would have to go into a national divorce, requiring negotiated settlement, and being difficult enough that it probably won’t happen; you bring up an item that would require a lot of thought to resolve and is reason to believe national divorce might not happen.

      Point 4 could use some references if you don’t want me dismissing it as baseless assertion piled on tautology. Hines has given multiple specific examples of peaceful institutions running cover for violent terrorists. You’re the self-deceiving one if you try to handwave away this entire category of things as not happening.

      Point 5 sounds like a fish not knowing what water is. The Left has built a colossal infrastructure on the willing abandonment of the fact of racial differences, to name one example. Compared to this, chemtrails are an utterly irrelevant distraction on a level with Time Cube Guy. Your ranking of “top cop killers” also smells of extremely selective lumping, splitting, group denialism, and cherrypicked statistics from a very small sample size. Or to put it in perspective: more people die from botched circumcisions than “cop killers” every year.

      Liked by 5 people

    • jsolbakken says:

      The difference between Left and Right is that the Right wing organizations you mention have not been truly weaponized for violence the way that the Lefties have been. The anti-abortion violence has been the work of lone wolf individuals and sincerely condemned by the vast majority of members and supporters of anti-abortion organizations. But, pity the poor dumb Lefty idiots if they succeed in goading the Right to weaponize itself.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Harold Kerr says:

      Name a single pro–life organization with a terrorist on its board. Name a single pro–life terrorist with a professor’s chair at a Christian university, or even a syndicated column.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Smokey says:

      Just4Lulz,

      To deconstruct your belief system:

      1. The Left promotes your fake news talking point, not conservatives (who have never trusted the erstwhile Soviets).

      2. Pure projection (imputing your own faults onto others). For every violent act by one deranged individual on the right, there are many hundreds of organized acts of violence by the Left.

      From the article: “Sustained political violence is dependent on the willing cooperation of admirers and accomplices. The Left has these. The Right does not.” True dat.

      3. Read the Constitution. And some American antebellum history wouldn’t hurt.

      4. Violent protesters always trump the non- or less-violent. See: Stalin v Lenin. It’s just Gresham’s Law applied to politics: the bad always drive out the good.

      5. Cherry-picking a few individuals and implying that “the right” endorses every example you give is disingenuous. It’s no different than saying, “David Duke supports Trump!” So what? 99% of Trump supporters reject that bogus comparison. But since that’s the best argument you have, you use it.

      However, your first example, “global warming denial”, is absurd. Name one scientist who disputes “global warming”. Name just one. You can’t, therefore your point #5 fails.

      The planet has been warming for hundreds of years—naturally—since the end of the Little Ice Age. But that natural warming has not accelerated, despite a 40%+ rise in the harmless trace gas CO2. If CO2 caused any measurable warming, an acceleration in global warming would have been measured by now. But the steady centuries-long rise in warming has not accelerated. In fact, global warming recently stopped for almost twenty years, while CO2 continues to rise (due mostly to China). CO2 has been 20X higher in the past, without ever triggering runaway global warming (or any global warming, for that matter). And CO2 is essential to life on earth; under ≈150 ppm, plant life begins to die. We are still very near the low end of atmospheric CO2, and even if it doubled from here (unlikely), we would still be near the low end.

      The “climate change” scare is a scientifically debunked false alarm. It is a scare intended to pave the way for a carbon tax. But no tax can change global temperatures by even 0.000001ºC. It’s just more big government, with a concomitant growth in the nameless, faceless, and unaccountable army of federal bureaucrats—from a tax that would be every government’s wet dream since governments began: taxing the air we breathe.

      ***********************************************

      I remember just about all of the events reported in this article (I’m 68). But the media has buried them almost completely since then. Kids edumacated by the gov’t .edu factories aren’t taught anything worthwhile any more, like American History, Civics, the Constitution, etc.

      So thanx for the article. Don’t let this fall down the memory hole!

      Like

    • Donna says:

      Just4Lulz: I could not have said it better myself!

      Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        I’ve been a rabid anti-communist since I found out what communism was back in the early 1960’s. It was never Russia or the Russians that I opposed, it was the bullshit of communism and its tyrannical idiocy. The reason us rabid anti-communists are sweet on Putin and the Russians now is because we respect and appreciate the NATIONALISM they are pursuing, and we like and appreciate even the possibility that they are slowly but surely turning away from the dumbass communism and freeing their minds and hearts from its tyrannical idiocy. I think Russia is becoming a normal country with a normal view of its national interests instead of being devoted to worldwide communist revolution. Could be wrong, but why would we trust and believe people like you who still openly support communism?

        Liked by 1 person

    • X says:

      Jew alert.

      Like

  9. Pingback: Jim Hines and the narrative. | Dark Brightness

  10. Doc Sithicus says:

    I’d rather have Civil War 2 rather sooner than later. Why? I’ve still got about 10 good years left in me and don’t want to go through this shit when I’m old and useless. Second reason – I’d gladly kill, murder and commit genocide so that my children and their children don’t have to. I’d gladly go to my grave with blood stained hands if this will give my kids future and chance for a good life.

    Liked by 4 people

    • jsolbakken says:

      ” I’d gladly go to my grave with blood stained hands if this will give my kids future and chance for a good life.” Because you are pro-life and the Left is pro-death. God said, “All who hate Me love death.”
      Proverbs 8:36 But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me LOVE DEATH.
      Instead, the good guys choose life, even if it involves hurting those who love death so much. Is it wrong to give people what they love and want?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Daniel says:

      Can’t tell if this comment is for right wing death squads or left wing death squads.

      Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        ” I’d gladly go to my grave with blood stained hands if this will give my kids future and chance for a good life.”
        The reference to kids and their future indicates clearly that this commenter is referring to “Right Wing” death squad activity, as opposed to “Left Wing.” Even if a Left Winger has kids, they don’t give a rat’s behind about their future.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Possibly both, actually. Strange thing overlooked in this assessment, the dems/left banked it all on their ‘creations’ of those universities. For those not a part of the institution, they appear wholly repulsive and offputting. Both New and Old Black Panthers eventually backed Trump. Why? Well, they may not have all the knowledge Burroughs and Hines do, but they had an inkling they had to “get off the plantation”
        Black Lives Matter sounds MUCH more feel-good and middle-friendly than “Panthers,” a predatory animal. Some damn smart-ass saw this shift happening eventually and already was building a replacement for it. The panthers too, started ‘independently grassroots.’ and were separate from the uni-backed organisations.
        But now, a movement founded by a student of Angela Davis, Alicia Garza, and now directly headed by her, has propelled forwards into the mainstream consciousness. And this Womens’ March nonsense is part of inverting what had to be done back then. With the new radical black movement all about converting white fencesitters, and since there’s a pre-disposition already there to worship black leadership even if they’ve shown no qualities of such (basically Obama’s entire campaign) then it’s now easy as hell to rope all the broadly scattered white feminist groups under the BLM banner. And as a bonus thanks to its leadership, it won’t go ‘off course’ like the panthers. There is a DIRECT line from BLM straight into the universities, going both ways now even with DeRay McKeeson becoming a ‘tenured professor’ who teaches that ‘looting isn’t stealing, because they already stole your money to pay for that, you’re just reclaiming what’s yours’

        So, the old Left Wing Death Squads got discarded by their children, and wound up thrown in with the rest of the ‘nazis’ by simple virtue of not adapting to new “radical human rights precepts” fast enough. Hence the drive to “Get off the plantation.”
        It’s a matter of noticing they ‘can’t trust Trump, but these stupid motherfuckers trying to get us killed!”
        http://thegrio.com/2016/09/03/new-black-panther-activist-urges-blacks-to-listen-to-donald-trump/
        http://www.worldtribune.com/martin-luther-kings-niece-endorses-trump-black-panther-leader-says-blacks-being-pimped-by-democratic-party/
        https://newsone.com/3537561/black-men-for-bernie-leader-bruce-carter-supports-donald-trump/
        I suspect before Malcolm X was killed it was actually going this way back then too, considering he began allowing George Lincoln Rockwell into his rallies.
        Deep State saw what was about to transpire and ‘activated their assets’ within both organisations to prevent any sort of alliance.
        BM4B has already had to deal with its share of bombings as well having been branded traitors, “mysteriously” unreported by the media.

        Like

    • Donna says:

      It won’t give your kids a chance for a good life or a decent, livable future. It will only destroy the, formerly, United States of America and allow the foreign powers and interests to finally tear us apart for good and pick our bones, as they have been trying to do since the beginning of our country. Get a clue. Haven’t some people learned anything from the Civil War?? Violence and war are never the answer. They solve nothing, except to beget more violence. If you are a Christian, the New Testament and gospels have a lot to say about this. I’d suggest you give them a read, if you are so inclined, before you “gladly kill, murder and commit genocide” so that your “children don’t have to”. Oh, but they will. This shit NEVER ends! Just take a look at the Middle East.

      Like

    • Donna says:

      United we Stand; Divided we Fall.

      Like

      • Donna says:

        Erik: Since there is no ‘Reply’ button on the last 2 comments you left, directed to both me and Enkiv2, I will reply here. No, I do not want to amend my original statement. The Cato Institute has changed it’s tune, recently, as you have noted. This is in marked contrast to their previous, long-standing positions over the years, which are firmly on the right, hard right, I would say. I would suppose this is because David Koch, the founder of the Cato Institute and their top funder, was forced to resign from the board in the past year or so because of the controversy over his massive influence over the think tank, which was discrediting it. I’m not sure what your point was regarding AEI being founded in 1938 and the Heritage Foundation in 1973. Are you saying there were no right-wing think tanks or institutions, before 1980? I suppose that comment relates to Enkiv2’s statement that you quoted. There have been right-wing institutions around for a very long time, both here and abroad. However, there has been a massive proliferation of them in the U.S. since the 1980s (see the Powell memo) and they all seem to have Orwellian names that stand for the opposite of what they are named. Your comment “it looks more like a list of miscellaneous institutions built by the not-hard-left since approximately forever” makes no sense to me, whatsoever. Obviously, we disagree on what constitutes right-wing, right, and/or hard right (as well as the so-called “left”). That’s not surprising, because these terms, in the American lexicon today, have become virtually meaningless and serve to confuse and obfuscate the issues much more than they illuminate anything. If I was interested in continuing this conversation, I would insist on defining our terms, first. Otherwise, any conversation or debate about this topic is useless. Having said that, it should be clear that only discussions/debates about real issues matter. If you are interested in that, we might have something to talk about. Otherwise, I am not interested and have better things to do with my time.
        Also, this comment section does not operate in a straightforward manner. Reply buttons are not consistently displayed. Replies to comments end up in weird places and are not linked to the original commenter by name. I cannot even find the original comment I was replying to on this thread! It seems to have disappeared. What gives? Also, there seems to be a troll problem….moderation??

        Like

      • Donna says:

        Erik: I’m replying to my own comment because there is, again, no Reply button on your comment. The passage from Luke that you cite above, Luke 19:27, is taken out of context. It is a parable of a ‘certain man of noble birth’ which starts at Luke 19:11. He is called “Lord” in the passage by his subjects. This reference to the “Lord” is not to Jesus, but to this noble man. “But as for these mine enemies who would not have me reign over them – bring them hither and slaughter them before me”. This is NOT Jesus advocating violence. It is a story about a noble (rich) man. It is a parable. It teaches a lesson. Like the parable of the mustard seed, it is not to be taken literally. If you read on and place it within it’s proper context, you will understand what it means. In my interpretation, Jesus was rejecting this ancient mindset that was commonly accepted in the Old Testament and historically, in general. Jesus brought a New Testament. It seems that either you do not understand this interpretation, or that you reject it. Either way, it is your prerogative and your choice. That is why we have, and must have, freedom of religion. I don’t accept your implied interpretation taken totally out of context. And, apparently, you do not accept mine. But, you know, that’s O.K. with me!

        Like

  11. Pingback: Antennae of the Race: Understanding Modernist and Contemporary art | Samuel Stevens

  12. Pingback: Bryan Burrough’s Days of Rage – The Maverick Mathologist

  13. Sam J. says:

    One option that David Hines doesn’t mention to solve this problem. Expel the Jews. If you’ll notice the Jews are all over all these extremest movements. They actively push these extremist movements. Push to make them more radical. For all I know they could be the ones pushing the whole Civil War II momentum, right David? The Jews push and fund the left disruption while they goad the right to,”not take this anymore”, while they sit back and get their jollies in the carnage. A good example is the Ukrainian civil war. Both sides in the war are run by Jews. The shootings that started the war were supposedly protesters being shot by the police and protestors shooting at the police. We now know that the bullets came from the same weapon. It’s just the same old shit. Jews set us up and watch while we kill each other.

    The Jews have been thrown out of every single country that they’ve been to in any numbers. Wonder why?

    Liked by 1 person

    • empreb says:

      He said he was a jew…. IE /pol/ is always right. ALWAYS.

      Like

    • Anon says:

      YOU are the reason the right can’t organize

      Like

    • Emerich says:

      Sam J, haven’t you heard? The jews are just like you and me — only more so.

      Like

      • Sam J. says:

        You got it backwards. They are just like you and me but “less” so. They’re a tribe of psychopaths. They have little to no empathy for other humans. A large amount of their population is like this. After all who else has a religion that says all people not Jewish are not human, all their property belongs to the Jews and they should all be the Jews slaves. If that’s not a psychopathic religion I don’t know what is. Same with their treatment of people once they gain political control over them, Persia(Purim, ring a bell), the Canaanites, Spanish after Jews betrayed them to the Muslims(twice in Spain counting the Spanish Civil War), Germans, the really huge slaughters in the Ukraine and Russia, Armenian Genocide, Palestinians, the Americans killed on 9-11 and I could go on with more fine grained facts but you get the idea.

        Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        It was God who told the Israelites that gentiles were unchosen and unsaved. What the Israelites didn’t get was that it was only for the time being, a temporary situation which would be adjusted when the Messiah, the Son of God, came to do His work of redemption for all mankind, not for the Jew only, but also for the gentile. The Jews didn’t accept the change when Jesus tried to teach them that in Him there was no Jew or Greek, free or bond, rich or poor, male or female, no more barbarians and Scythians on the outside looking in. But even that blindness is God’s work, to serve God’s mysterious historical purposes. The Jews are brothers in the election, but for the time being they are enemies of the gospel. The Jews are so much enemies of the gospel that, I believe, they created a Doomsday Weapon called “Islam” for the purpose of destroying the gospel once and for all, but like all Doomsday Weapons it is running wild and is destroying everything in its path. The Jews are kind of like Doctor Frankenstein and his monster. Doctor Frankenstein wasn’t such a bad guy, really, but his monster was very dangerous and it killed people.

        Like

      • Sam J. says:

        jsolbakken,”It was God who told the Israelites that gentiles were unchosen and unsaved…”

        No it wasn’t god. It was a demon. One of the group of Christians that believed this was the Carthars. They believed that the Jews worshiped a demon and satan. The Carthars believed,”…The good God was the God of the New Testament and the creator of the spiritual realm, contrasted with the evil Old Testament God—the creator of the physical world whom many Cathars, and particularly their persecutors, identified as Satan….”. Of course the Catholic church came and killed every Man, Women and Child in the Cathars. It’s where the phrase,”Kill them all, God will know his own”, came from.

        If a people, the Jews, act in such a way as to be thrown out of every single country that they’ve ever gone to in any appreciable numbers over thousands of years, what does that say about those people? What does it say about their behavior?

        Maybe it’s just everyone else that’s the problem and the Jews are angels.

        Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        You give your self away when you refer to God with a small “g.”
        But you are correct that the Jews have had problems with worshipping demons from ancient days, but because they were copying the gentiles instead of obeying God. Jews are enemies of the gospel today, but they are still brothers in the elections of God and when they see Yeshua Ha Mashiach come back in glory they will look on Him whom they have pierced and turn back to their God and be restored, grafted back in to their own natural family tree.
        Now, until that day comes I agree that Jews that support communism and Islam and other wicked totalitarian perversion need to be resisted. Same goes for non-Jews who support such evil things.
        Just like the ancient Israelites who went after Molech and Ashtoreth, modern Israelites too often follow after communism and Islam, both being hammers with which they hope to smash Christianity with.

        Zechariah 12:
        10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. Zechariah 13
        1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.
        2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.

        Like

      • Sam J. says:

        “…The Jews are so much enemies of the gospel that, I believe, they created a Doomsday Weapon called “Islam”…”

        I think you very well might be correct on this. It wouldn’t surprise me. Psychopaths always do stupid stuff like this.

        Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        My study of history has made me strongly suppose that Talmudic Jews wrote the Koran to create Islam so that it would oppose Christianity. The Jews of the 7th century were quite alarmed at the spread of Christianity and were in a panic to oppose it.
        The difference with me is that I do not hate the Jews for this. I recognize the danger, and am willing to oppose them, but I go by what the Bible says about it. Paul wrote in his epistle to the Romans that God hath not cast away His people, but hath let them be blinded for a time until the time of the gentiles is fulfilled, then they get grafted back in to God’s family tree where they belong, brothers once again, hallelujah, praise God. Romans 11:28 “28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes.
        29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
        30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
        31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
        32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
        33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
        34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?
        35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
        36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

        Like

      • Sam J. says:

        “…The difference with me is that I do not hate the Jews for this. I recognize the danger, and am willing to oppose them…”

        You suppose that anybody who opposes the Jews are filled with hate or that’s what the Jews say. You of course defer to the Jews and their demon influenced Talmud. There’s another quite plausible scenario. Remember Trumps fable about the snake.

        You go play with the snakes. I don’t want to have anything to do with them I know what they are.

        You’re full of forgiveness for those that never forgive. In the immortal words of that great philosopher Gomer Pyle,” Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me”.

        Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        Having an eschatological perspective on the Jews is not the same as deferring to them. I have no illusions about them being my friends where the gospel of Jesus Christ is concerned. I understand perfectly well that they hate Jesus Christ and want to destroy Christianity and I’ve come to believe, as I previously stated, that certain Jews created Islam as a Doomsday Weapon to destroy Christianity from off the face of the earth. Islam is a lot like the Doomsday Machine on the original Star Trek episode, where they had to explode a star ship inside of it in order to disable it. But the fact of the matter is that the Bible says they are blinded in part until the day of their redemption comes. And it is also written that IF the Jews had known that they were murdering the Son of God, they wouldn’t have done it. They did it because they were blind to the truth, not because they knowingly hated the truth. It seems that to God there is a spiritual difference in being blind and willfully opposing the truth when you know it to be the truth.

        Like

      • Sam J. says:

        jsolbakken ,”…You give your self away when you refer to God with a small “g.”…”

        You suppose I do but you don’t understand. Jesus Christ is the Son of God. The Jews worship a god. Satan. If you follow the teachings of gods you are worshiping Satan. The Talmud is the words of demons.

        Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        OK. Sorry. I jumped to the wrong contusions when I saw the annoying use of the small “g” for God.

        Like

      • X says:

        Sam nails it.

        Like

      • X says:

        We don’t give two short and curlies what (((Jesus))) or (((Paul))) said.

        We WILL have white nations in Europe and North America.

        http://www.thisblogisdangerous.com/the-pagan-cross-and-codes-of-honour/

        Like

    • X says:

      Yes. I noticed. So have 300 million of our brothers in Europe and North America.

      Like

  14. David R. Graham says:

    I read through the whole essay. I experience the feelings motivating it. I wrote a brief essay titled Revolution Refounding Reformation. It treats of the same feelings and comes out with a time-line including but extending the one above: http://theological-geography.net/?p=28130

    Like

  15. Excellent. Good information here. Moldbug introduced the theory (from De Jouvenel) that the structure is High (elite, institutional left) and low (Blacks, Mexicans, Muslims and students) against Middle (conservative middle class.)

    I’m not optimistic either.

    Like

    • jsolbakken says:

      The John Birch Society called it “Pressure from above plus pressure from below” creating the vise like crushing of the liberty of the normal people caught in the middle.

      Like

      • Oh? They saw this pattern too?

        I just saw an article on Anti-Fascism in the Nation calling for violence.

        Liked by 1 person

      • jsolbakken says:

        Yes, the John Birch Society needs to be thanked for carrying the torch of truth through the darkest days when there was no other light. When the whole world was against them they stood strong for what they believed to be true, which is now slowly becoming, I hope and pray at least, common knowledge, that there is a cabal of rich and powerful people who use their money and power to influence not only government policy but government structure itself to make it more amenable to their centralized control over the whole world. This vast global conspiracy, or if you don’t like the word “conspiracy,” use my preferred neologism “cahootancy,” is what is behind all the Globalism and push for world government. When people resist my assertion that the richest and most powerful people manipulate the rest of the world for their own personal benefit, I ask them, “so, you think that the richest and most powerful people in the world just let the chips fall where they may? They just let the cookies crumble as they will? They just the mop flop any which way? They aren’t the types of people who get their little duckies all in neat little rows?”

        Like

  16. Anonymous says:

    I regret ever posting that goddamn frog. It was about being a lonely, unhealthy weirdo, not a goddamn revolutionary or whatever the fuck.

    Everything I try to do turns straight to shit.

    Like

    • Didn’t you read the article? That’s exactly what revolutionaries are trying to do too!
      Should write yourself a book about becoming the “accidental revolutionary the internet and America needed” or something. At least you’ll get a couple bucks out of it!
      I guess it could be worse, Nicki Minaj popularising it in the first place outside of tumblr/chans could have gone to some really strange places if /pol/ hadn’t picked it back up.

      Like

    • ameizing says:

      >you will never post a silly frog meme without it turning into a far right icon

      Like

  17. Oldhippie says:

    Interesting. You have picked up some of the pieces. Myself I started to drift out of SDS when martial arts training became obligatory. When weapons training was required that was the end for me. What sent me away was not so much the notion of using a gun for a political end as that the providers of the guns were people who until five minutes previous could not fundraise a nickel bag for a party. Suddenly they had weapons, unlimited weapons, nice weapons, and an infinite supply of ammunition for training purposes. If they burned out an M60 by running it too hot there was another M60 ready to go. And a little farm in Wisconsin to use as a training facility. All the farmers in the vicinity could and did hear the M60 and the BAR, so could the local police, somehow in spite of every local looking daggers at the hippies when they passed through town there was no problem ever. Someone had arranged all this and it was not the Episcopal Church. Of course the two honchos who ran our chapter were both later exposed as pedophiles and FBI.

    Yes it is true Cathy Wilkerson got off light. Most Weathermen did hard time. The two who conspicuously, very conspicuously, got off scotfree were Dohrn and Ayers. Those two were also the absolute bedrock core of the Action Faction. That is what they called themselves. Whenever anyone wavered they were there. They were the maximum leaders and they were the ones always pushing for guns and bombs and the Wargasm. Both up to their eyeballs in the Greenwich townhouse bombing in the photo above and they admit to it. Let me tell you about young Bernardine. She was a strikingly attractive woman. Beautiful clear olive skin. Busty and she showed it off all the time. And usually in high black boots. Not working class engineer boots, shiny black fetish gear. Have you seen the Weather movie? Through the entire “underground” period she wore that gear. They were “underground” on the Upper West Side, in the Columbia University neighborhood, where lots and lots of people knew who they were. And miraculously the FBI could not find them.

    Yes the 60s and 70s were completely crazy. Those who were not there cannot easily imagine it. And the big sponsor of the madness was not the NYT or the City of New York or the Episcopal Church.

    Like

    • Sam J. says:

      That’s really interesting.

      Like

    • Anonymous says:

      Could you drop more information on the FBI-Pedo connection and the big sponsor?

      Like

      • Oldhippie says:

        Chairman Bob Avakian claimed to be the one supplying the guns. Look him up. Find one word by him or about him that passes the laugh test.

        Again, focus on Ayers and Dohrn. The leaders and the only ones to entirely escape prosecution.

        AFAIK the pederasty was feeelance. The sort of characters who would want undercover work in COINTELPRO and it’s many cognates would tend to be a bit off. And they got a get out of jail free card.

        Like

      • Sam J. says:

        I look up this Bob Avakian fellow and get. “Hillary Floats Chairman Bob Avakian as Supreme Court Nominee”. WOW. I never heard of him. These people are all in groups that come up over and over. I think they could be stopped if anyone cared to.

        I find it hard to believe they’re firing off machine guns and no investigates. Seems at least the local Sheriff would find out if they were legal. So what does that mean? I don’t know. Why would the deep State want to fund radicals? I don’t know. That most of these people are Jews is interesting in itself. The did this sort of thing in Russia and killed 60 million???(according to Solzhenitsyn) people when they took over. These are not nice people.

        Like

      • Sam J. says:

        @oldhippy and anonymous. You ever heard of the Finders? Lots of these type groups around. Children of God. Many others.

        These people need to be in jail. I’m fairly hopeful as I look at the actions of people that are following the pizzagate crime, if it is one. It wouldn’t look like much except there’s been so damn many of these. I’m hoping that people will start getting enthusiastic about being amateur investigators. People like oldhippie and lots of others who saw stuff but decided not to bring it to notice could provide valuable information and eventually the cops would HAVE to do something. There’s only so much they can bury and the filth is piling up, HIGH. They’re kind of stuck. If they have to censor the whole internet all the little girls whacking away at their phones would have a fuckin cow. They would have to wait for censors to clear their tweets. Can you imagine the uproar. Any site who censors is immediately bypassed to one that doesn’t and new services like Maidsafe are distributed storage servers, like huge internet information bit-torrents, so they can’t be censored at all.

        I want to state again that the above article is an attempt to get the Right to attack the Left by egging them on and telling them,”Wow they got away with it”. I say let’s box them ALL in and jail them all.

        Like

      • James K. says:

        The site that has the article “Hillary Floats Chairman Bob Avakian as Supreme Court Nominee” also has such articles as “Kim Jong-un Throws Hat in the Ring for Republican Nomination,” “Orcs Declare They Are Anarcho-Capitalists, Still Bummed Ron Paul Lost,” and “Jennifer Lawrence Revealed as Former Member of Red Army Faction.” It seems to be a mixture of third-rate Alex Jones, third-rate Onion, and nonsensical headlines created just for clickbait. So you don’t have to worry about that one.

        Like

      • Sam J. says:

        James K. says,”…The site that has the article “Hillary Floats Chairman Bob Avakian as Supreme Court Nominee” also has such articles as “Kim Jong-un Throws Hat in the Ring for Republican Nomination,” …”

        Oops my bad. I just searched and that’s what came up. I’ll have to be more careful. There’s a lot more of this lately. The volume of stuff like this is getting much higher. I think deep state has an A.I. furiously typing this stuff up and posting it all over.

        Like

    • bjdubbs says:

      That’s interesting. The same is true of many of the other radicals, they were hiding in plain sight. For instance, Kathy Boudin, who was living at the townhouse that exploded and who crawled out of the wreckage, didn’t try very hard to elude authorities:

      “In the days following the explosion, Kathy rode the subway and saw her photograph and headlines on other people newspapers. She later told an interviewer, “One of the amazing things was knowing how hard the authorities were searching for us and yet they weren’t able to find us.”

      But it shouldn’t have been hard to figure out. Kathy was literally living with her parents a few blocks from the explosion.

      “At 8 PM FBI agents arrived at the Boudin home. Jean [Kathy’s mother] shooed her daughter and Cathlyn [Wilkerson] quietly upstairs. She harshly informed the two men that she was busy, then slammed the door.”

      OK then, no need to ask further questions. The quotes are from Family Circle: The Boudins and the Aristocracy of the Left.

      Like

      • Oldhippie says:

        Do you know what Boudin looks like? Quite impossible for her to hide or disguise. “…how hard the authorities were searching for us…” The authorities always knew exactly where they were and what they were doing and were quite pleased with the situation.

        Bureaucracies are generally clumsy and incompetent. No suggestion from me that the government is omniscient. They can and will overlook what is right in front of their noses. In this case the government was in full control. The bulk of the active membership of SDS (that would be members, not campus hangers-on) were always government workers. In the aftermath of SDS the situation was even more extreme. Organizations as RCP or PL-SDS had no existence at all outside of government.

        Like

      • Sam J. says:

        “…In the aftermath of SDS the situation was even more extreme. Organizations as RCP or PL-SDS had no existence at all outside of government….”

        That made me laugh. They’re like the Klan, nine FBI informants and one guy who hates Blacks, cause his Sister got raped by them, who they recruited on the internet.

        Like

    • Actually the Episcopal Church is still a big part of it. But you have to think to yourself about where their people were going and why they’d defend the FALN if they weren’t joining it themselves. Though the fastest and quickest route is…Who was our first Episcopalian President? And what office did he hold immediately before then?

      If not this president, then I hope one later will eventually declassify the entirety of CIA documentation to draw solid lines between all this as opposed to just guesswork. But the movement of that family, and their supposed “bitter rivals from Mena, Arkansas” is mightily suspicious indeed. And I mean an authentic declassification, not having all but 3 words in an entire document blacked out!

      It’s kind of amusing in a maudlin way how much of this information I encountered already…when looking up what Clinton was doing in South America. It’s practically common knowledge what Castro was doing and how he was messing with the general American public, and how he had essentially been the ‘ghost funder’ for the more violent groups. Even the lowliest crop-picker looks upon you with shock and horror realising how little Americans and Europeans were actually aware of this.
      In a way America’s paranoia of Castro is also what causes radicalism in reverse through the rest of South America. They believe every other populist leader that arises could not only become another Castro, but as impossible to kill as he was. So they knocked over legitimately good governments and turned them into drug cartel hells. Somewhere along the line, around the time the Clintons were brought in, it went from knocking over these governments from paranoia, to knocking them over for profit, and being complicit in the drug trade. The most recent debacle, deposing Manuel Zelaya, was a little of both. The CIA has been a cartel all itself really, at least since the 70s, stealing suspicious characters under investigation from under the DEA and FBI frequently, then releasing them free and clear.

      Every now and then small bits and pieces hit the mainstream.
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/10/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html
      http://www.serendipity.li/cia.html
      But the full extent remains largely hidden and piecemealed.

      Also, it’s an interesting ploy that they came up with early on…Hiring nazis to “hunt communists” to look good to the American people for stopping the spread of communism, all the while importing its most important elements into the US itself. One of Davis’ professors even is suspected of being one of these early assets, Max (((Horkheimer)))

      Like

      • Donna says:

        I think you are on to something, deutschefolkhero. I have read a lot about this over the years. And the president you are referring to, I believe, was CIA director before becoming president – something that was unheard of, before then, and should never have happened. A lot of mischief happened then and continues. Things weren’t good before, but it has been all downhill since then, a veritable ‘race to the bottom’.

        Like

    • Sam J. says:

      I read somewhere that whoever was calling for the most violence was who Bernardine latched onto and fucked silly. No violence, no pussy. Maybe they need to put that on a tee shit. Can’t remember where. Book maybe.

      Like

    • spindlitis says:

      The big reason Dohrn and Ayres got off is money. Their parents were rich. I think this point started to sink in to the radicals with less wealthy parents.

      Also a lot of the anger was fueled by the draft and the Vietnam War. It’s easier to support the violence if you think you’re going to Nam. I don’t see anything to fund that anger today.

      Like

    • Donna says:

      Thank you for your candor, Oldhippie. Yes, the 60s and 70s were completely crazy…lots of operatives all around doing very nefarious things. Since then we have seen many scandals come to light about these horrendous pedofile rings and each one of them has had some kind of FBI/police involvement to protect them and cover it up; often times, in addition to the involvement of church officials, catholic priests, as well as other “religious” leaders, powerful politicians and businessmen, and people running various “charitable” organizations (like The Second Mile, in the infamous Penn State case in Pennsylvania, where, as of yet, only Jerry Sandusky has been prosecuted, convicted and incarcerated. They brought in previous FBI director Louis Freeh for that ‘investigation’.). Nobody wants to turn over any more of those rocks, though!

      Like

    • X says:

      The Jews.

      Like

  18. Joel Salomon says:

    Thanks; you’ve gone and made Tom Kratman, with his own predictions of CWII, sound like Pollyanna.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Pingback: Punching Nazis Is the First Refuge of the Incompetent | Refutation & Overthrow...

  20. Emerich says:

    I read the whole article not just because it was inherently interesting–I already knew about the book from book reviews–but because it was well written. Hines writes well, and also added some good insights and analysis of his own. Certainly hope the pessimistic note it ends on is a few turns too far.

    Like

  21. Pingback: The American Troubles | The Anarchist Notebook

  22. Pingback: Cold Fury » That 70s show!

  23. bjdubbs says:

    Dohrn is now giving parenting tips on public radio. Somehow I don’t think Richard Spencer will be giving parenting tips on NPR.

    https://www.wbez.org/shows/storycorps/former-weather-underground-leader-shares-tips-on-raising-feminist-boys/599f08b3-c4cf-4d3e-8f0f-09ffe6a9b59d

    Like

    • X says:

      Feminism was a Jewish attack on white civilization.

      Period. And you’re a retard if you still don’t understand this fact.

      That bitch is pure evil.

      Like

      • bjdubbs says:

        There is a funny story about Dohrn and Ayers. They were raising Boutin’s son after Boutin landed in jail and D&A sent their adopted son to the local public school in NY, much to the horror of Boutin’s parents, also radical left wingers. Of course once D&A settled in Chicago they wised up and sent their children to the UofChicago Lab School, despite perfectly adequate local schools in Hyde Park.

        Like

  24. Pingback: Interesting Links for 24-01-2017 | Made from Truth and Lies

  25. Pingback: Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » Quote note (#325)

  26. enkiv2 says:

    It’s weird that the author believes the CIA to be a hard-left asset rather than a neoliberal/centrist one (government tends to be culturally reactionary even if it’s economically center-left, because it wants to accumulate and keep power, and we have to recognize that for most of the CIA’s life it’s been involved in attempts to sacrifice major resources in order to stop communism, including the propping up of right-wing dictators). It’s also very strange that the author believes that the right lacks institutions: the hard-right has been actively building alternative institutions along the same models as the left’s since the 80s (since today’s center-right old guard is mostly former radical leftists who have turned) and positions and institutions that were moderately left-leaning in the 60s and 70s have become right-of-center due to the shift of the overton window. (It’s absurd to suggest that NPR and the New York Times are hard-left or even soft-left: they’re centrist organizations with an interest in holding on to the support of the current power-elite, who are mostly center-right.)

    Yes, there were crazies on the left that played out a violent drama forty years ago, during the era of COINTELPRO. But, differences in resources have been vastly overstated, and differences in resources projected out from the tail end of a huge left-wing youth movement aren’t valid when that movement is famous for having moved to the other side of the aisle to create the current right-wing status quo.

    Like

    • jsolbakken says:

      What confuses people is that they can’t seem to absorb the fact that the Deep State, as we are calling it now, is completely pragmatic, and uses an Hegelian process of Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis, to accomplish its objectives. Or, alternatively, I would say that one way to lo look at it is that the Deep State sees itself as the normal “Center,” and sets up “opposition” from “left” and “right” that it controls, in order to solidify it’s position in the “Center” as Supreme Overlord of All. Does it matter whether Right is the Thesis and Left is the Antithesis, or vice versa? What matters is, what is the evil and wicked totalitarian Synthesis the Deep State is shooting for.

      Like

      • enkiv2 says:

        Agreed — the deep state, like the spectacle, consumes all that opposes it and assimilates all weapons used against it, so it is not easily classified. (Or rather, it is too easily classified but not easily correctly classified: if you’re motivated to see shapes in the clouds, you can.)

        I’ve been surprised to see the far-right using situationist/culture jamming tactics normally employed by the left during the past few election cycles, although I shouldn’t be. Even intellectual weapons are wielder-agnostic.

        Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        “I’ve been surprised to see the far-right using situationist/culture jamming tactics normally employed by the left during the past few election cycles, although I shouldn’t be. Even intellectual weapons are wielder-agnostic.” For an example, I would say I support in general the policy of bombing the German and Japanese cities and infrastructure, but I oppose the bombing of a place like Dresden, which seems to have no military significance beyond psychological. I would not have opposed bombing Dresden to the extent that I would have refused the mission if I was a bomber pilot assigned to it, though. I would merely have said, “I wouldn’t have picked Dresden my self as a target, but, I’m not in charge of picking targets, so, let’s go.” I fee just like that about this Civil War II with the Leftist traitors who hate America. I wouldn’t necessarily encourage everything that is hurled at them, but, I wouldn’t necessarily give a damn either way if it seems over the top and a bit too much. That’s what happens when you act like a Leftist communist criminal traitor, the people you’ve been screwing over and oppressing and trying to assimilate lose their sense decorum and limitations. I’m ready to go along with bombing their Dresden, is what I’m saying.

        Like

    • Erik says:

      “It’s weird that the author believes the CIA to be a hard-left asset rather than a neoliberal/centrist one […] we have to recognize that for most of the CIA’s life it’s been involved in attempts to sacrifice major resources in order to stop communism”

      In the Sino-Soviet Split, both flavors of communist sacrificed major resources to stop the other sort of communism. The hard-left is prone to schism; opposition to a particular brand of hard-leftism is very weak evidence that an organization is not itself hard-left.

      (Read Fosetiiiiii!)

      “It’s also very strange that the author believes that the right lacks institutions: the hard-right has been actively building alternative institutions along the same models as the left’s since the 80s”

      Such as?

      Like

      • Donna says:

        You are kidding, right?! O.K., for example, The Cato Institute, AEI, Heritage Foundation, The Federalist Society, Americans for Prosperity, ALEC, FAIR, Family Research Council, GOA, Liberty Councel, National Right to Life, National Organization for Marriage, Eagle Forum, Center for Immigration Studies, Club for Growth, CBN, TBN, the many Tea Party iterations, and many, many others with their Orwellian names, just for starters! For a more complete list, see http://www.rightwingwatch.org/organizations/ . I could go on writing for pages, literally! Where have you been over the past 4 decades, Rip?

        Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        Right Wing Watch? Why would we give a damn what they have to say, about anything? Sure, the Hegelian Dialectic that humanity’s enemies use to manipulate us involves a lot of controlled opposition, but an outfit like Right Wing Watch calls any organization that is not Left Wing nefarious and fascist and evil. It uses political criteria for the purpose of stirring the pot and manipulating Left wingers instead of focusing on facts. Also, you list GOA? Really? Would there be a Gun Owners of America if the Left Wing was not so rabidly anti-gun and crazy mad with intent to disarm the citizenry? There would be a National Rifle Association because it was founded before modern gun control was even imagined and was focused on shooting skills and technical issues, but GOA is all about the politics of gun control, more specifically, resisting it. If you want GOA to go away then stop trying to enact gun control laws. If you don’t want the Hegelians to have a GOA they can control then make the reason for its existence go away.

        Like

      • Erik says:

        No, I’m not kidding. If you have so many pages available, pick better examples. Because this looks like a Gish Gallop – throw out lots of bullshit, bullshit takes much more energy to refute than to produce.

        Take your first example, the Cato Institute. I went and read all the articles featured on its front page just now. They boil down to: Trump’s infrastructure plans are bad, Trump’s immigration holds are bad, the surveillance state is bad, and immigration is good. This is far from “hard right”. To boot, it’s founded 1977.

        The second, the American Enterprise Institute, I happen to know it’s founded pre-WW2. (Looking it up: 1938.)

        Heritage Foundation, 1973.

        You originally said: “the hard-right has been actively building alternative institutions along the same models as the left’s since the 80s”. Now you move the goalposts to “For a more complete list, see http://www.rightwingwatch.org/organizations/ which I am pretty damn sure is not actually a list of alternative institutions built by the hard-right since the 80s – it looks more like a list of miscellaneous institutions built by the not-hard-left since approximately forever. And that’s without even getting into the weeds of “along the same models as the left”.

        Do you perhaps want to amend your original statement?

        Like

      • Erik says:

        Oops, just realized that Donna jumped into the conversation and isn’t enkiv2. My apologies for talking as though they were the same person.

        The general point stands. Donna, your list does not pertain to the subject that was under discussion.

        Like

      • X says:

        Donna, men are talking sweetie.

        You just listed a bunch of cuck organizations

        Conservative white men HAVE NO WAY TO MAKE FIAT DOLLARS OTHER THAN HARD LABOR.

        (((CATO INSTITUTE))) was on (((CSPAN))) yesterday telling the goyim that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment.

        Like

    • spindlitis says:

      Have you listened to Gloria Steinam’s interview about her days in the CIA. She found them easier to work with than those in the rest of the government. I’ll see if I can find it.

      Like

  27. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2017/01/22) - Social Matter

  28. Pingback: Future History | The Jolly Landsknecht

  29. Pingback: Days Of Rage | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  30. DensityDuck says:

    Good essay. One of the cute bits (about the chinese revolutionaries) comes from here: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/31/radicalizing-the-romanceless/

    Like

  31. Jorge says:

    “You don’t want white people to riot” That sentence alone resumes everything. It means “They have their patience, but you don’t want to see them angry, believe me, you dont”. And I am a white guy and I can say you are right. If they continue poking us, one day we are going to be triggered as fuck and civil war will start. Which, by the way, i’m not afraid of. See? This is the main difference between a jew and a white. I -as a white- will avoid violence as much as I can (see the statistics, this is as it is), but I can be triggered and then I won’t be afraid to die. Good news is that right now I feel 20% fed up haha

    While I respect that I really think you want to deescalate things, I trully believe that you know that it’s not the right’s fault at this point. We won the election fair and square. Bullies were sent by the DNC to Trump rallies (in order to blame Bernie). All nonsense has started in their side. We just want the lefties to behave and stand behind the country, there’s a lot of work to do and they can help if they want to. But lefties can be divided in top donors, organizers, and zombies. The thing is that if you don’t dismantle the architecture, top donors will be paying organizers to push zombies into stupidity.

    Like

  32. Dues says:

    As the democratic and republican parties seem to be dropping members like crazy (and becoming more radical as a result) it seems like we need more centrist organizations for independents and centrists to rally around. Because it seems pretty obvious that most people on the left and the right don’t want extremists to have power, it just that right now the incentives drive parties to be extreme.

    Like

    • Donna says:

      Yes, but what we want and what we need is real representation of our actual interests, economic, social and political, not the false dichotomy of “right” v. “left” or even the false chimera of “centrist” or so-called independent, because those latter labels are relative to and totally dependent upon/defined by the former. We should all be non-partisan, like George Washington, and demand candidates that either, a.) actually represent us, or b.) ARE us. The parties are the PTB’s main tool to divide and manipulate us. They are intended to deny us real representation and real representative government.

      Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        I also hate the kind of mindless partisanship that is merely about us versus them, red team versus blue team, which arises because politics is a money making business that people make their living at. But don’t pretend that there are not serious areas of substantive disagreement about policies that also explains the political polarization that takes place. It just so happens that I hate things like Obamacare, the minimum wage, gun control, immigration and especially H1-B visas, and shopping bag bans. Gee, wonder which party I’d feel more comfortable with? Duh. If you like Obamacare, the minimum wage, gun control, immigration and especially H1-B visas and shopping bag bans, then you have a logical preference for which party you’d want to support. What is sad is that whatever our policy views happen to be, there are mostly only crooks available to provide the political representation for them, and I doubt that will ever change. In fact I’d bet dollars to donuts that politics will ALWAYS be populated with crooks and liars and cheats and swindlers who do not really give a damn about what the policies are as long as they get rich.

        Like

      • Decade says:

        Well, jsolbakken, that particular list of issues is so materialistic that it can only have been produced by the partisan processes that you think you hate. I care about liberty and the full development of human potential, regardless of partisan issues.

        As for your list, I value affordable health care, government not subsidizing companies’ minimum wage employees via welfare, public health and safety, my immigrant colleagues’ contributions, and uncontaminated sea creatures to eat. (Really, how is plastic bag outrage a thing? We lived without plastic bags for millennia. We don’t hold grudges about other banned items that are totally unhealthy, such as asbestos.) Now what is the reasonable position?

        I disagree with the Democratic Party’s solutions to most issues, but between Bush and Trump I have less faith in the Republican Party. If I had my way, I would be maximally effective registering with neither.

        Like

      • jsolbakken says:

        You say my list of political issues is materialistic, but is not politics a materialistic field of interest? My politics is controlled by my spiritual morals and values, but politics cannot change the laws of physics or chemistry or economics. I hate gun control because it obviously empowers criminals at the expense of innocent victims. I hate minimum wage because it harms the poor and empowers the richest of the filthy rich and powerful. I hate Obamacare because it harms the poor and empowers the megalomaniacal bureaucrats. I hate immigration because it harms my country and empowers the Globalist criminals. There is morality all tangled up in these issues, but my judgement about them is based on the real world reality of how the policy works out in the real world and towards whose benefit. I am not manipulated by the emotional appeals of the politicians, both because I know they lie constantly, and I also have an independent understanding of how the world actually works, so when they tell me that gun control will reduce crime, I know that they are stupid, evil, crazy, and probably all 3. When they tell me that minimum wage helps the poor, same thing, because I know that economics does not work that way. When they tell me that more immigrants is good for my country, I don’t need to know anything more than to look around and see that where I live the ignorant and illiterate peasant immigrants all vote against me because they come from backward places where they never knew about anything besides the dirt and the mud that they tried to scratch out a subsistence living from. I’d like to help them have a better life, but not at the expense of destroying my own country, thank you very much.

        Like

  33. Pingback: Age of Rage? On Left, Right, and civil war – The Enigma of Scarhand

  34. spindlitis says:

    I thought of this yesterday and may be the ray of hope. The Left does not know how to create men. You wind up with adult boys. Even Dorhn talks about raising “feminist men”. The Right knows how to create men. The Lefties from the 70s were raised by parents that had sterner stuff. Do you really see Pajama Boy building a bomb?

    Like

  35. Pingback: 20 Alternatives to Punching Nazis - Alpha Gamma

  36. Pingback: The Very Best of Last Week in Reaction (2017/01/22) – The Reactivity Place

  37. Pingback: IT BEGINS: Trump Counter-Extremism Program To Focus Only On Islam -

  38. Pingback: Days of Rage – Orphans of Liberty

  39. Pingback: How many “lone wolves” would you need? | Wandering Through The Night

  40. Pingback: This Is Who They ARE | The Arts Mechanical

  41. Pingback: Peter Turchin Days of Rage - Peter Turchin

  42. Pingback: Episode 129 – Berzerkeley | GunBlog VarietyCast

  43. Pingback: Toolkit: Links 2/7 – sam[ ]zdat

  44. Pingback: Boldmug Part 1 – Swamp Reiver

  45. Mike says:

    Two comments:

    1. “The National Council of Churches (!!!)” …was a communist-front.
    2. Colombia is a pretty decent place now — seriously; go check it out. Pablo’s narco-state was Stalinistic in structure (i.e., it was more about loyalty than ideology, and frequent murder kept it that way) — it was the kind of fire that could only be fought with fire.

    Like

  46. Old Timer says:

    One thing that this writer gets wrong, is that if there ends up fighting in the streets, it will be lefties against lefties. Those are the only ones who are amoral enough to sanction violence. It was lefty against lefty violence in Wiemar Germany, and one group of Marxist socialists, the Nazis, won. It was lefty against lefty in the Spanish civil war, and like a true Marxist, Franco nationalized everything upon winning. So while the right eschews violence except in defense, it may acquiesce to the violence by that leftist organization that claims to protect the right (not that they actually do protect the right, but that’s a different story).

    I remember watching organizations like Queer Nation and Act Up emulate the tactics of another homosexual organization, namely the Nazi SA / Brownshirts. It worked, too, just like it did for Hitler. They effectively took over the politics of San Francisco.

    Like

  47. Pingback: Der Movement is Disheartening and Demoralizing – eginotes

  48. CEOUNICOM says:

    The comments on this (excellent) piece are a convincing argument for Not Having Comments

    Like

  49. Pingback: Boldmug Says @ Scott Aaronson’s Blog – Lawrence Glarus

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s