By Brian Moody – Contributor
The city of Charlottesville became a battleground during a hot summer weekend in August, when white supremacist groups such as, the KKK, Neo-Nazi’s, and others, clashed with counter-protestors that included Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa, a group that is anti-fascist as well as anti-capitalist. Antifa’s premise is to violently confront people that the group has determined as being fascist or at least against their ideals and perspectives. The clash got deadly as a Heather Heyer, a protestor was killed by a vehicle that rammed a group of counter-protesters. The investigation is currently ongoing and the suspect was released after being charged without a motive. The weekend violence also contributed to the deaths of Lt. H. J. Cullen and Trooper Berke M. Bates, members of the Virginia State Police, the two State Police Troopers were providing aerial support in a police helicopter, which for reasons that are still unknown crashed in a wooded area near the University of Virginia.
The violence shocked a nation that all too often is finding that violent protests are becoming the norm, and political polarization and vilification has replaced civil discourse. It was not too long ago that James Hodgkinson, who specifically targeted a Congressional Republican baseball practice, wounded U.S. Representative Steve Scalise (R), along with four others. Post-election, and at the inauguration of President Donald Trump, protests became violent resulting in injuries and property damage, but no deaths.
While conservative media and far-right media claim that far-left and alt-left violence is rising it is a small number in comparison to the right-wing extremist attacks that have taken place within recent years. In the 1990s there were several bombings of abortion clinics and the largest loss of life occurred with the bombing of the Alfred P Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Still, with Antifa’s growing numbers and the attack on the Congressional baseball game, it is possible that more groups will see violence as a popular alternative and with the intense polarization of politics more mainstream right and left-leaning people may be pushed to the fringe groups.
Words matter and the controversy generated by President Trump’s tweets are a testimony to that. However, President Trump is not the only lawmaker to generate controversy utilizing the social media platform. A Missouri state lawmaker caused controversy when she posted on social media that she hopes President Trump is assassinated. This comes after a weekend of political violence in which three people lost their lives.
Outright calls for violence are unnecessary in a highly polarized and partisan society, and while State Senator Maria Chapelle Nadal (D) walked back her statement, she has refused calls to resign from her position. The use of violent imagery can also be a cause for concern as it can push people who are on the brink over the edge and act violently. Arguing over the health care bill, Senator Warren (D Massachusetts) called the Republican proposal to cut money from Obamacare “blood money” and “that people will die” as a result. This imagery is used to shock the electorate and to inspire action and support for the cause, however, it is also imagery that can push people to the brink of radicalization. Such violent imagery helps to demonize the opposition and to effectively silence any rational argument or debate.
The use of inciteful rhetoric occurs from both the Republican and Democrat political parties, and each incident, protest, or rally is used to prove a political point further alienating rational and civilized discourse. Hate should be unequivocally denounced and brought out of the shadows into the light. As hate is exposed, it will become truly seen for what it is, and America will be able to move forward with the realization that supremacy over any race is indeed the minority viewpoint. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights should be our ultimate guide in dealing with these tumultuous times. The forefathers who founded this country had the ultimate insight to build in protections for times like these. The ability to speak freely and peacefully assemble is a right that must be cherished, protected, and defended. Protecting speech that is offensive and challenges common decency is what every American requires. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility. It is our duty to protect the offensive speech of hate groups and allow them a platform to make their voices heard. It is also our duty to publicly decry their speech, and to denounce it, using an equally loud platform. Allowing hate speech to propagate will only undermine its cause when it is put in front of reasonable Americans.
Freedom of speech is equally as important as the freedom of choice. As Americans let us choose to protect the freedom of all citizens to speak their mind and allow their voices to be heard, even if this voice may be offensive, but as Americans let us choose to soundly reject these voices and share a differing viewpoint an alternative view and one that is based on equality and justice. A viewpoint that every man and woman is created equal and that every man and woman are allowed their unalienable rights, the right to liberty, justice and the pursuit of happiness
_______________________________________________________
Brian Moody is a former Marine Corps Combat veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is employed by the Transportation Security Administration and he worked during FY15 as a State Department Virtual Student Foreign Service intern on a project for the Army Research Laboratory during which he analyzed scientific-technical publications. Brian currently holds an M.A in Intelligence Operations from American Military University (AMU) where his area of study concentrated on East Asia and Pacific Rim issues.
Leave a Reply