Biden: Antifa is 'Just an idea', yes Joe, but of what - Liberty or Tyranny?

What is most alarming about Joe Biden saying in last week's debate that antifa is just an idea, is that he seems to think that makes it harmless. Just an idea... hey Joe, what do you suppose that organizations are organized around? What do you think it is that motivates people, to organize organizations, to begin with?

Just an idea, yes, but of what?

For example, here's a couple other things that Joe might pass off as being... '...you know, the thing...', that've spawned some exceedingly real and substantial organizations:

• all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
• the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.
• All within the state, nothing outside the state

Each one of those catchy phrases, though 'just an idea', led to some momentous movements and organizations, one of which became the United States of America. The other two ideas, unfortunately, though they too were 'just an idea', led to the deadliest and most destructive states in all of human history - from the Terror, to Communism, Fascism, Nazism.

That antifa is 'just an idea', is hardly a meaningless statement. The Tea Party was 'just an idea' without formal or uniform organization, yet millions of people were able to rally behind it and alter the well laid plans of government. The question to ask is, what kind of idea is it? Is the 'just an idea' in question, one that, like the Tea Party, values human life, does it stand for people living in an expectation of liberty and justice? Does it recognize the fundamentals of the American system, such as this mere idea of from John Adams':

"Property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist."?

, or does Antifa & BLM use simple ideas to intimidate people, such as 'check your privilege', and to undermine the basis of their lives with 'It's only property!', does it lead the people who have 'just an idea' in their heads, to force people to obey and to conform and to submit to the power of those massed in the streets, does it endorse accosting and intimidating people, demanding that they bow and 'say their name!,' proving that they accept the new revolutionary social standards. This too was 'just an idea' of Rousseau's,

"whoever refuses to obey the general will shall be compelled to do so by the whole body. This means nothing less than that he will be forced to be free"

, but that idea in the head of Robespierre is what drove the French Revolution's Terror and sowed fertile ground for the deadly weeds of the 20th Century. Just an idea. Here's a collary of these ideas, which history demonstrates over and over again, that ' by tolerating property being destroyed, innocent men are and will continue to be killed'.

I have some good friends, and virtual friends, who think Antifa & BLM are swell, that they are 'doing good' and that while they destroy property, it's warranted and excusable. The fact that the actual fascists intimidated people in the streets, destroyed property, and caused injury and even death, doesn't cause them to check the premises of their ideas in the least, they seem comforted by the fact that antifa and fascist are different names. When I point out that it doesn't matter if the names are different, when, where it counts, they are the same, they laugh 'Antifa aren't fascists, they fight against fascists!'. Try and pin them down to what they mean by that, and they refuse to say what, if anything, they think it means. They're not, you know, gonna be pinned down by me and my terms of truth & liberty, they reply, in so many words, that they have,

"...contempt for fixed categories and those who claim to be the bearers of objective immortal truth..."

, they are for relativist concepts, that 'my truth' isn't 'their truth', or as Joe Biden might've put it, 'Ya know... the thing...', which doesn't surprise me at all, because another fellow who expressed much the same frustrations, and expressed an admiration for relative truths, unconcerned with how they might be practiced in one place or another, said:

“... relativism is simply a fact.... Everything I have said and done in these last years is relativism by intuition. If relativism signifies contempt for fixed categories and those who claim to be the bearers of objective immortal truth … then there is nothing more relativistic than Fascist attitudes and activity... From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable...."

Unfortunately, for the meaning of the name 'antifa', that fellow was Benito Mussolini describing ('Diuturna', 1921 (pg 374-377) what was 'just an idea' of Fascism.

And you know what? It doesn't matter much whether you put a name to it or not. It is easiest to understand an idea by seeing the results of it being put into practice, and though it is hard to believe it needs to be said, it does: The disregard & denial of Individual Rights is the defining nature of Tyranny, and whether you name its practice as being Antifa, Alt-Right, Fascists, Nazis, Communists, KKK, Black Panthers, etc, each by any other name would reek as foul. Whether the tyrant prefers to tyrannize by race, class, religion, economics-are but fashion choices -Tyrants they are, and those of you who won't 'say their name' will be their target.

Or are you one of those saying

"No hold on, no one's advising fascism, we just think you should be more pragmatic about these matters with antifa"

Funnily enough, both Mussolini and his ghost-author and intellectual guru, Giovanni Gentile, were also deep admirers of the Pragmatism of William James & John Dewey, you know, no 'dogmatic principles or ideals', just doing what works - that was what they saw Fascism as being - taking action to do what works. The problem is, that despite the efforts of tyrants to peddle their notions as 'just an idea', those ideas, when men attempt to organize around them, the nature of those ideas tend to organize men into unprincipled, undependable, passionate forces of despotic violence and destruction.

Here's 'Just an idea' attacking a police station

Let's be clear: If you think that roving gangs of ideological zealots, masked and armed to intimidate and injure, should be the arbiters of public speech, then you are a fascist. If that gang calls themselves 'anti-fascists', the only fascists they oppose are the other competing brands.

One of the best reasons for not voting for Joe Biden, is the fact that he brushes off a group of people who've self organized around passionately tyrannical ideals, as 'just an idea', without the least inkling that that idea is the stuff of apocalyptic nightmares.

Idiot.

Is Justice the concern of those shouting for 'justice!'?

My own life & liberty, and that of my family & friends, depends upon the individual rights of everyone of my fellow citizens (without regard to their wealth, race or religion) being equally upheld and defended by the rule of law. For those charged with personally enforcing the law, to slight or abuse anyone's rights, let alone physically injure or even deprive them of their life - whether by negligence, callous disregard or deliberate murder - is a horror and an infuriating offense beyond my ability to express. On being found guilty after due application of the law, such officers should, must, be brought to feel the full weight and punishment allowed by law.

That is what justice requires. Is that also what you require?

What are your reactions to 'obvious' injustices in the news - not necessarily your first reaction, as that can be, maybe even should be, an emotional one, but about the first reaction that you thought to broadcast to the world on social media or by your vocal presence in the streets? I felt the same reaction as I suspect most people did, on seeing a man subdued, plaintively crying for his mother, and dying in police custody - but what would you have me do with my outrage, and why? Is expressing my outrage on social media going to benefit, George Floyd? Is it going to somehow turn the wheels of justice that had already begun turning after his death was publicized (the four police involved were fired, and one arrested before this weekend's rioting)? Would taking to Social Media and trumpeting additional anger at 'the police', or 'the system' or just injustice in general - would that be expressing a concern with Justice, or with expressing a personal 'judgement!' on the little that is known about something which we all ought to know has much more to be known than what is available on Facebook or Twitter? Does calling me a racist because I haven't vented my spleen on Facebook, serve your desire to see 'justice!' for George Floyd?

If you are concerned with justice, here are some non-negotiable starting points that are hopefully not just mine alone:

1. What seems so obvious to you might be wrong.
2. I don't know all of the facts.
3. Justice is not possible unless you pointedly "hear the other side"
4. "No one can be an impartial judge in their own cause"

Justice is something that can only come from a methodical process of examining the facts, determining their full context, identifying whose individual rights were violated, weighing whether or not that is something the Law (govt) properly has a say in, and then determining what actions, penalties, rewards, will best confirm and carry out that judgment.

If that isn't the position that you start from, then justice is not what you are aiming at, and more than likely, massaging your own shallow ego, is. You are aiming at expressing your feelings, demonstrating your outrage, flattering your own self-importance, and seeing to it that others see how visibly you flatter those positions that are popular to you both, etc., but nowhere within such an aim as that, is there or can there be an actual interest in Justice.

 Do you disagree? Do you truly equate Justice with, inflammatory outbursts, unruly and even violent demands for 'fairness!', speaking out 'for the oppressed!' while muzzling any and all dissent? Does somehow your 'Getting even!' with the faceless serve anything but your own interests? Or maybe you are one of those with an Ivy League education who've 'learned' that 'speaking truth to power!' involves firebombing police cars (one of many reasons why I view the 'Ivy League' as more weed patch than flower garden) will somehow serve the noble agenda of altering the political landscape for 'Social Justice!'?

Do I really need to bother to point out that none of those actions are the least bit interested in the interests of Justice?

Whatever your feelings for the police might be, if justice has any place within your own interests, the nature of that job which all of us depend upon being done, and how charges of impropriety on the job are to be handled, must be considered. An officer of the law does a job that routinely requires the use of physical force, and even the proper use of deadly force, in the course of their work. Those people that the policemen's duties bring them into contact with, of course include persons and criminals who, having a vested interest either in escaping justice themselves, or even from sheer spite, will falsely accuse the police of a crime. Assuming of course that justice is your goal, how do you think such incidents should be handled?

Police departments have procedures for handling and investigating such incidents, and for removing their officers from active duty while the investigation proceeds; there are defined steps and criteria for determining if the charges have substance, and for discipling or even putting such a policemen under arrest, if the evidence warrants it.

Assuming that Justice is your goal, should those procedures be followed all of the time, or should they be pragmatically bypassed when passions are running high? Do you think such procedures should be tossed aside because, ya know, you just know he's guilty?

Say, would you like the police to be able to throw you in jail because, ya know, they just know you're guilty?

What should we do? I'm not asking what we want, or what we feel, but what should we do to ensure that Justice is served? Does screaming for the cops head on a platter serve justice? Does posting and publicly posturing about how outraged you are serve justice? Can I assume that you understand that the answer to that is: 'No'?

”In video after video, we see masked white protesters destroying property in black neighborhoods. And it’s blacks who are trying to stop the #Antifa protesters from defacing small businesses," says Project 21's @StacyOnTheRight.
#GeorgeFloydRiotshttps://t.co/wlIiLOxBos

— Project 21 (@Project21News) June 1, 2020

If you're a person who believes that the police or government are routinely violating your rights and the rights of others, then if justice is your goal, you may well decide to protest. I can understand and fully support the people who do believe (rightly or wrongly) that an injustice has been committed, and that if they see it is part of a long pattern of similar injustices, will feel the need to publicly protest in order to draw attention to their grievance. I support them 100% in that. I've done the same myself in the past, and I've helped organize protests, large ones, over a period of several years. But our peaceful protests, were actually peaceful, orderly, and clean, and they were so, because Justice was our goal. When we found malcontents and bad actors in our midst, we exposed and rooted them out, and expelled them from our protests, because justice was our concern, and not theirs. Fortunately for us back then, there were very few bad seeds in our midst and so they were easy to identify, isolate, and expel. Unfortunately for those protesting the George Floyd incident today, because of the political ideals that've long been supported in our urban areas and schools, their ranks are riddled with those who don't give a damn about George Floyd's life, or of other people's lives, individual rights, property, or justice, they care about political power only, and expelling them from their midst is going to be a herculean task.

Dear non-black people, STOP DOING THIS! pic.twitter.com/x98ACcJfJv

— Perez (@ThePerezHilton) May 31, 2020

Dear non-black people, STOP DOING THIS!

Assuming that Justice is your concern, is it right to demand that when someone dies while a cop is making an arrest - even if you have pictures and video - does it serve justice to assume that the case is closed, no investigation necessary, throw him in jail? Is it justifiable to not just protest, but to riot and loot businesses and neighborhoods and destroy the livelihoods of those with no connection to those police actions? Is it justifiable at all - AT ALL - to lend your vocal Social Media support to those who do inflict violence and rage upon communities across the nation, in order to 'express yourself'?

"Rioters Set Fire To Home With Child Inside,
Then Block Firefighters’ Access;
Emotional Police Chief Details Incident

I feel the outrage over a man who appears to have lost his life, due to the callous disregard of his person, by the very police that we all rely upon to uphold and defend the lives, property and individual rights of us all - there are few greater outrages in civil society. I understand and support the decision by some to peacefully protest that such injustices occur, and to do so repeatedly.

This is gold https://t.co/0SxrrQ44ms

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) June 1, 2020

I do not, however, in any way shape or form, allow that any peaceful protest involves obstructing or abusing the lives and property of others. The moment a single protester upends a trashcan upon a car, let alone breaks a window, that protest ceases being peaceful, and unless those who did come to protest peacefully, expels and/or subdues those bad actors, then their protest will be transformed by them into a mob, and the looters, vandals and arsonists who are part and parcel of such mobs will have transformed that once peaceful protest, into a riot, and that opens all involved up to being put down with whatever exercise of force - including lethal force - that the police and/or National Guard deems to be best suited to eliminating that threat, with the least potential of harm for the public, police and/or National Guard.

Portland #BlackLivesMatter protest erupts into violence.

Man gets ganged up on and brutally assaulted after attempting to flee;
Tooth knocked out; left lifeless in the street.
BLM: "Black Lives Matter, you F*ggot"
May 30th, 2020#Oregon #PDX911 #AntifaTerrorists #GeorgeFloyd pic.twitter.com/RYfT7wCZpJ

— Brandon Farley (@FarleyMedia) May 31, 2020

Are you still with me, or is that a bridge too far for you to go? If so, you may well be one of those who, despite our warnings, gushed over 'Occupy Wallstreet',  and who did not understand that that trajectory would lead from there to the rioting in Ferguson, or from there to college, and to Antifa, and on down to where we are today, but there's one thing to be learned from your example: Justice has no place in your thoughts, and tomorrow is going to be a true surprise for you, and a painful repeat of history for those of us who've paid alarmed attention to what history has for teach its lessons to the slow learners.

Stop the looting and property damage! #antifasucks #BlackVoicesforTrump #GeorgeFloydWasMurdered ⁦@BlackVoices4DJT⁩ pic.twitter.com/1ZeDMRh12F

— Stacy Washington (@StacyOnTheRight) May 30, 2020

Those of you posting and preening about 'Justice!', whether you're a run-of-the-mill Pro-Regressive leftist who gives little thought to a consideration of matters beyond your feelings, or the more deliberate supporter of 'fascist organizations such as antifa', or one of the many anti-authority Libertarians, I personally hold the straight-up looter in much higher regard, than I do you. The fellow who sees the lack of order as a means of obtaining something of actual value for himself, who doesn't bother with the obvious deceptions and perversions of 'justice' that the 'Virtue Signaler' is engaged in, I rank them head and shoulders above the rest of the mob. I'm still ok with the looter being shot on sight of course, but I still have more respect for them, than for those of you who hurl your virtue signaling out into the public mind, in order to stoke the flames of unrest and transform truly peaceful protests into murderous riots, in the name of 'Social Justice!'

In a just society, it is the Preaners and Anarchists who would be the object of condemnation and protest. One day, perhaps, we might again enjoy living in such a society as that. One day. After we've learned that such thoughts of vengeance and anger sully the minds of those who think them.

Whether we have a long, long, way to go before we again see the sun rise on a land like that, or we get to live in that world today, depends only upon our seeking real Justice for all, and giving each other the respect due to a fellow human being, because they are a human being, just like you.

"We are Americans first" - Really? The first step towards resolving a problem, is admitting you have one.

I saw President Trump's statement on the rioting in Virginia, and it was as good and as to the point, as can be expected. But unfortunately, it rested upon the line

'We are Americans first'

They say that the first step towards resolving a problem, is admitting that you have one. Well, we have a problem, and the problem is that I fear that phrase is not only no longer true, but is perilously close to having no meaning at all. Why? Because in order to truthfully say that we are Americans first, a person has to first be able to say:

'American'

, with some understanding of the word that's coming out of their mouth. From what I can see, in looking at what other words are coming out of people's mouths, I'm seeing very little to indicate that most of us do know the meaning of American, beyond the shallow legalistic sense of having been born within the geographic borders of the United States... and if that's the extent of your understanding, when you come up against racist organizations advocating for 'America'... well... do you see the problem?

Sure, you're given a legal status by being born within our borders, but you do not, in any meaningful sense, become an American by such means alone, at least not in a way that is any different from how a person becomes a German or a Russian, i.e. by being born of parents on American soil - aka: by 'blood and soil', which, BTW, also happens to be the traditional rallying cry of fascists.

Now do you see the problem there?

Being an American that understands the meaning of that word, American, requires understanding that the meaning of that word, is not gained by means of osmosis through your ancestors blood, or through the soil that your mother gave birth to you upon, which were features and events which you yourself had absolutely no hand in, knowledge of, or choice in. If that and your "[insert your favorite color here] Pride!", are the extent of your claim to being an American, then you are not, in that more meaningful sense, an American.

To understand what it does mean to be an American, means understanding, and accepting as best you can, the fruit of that particular set of ideas that were expressed in our Declaration of Independence, especially, that:

"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...."

Those phrases of our Declaration, have deep philosophical meaning, which gives voice to the meaning and purpose of America, and yet, as Jefferson later wrote to a friend, they weren't meant to be especially impressive, or 'deep', or as an exercise in edgy literary or philosophical virtue signaling, but simply as expressions of something much more commonly profound:

"Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion. All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c..."

If those ideas and 'harmonizing sentiments' or the 'elementary books of public right' are foreign to you, then you necessarily stand mute before them, making you intellectually, and spiritually, foreign to America, no matter what the legal status of your physical ties to its 'blood and soil' are.

Am I being too harsh in this? If we look about the land today, what evidence do we find for the sentiment that 'We are Americans first'? If we look to Charlottesville, Virginia, for instance, what did we see on display there last weekend? When I look at the center of these heinous events, I'm seeing prime reasons for the fears that I'm talking about, as racist, socialist, anti-American sentiments were on display in abundance, with very few visible examples of those 'Harmonizing Sentiments' which are what made it possible for the contents of our melting pot, to want to see themselves as being "Americans first."

For Instance: