Recent posts

#51

Off the Record / Re: Quo Vadis GOP?

Last post by garbon - September 13, 2025, 12:16:56 PM

Soon there'll be reports of miracles happening.

On the psychodrama bit as garbon says - the nearest I can think of from my own life is Diana which was insane (especially looking back) - just unbridled, sentimental national hysteria.

Kirk's widow must be going through hell and I have only sympathy for her, but her saynig "you have no idea what you just have unleashed across this entire country and this world. You have no idea the fire that you have ignited within this wife. The cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry." And talking about how much he "loved" Trump.

There is an emotional pitch to all this that I can't. I just keep on thinking about the fact that Trump saw Evita five times when it landed on Broadway ("I know writers who use subtext and they're all cowards").

Yeah what she said was crazy too. I was like it is true, I have no idea what you are talking about.

#52

Off the Record / Re: Quo Vadis GOP?

Last post by garbon - September 13, 2025, 12:15:43 PM

Far lefties are smarter then normal lefties?

Depends how much you agree with their assessment that "free speech" is controlled by the far right and you really need to protect yourself online.
It's hyperbole but I can get the point.

They look like chicken shits.

#53

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Sheilbh - September 13, 2025, 12:12:23 PM

Yeah. Addressed, remotely, by Musk too.

Although this is a very big event for the far-right. But these are people traveling from all over the country to this single big march (and I think the killing of Kirk hugely boosted its visibility - lots of pictures of him). And for some sense of perspective, the Gaza marches have been up to 500,000 people in London alone with multiple simultaneous marches all over the country and even now they till regularly get 25-50,000 (again with people all over the county in protesting in different cities).

Semi-connected to that obviously not massively surprised at the Robinson march having lots of England and UK flags and a fair few American ones too. But striking that the only flags at the counter-march (frustratingly but inevitably Stand up to Racism "organised" as far as I can see) were Palestinian. I think if there's any issue radicalising people on the left in a similar way to the boats on the right, it's Gaza. I think the impact of Gaza on public opinion is under-explored.

#54

Off the Record / Re: Quo Vadis GOP?

Last post by Sheilbh - September 13, 2025, 12:02:17 PM

Soon there'll be reports of miracles happening.

On the psychodrama bit as garbon says - the nearest I can think of from my own life is Diana which was insane (especially looking back) - just unbridled, sentimental national hysteria.

Kirk's widow must be going through hell and I have only sympathy for her, but her saynig "you have no idea what you just have unleashed across this entire country and this world. You have no idea the fire that you have ignited within this wife. The cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry." And talking about how much he "loved" Trump.

There is an emotional pitch to all this that I can't. I just keep on thinking about the fact that Trump saw Evita five times when it landed on Broadway ("I know writers who use subtext and they're all cowards").

[Is "radical-left" violence really on the rise in America?The killing of Charlie Kirk is part of a grim pattern of political violence. This is what the data show]

#55

Off the Record / Re: Acts of Terrorism megathre...

Last post by Syt - September 13, 2025, 11:33:36 AM

https://archive.is/20250913101747/https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2025/09/12/is-radical-left-violence-really-on-the-rise-in-america

Is "radical-left" violence really on the rise in America?
The killing of Charlie Kirk is part of a grim pattern of political violence. This is what the data show

ON SEPTEMBER 10th Charlie Kirk, a right-wing activist, was shot dead while speaking at a university in Utah. Although a suspect is in custody, the motive of the killer is still unknown. President Donald Trump, who has himself been the target of gunmen, pinned the blame on rhetoric from the "radical left". Assessing political violence in America is inherently subjective: analysts must determine which forms of violence count as political and assign ideological labels to attackers or victims. But the studies and datasets available—largely compiled by researchers whom sceptical conservatives would probably dismiss as biased—suggest that the killing of Mr Kirk is not representative of broader trends.



Distinguishing madmen and militants is never simple, but the Prosecution Project, led by Michael Loadenthal of the University of Cincinnati, analyses felony criminal cases involving political violence to see which ideologies are most common. The project examines criminal complaints, indictments and court records, looking for crimes that seek "a socio-political change or to communicate" to outside audiences, says Mr Loadenthal. Its data show that extremists on both left and right commit violence, although more incidents appear to come from right-leaning attackers (see chart 1). The figures do not, however, capture the severity of the crime nor the death toll. In 2001, for instance, there were more cases of right-wing violence than attacks by Islamists, even though the September 11th attacks by al-Qaeda killed almost 3,000 people that year.

One paper by Celinet Duran of the State University of New York at Oswego studied political violence between 1990 and 2020. It found that there were far more frequent and deadly attacks by the hard-right than the hard-left, although left-wing violence increased throughout the study period. A separate tally by the Anti-Defamation League, an advocacy group, shows that 76% of extremist-related murders over the past decade were committed by those on the right. Such tallies, however, depend on how extremism is defined and how ideology is assigned. The ADL uses public records such as media reports and police filings to reach their numbers. But those who commit violence often leave a messy trail of resentments that defy easy classification, and some are clearly mentally ill.



There is no single definition of political violence and no federal database. The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), another research outfit, defines it as the use of force with political purpose or effects. By its count 37 people have been killed in such attacks in America this year, and 373 since 2020. The incidents it classifies as political range from a July shooting in midtown Manhattan, when a man killed four people in the NFL's headquarters, blaming the league for his alleged brain injuries; to more straightforward attacks, such as the fatal shooting of two Israeli embassy staff in Washington.

Most Americans reject political violence. Fewer than one in ten say they support it, with little difference between left and right. Yet that leaves potentially millions willing to condone violence—and some proportion of them willing to commit it—in a country awash with guns. Mr Kirk, himself a gun-rights champion, once said that some shootings were a price worth paying for protecting the constitutional right to bear arms. But he did not advocate political violence, and relished debate.



Demonstrators or political activists, such as Mr Kirk, are a frequent target of terrorism in America, according to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a think-tank in Washington. CSIS defines terrorism as violence by non-state actors intended to achieve political goals through psychological impact. It draws on ACLED data and analyses propaganda and media reports. Attacks that randomly target individuals, such as the 2022 mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo, are the most common. Between 2020 and 2025 the government was the second-most frequent target.



Data from CSIS also show that after a lull in the early 2000s, terrorist attacks and plots against government targets—including politicians and state employees—are rising again. The increase in those motivated by partisan political beliefs is particularly striking: between 2016 and 2025 there were 25 such incidents compared with just two in the previous 22 years.

That marks a shift from earlier eras. Some social movements in the 1960s were brutally violent but not partisan, notes Lilliana Mason of Johns Hopkins University: "It wasn't that Democrats were on one side of it and Republicans were on the other."



Attacks and plots have grown more common in recent decades, but the picture is muddier around threats and harassment (see chart 5). The Capitol Police investigated over 9,000 threats against members of Congress last year, up from fewer than 4,000 in 2017. John Roberts, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, warned of growing threats to federal judges in his end-of-year report in 2024.

In recent months, however, the Bridging Divides Initiative (BDI), a research group at Princeton University, recorded a decline in threats and harassment aimed at local officials after peaking in 2024 when there were 600 incidents—a 14% rise on 2023 and a 74% increase from 2022. In surveys, more than 70% of local officials said that the hostility stemmed from their support for specific issues. Whether delivered through menacing tweets or in-person confrontations, the threats chill local officials. In BDI's surveys, two-fifths of them say concerns about hostility have made them less willing to work on controversial topics or run for re-election.

Researchers stress that violent attacks remain rare. "The amount of actual political violence that has occurred is nowhere near what it was in the 1960s," says Ms Mason. She also sees a different trend: attacks against political figures to get attention, not to advance a cause. "A lot of these are people who probably would have committed violence in some way," she says. "It's just that our politics has kind of aimed them towards political targets."

#56

Off the Record / Re: Quo Vadis GOP?

Last post by Jacob - September 13, 2025, 11:19:28 AM

A lot of university campuses had their flags at half mast.

University campuses. For the guy who set up the "Professors' Watchlist".

Your institutions are peopled with cowardly, craven, complacent individuals. Or people who are simply corrupt, ambitious, or content with authoritarianism. It's your job to strengthen the resolve of the first, or get the second out of your institutions. Don't wait for elections. Don't wait for institutional wheels to save you. Don't wait for the courts. Don't wait for mythical new leaders to emerge magically.

It certainly seems like the odds of some heroes sweeping in and fixing everything, or of institutions and norms reasserting themselves on their to save the day are low.

The reactionary right has spent decades building ideological infrastructure and investing in throwing sand in the gears of liberal democracy - making it harder for its institutions to operate.  I think your message is correct - the best way to resist is to do the same. Put effort into making it tedious and more challenging for the reactionary right to exert its power where you can. Build up and support spaces where liberal values and participatory democracy can flourish, even if its on a small scale.

This looks like it's going to be a long haul, but we still have choices to make and agency.

#57

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Jacob - September 13, 2025, 11:03:23 AM

The tide of Fascism is rising.

#58

Off the Record / Re: Quo Vadis GOP?

Last post by Josquius - September 13, 2025, 11:01:22 AM

Far lefties are smarter then normal lefties?

Depends how much you agree with their assessment that "free speech" is controlled by the far right and you really need to protect yourself online.
It's hyperbole but I can get the point.

#59

Off the Record / Re: Quo Vadis GOP?

Last post by Jacob - September 13, 2025, 11:00:42 AM

I see a lot of flags at half-mast here in rural Virginia.

Soon there'll be reports of miracles happening.

#60

Off the Record / Re: Quo Vadis GOP?

Last post by Razgovory - September 13, 2025, 10:44:31 AM

A lot of university campuses had their flags at half mast.

University campuses. For the guy who set up the "Professors' Watchlist".

Your institutions are peopled with cowardly, craven, complacent individuals. Or people who are simply corrupt, ambitious, or content with authoritarianism. It's your job to strengthen the resolve of the first, or get the second out of your institutions. Don't wait for elections. Don't wait for institutional wheels to save you. Don't wait for the courts. Don't wait for mythical new leaders to emerge magically.

Of course, they don't want to be cancelled.  The institutions that were frightened of being canceled by the left are now frightened by the right.   You didn't really think they was on your side, did you?