Yarmouth responds to Virginia violence

  • Mail this page!
  • Delicious
  • 3

About 40 people gathered in downtown Yarmouth Sunday evening, Aug. 13, to show their opposition to bigotry and racism after a demonstration last weekend in Charlottesville, Virginia, by neo-Nazis, white nationalists and Confederate sympathizers turned violent and deadly. The Yarmouth marchers heard statements by local lawmakers and then marched together singing “We Shall Overcome.” (Roger S. Duncan / For The Forecaster)

Tommy Ishimwe, 15, center, helps light candles as part of Sunday’s response in Yarmouth to the violence and hate in Charlottesville, Virginia. (Roger S. Duncan / For The Forecaster)

3
  • poppypapa

    I believe you skipped over one important detail in what happened in Charlottesville.

    • EdBeem

      Please tell me you have not stooped to defending Nazis.

  • poppypapa

    Assuming facts not in evidence much? Revealing your membership in the leaper colony?

    If you can’t figure out what my comment referred to, you once again your complete lack of self-awareness, speed of uptake, etc.

    • EdBeem

      Okay, I’ll bite. What do you think you mean. What’s the important detail? That Trump, Bannon and Borka are all supportive if white nationalists?

      • poppypapa

        Not at all. But it’s clear what you mean; that some groups, especially those you favor, are allowed to engage in violence, while others aren’t.

        My comment of 9 hours ago refers to the fact that the brief article left out something important: that there were TWO groups engaging in violence. Anyone who saw any of the video clips, and can’t discern that this was one side against another side reveals their utter ideological blindness.

        Having watched any number of violent “protests” by the darlings of the left, often given “space to destroy” by their sympathizers, I’m suspicious that the alt-left took the first swing in Charlottesville, though I have no proof of that, and those who do are probably in the alt-left, but know better than to post the video on social media.

        I have no problem imagining the helmeted, club wielding leftists deciding to descend upon those protesting the removal of the statue as they marched.

        I also believe perfectly decent people could protest the removal of the statue, along with perfectly awful people.

        Just like perfectly decent people could be upset with the permitted protesters along with perfectly awful people.

        They kind of sort themselves out on both sides when they start charging each other with violent intent.

        • EdBeem

          All Trump’s fault. Trickle-down racism, just what Romney warned would happen. Two sides, yes. One with a noble cause. One with an evil cause. Intolerance of intolerance is not intolerance. Apologists just empower the racist agenda.

          • poppypapa

            Word salad meant to divert attention from facing the facts.

            Besides, to quote someone else, you and your groupies can be described thusly:

            “straight, white Americans are inherently the beneficiaries of white
            privilege and therefore cannot speak on certain policies, since they
            have not experienced what it’s like to be black or Hispanic or gay or
            transgender or a woman.”

            Though you do have more experience than most seeking validation in the fruits and nuts department at Hannafords.

          • EdBeem

            Just incredible that you would defend Nazis.

          • poppypapa

            Nice try, Eddie. Why don’t you save the bumper stickers for your car, and try actually making a point in cogent thought.

            You’re quite adept at defending club-wielding promoters of crisply fried policemen; have you voiced your inclinations to the local force? I’m sure they’d get a chuckle from that.

          • EdBeem

            As usual, you make no sense. You and Trump make it sound as though there are two legitimate points of view on white supremacy. There are racists and there are the rest of us. Better decide which side you’re on.

          • poppypapa

            There are only two kinds of people: those who believe there are only two kinds of people, and those who don’t. Which type are you?

            Apparently, in your world, you “and the rest of us” are the “what do we want – dead cops!” crowd “along with the “fry ’em like bacon” variants. Better be careful, buddy, that pan can get pretty hot.

            Can’t wait to hear your UCC open and affirming group chanting the alt-left supremacy refrains.

          • jbs01

            You really have no heart.

            Always classy to attack religious groups.

            Maybe you were dropped on your head as a baby?

          • poppypapa

            Try paying attention to the narrative and Eddie’s body of work. Oh, never mind.

          • poppypapa

            While your defense of racists and fascists, pursuing peace through violence, is pure of heart and compassionate.

          • salesguy9

            If I had a son it would look like Trayvon…. trickle trickle who’s the pickle now Beem?? Fan that flame.

          • poppypapa

            Which side had the “noble” cause, and what was it? And try to speak clearly on this, will you?

          • EdBeem

            White supremacists, KKK, Neo-Nazis are evil and have no place in America. Those who oppose their hateful agenda are noble. Please don’t tell you support those racist scumbags. You are full of it most of the time, but I didn’t think you were a bad person, just wrong.

          • poppypapa

            Just to be clear; you aren’t referring to the untold millions in America and around the world who oppose their hateful agenda, right?

            You are referring to the opposing forces on the streets of C’ville who came at them with cudgels and whatever other violence they chose. Those we saw on TV, with the helmets, clubs, etc….those are the nobility? The ones the article neglects to even mention? The ones your friend Mr. McCarthy seems not even to be aware of? So those BLM supremacists there doing battle…those are your noble heroes?

          • EdBeem

            Okay, you support the side that drove a car into a crowd of people and killed a woman. I don’t. You support fascists. I don’t.

          • poppypapa

            You can find nothing saying I support the side that drove the car into the crowd. And your support of the opposition makes it clear that you support fascists, which is what they are.

        • Kevin McCarthy

          Your critique of the article seems to presume something not in evidence: that the article ascribed violence only to one “side.” Maybe I’m reading a later edition, but all I see is a photo caption that doesn’t blame anybody for the violence. Whatever, using this as a springboard to launch into a diatribe against the left and EAB, is, at best, odd. Your bluster results in a tortured attempt to justify the false equivalency employed by the President in describing these events. Moreover, your insistence on painting the “left” as equally culpable, if not the instigator, is not supported by anything other than your own prejudices and assumptions. The evidence I’ve seen, particularly of the torchlight March on Friday night, strongly suggests that the Neo-Nazi group was the instigator. Regardless of who started it, the very nature of the protest and the Unite the Right group has no moral justification. If that needs to be explained, there’s no point in any further discussion. The idea that “perfectly nice people” were innocently aligning themselves with neo-Nazis and the KKK in protesting the removal of statues is an insult to perfectly nice people.

          • poppypapa

            Wow; here I thought this passage:

            “their opposition to bigotry and racism after a demonstration last
            weekend in Charlottesville, Virginia, by neo-Nazis, white nationalists
            and Confederate sympathizers turned violent and deadly.”

            only referred to one group. So I guess the fighting and violence must have been the group mentioned above simply deciding to beat each other for the cameras.

            Did you see the sign held up in the Portland rally which had a blank on the right side?

            Are you suggesting anyone who wants historic monuments preserved is by definition a “neo-Nazi, or a white nationalist, or a confederate sympathizer?”

      • poppypapa

        By the way, Eddie, does your failure to opine on the murder rate in Chicago, for example, mean that you are supportive of Rahm Emanuel and alt-left coddling of murderous thugs?

        • EdBeem

          Sick (sic).

          • poppypapa

            Nah….just alt-left supremacy.

  • EdBeem

    Each time I try to write that white supremacists are evil I get a message saying the post has to be approved. Not sure what that’s all about.

    • salesguy9

      Each time you write your opinion hit pieces a message should say “Because this is my opinion I don’t need to check facts or make an attempt to understand the subject.”

  • poppypapa

    So, Eddie, as long as you’re demonstrating your critical thought processes for all to see, how about telling us which groups are permitted to engage in violence against others and/or property and when and why, and which groups are not permitted to do so.

    That should help clarify your thinking.

    That’s the least you can do for us, given you are a beneficiary of white privilege, and a straight American as well.

  • poppypapa

    Welcome to the new ownership rules.

  • poppypapa

    OK, Eddie. This one is for you and your fan Mr. McCarthy.

    There is no way to have any sort of rational discussion on this event until agreement is reached on the basics of what took place. Here is an assessment of those basics;
    let’s see if the two of you can agree on it.

    1) Two opposing groups engaged in violence against each other, not against property (at least none I saw or read about.)

    2) One of the groups is described as white supremacists, KKK, Neo-Nazis, confederate sympathizers, etc, lumped under the heading of “alt-right.”

    3) The reason for this group appearing in the area was to protest the proposed removal of a Civil War statue from a public park and the renaming of that park.

    4) This group was granted a permit for their protest by what I’m assuming is a municipal official. The ACLU reportedly supported the group’s request for this permit.

    5) The other group is described as Antifa, BLM, anti-government, anti-capitalist anarchists, etc, lumped under the heading “alt-left.” The reason for this group
    appearing in the area was to protest the first group and their objection to the proposal.

    6) Besides those in these groups that were “organized” in their activities, there were numerous non-violent citizens in the area for a variety of reasons; some related to the protest sides, and others just being themselves.

    OK, have at it. Not much editorializing in the above. If we can’t even agree on these core elements of the events, there is no way to expand on their meaning, their consequences, and their longer term implications for this country.

    Are the points above correct or not?

    • EdBeem

      Were the Nazis and the Allies morally equivalent? White supremacists, KKK and neo-Nazis were bad. Those who oppose their hateful ideologies are good. Can I make it any easier for you? I know you dearly want to blame both sides, as does your benighted buddy LePage and our sorry excuse for a president, but decent Americans know the difference even if you don’t.

      • Dave Snyder

        The question you posed regarding the Allies and the Nazis is interesting considering Russia was one of the Allies. By some estimates, Stalin and his minions murdered twice as many innocent people as Hitler and the Nazis. Do you ignore or forgive those actions and atrocities because the overall cause of the Allies was just? Similarly in Charlottesville do you ignore or deny the violent actions of a segment of the resistance because the overall cause was just?

        Perhaps starting with the concept that initiating violence in any form is wrong and then working from there would be more productive in advancing peace and tolerance as opposed to banging the drum of partisan blame and ignorance.

        • EdBeem

          The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Isn’t that the way the US does business (and war)? I condemn atrocities by all sides. My point to Mr. Poppycock was simply that there is no moral equivalency between evil-doers like the Nazis and those that rise up the defeat them.

          • poppypapa

            See, Dave? Antifa and BLM’ers are like the minute-men of yore. They had been busy out working the fields, and heard about the threat, and so they ransacked and burned a CVS store in Baltimore as training for their “rising up!”

            Seeing there wouldn’t be consequences for their OJT damages, they decided to reach higher on the nobility scale and start actually attacking other humans, doubling down on taking the law into their own hands. Kind of like a bunch of deputized sheriffs.

            They couldn’t find any tri-corner hats, so they had to wear black hoods and/or bandannas to protect themselves from the air pollution in the area.

            Eddie and his groupies will twist themselves inside out to stick to the handed down narrative. It’s why they don’t drink milk or take calcium pills. They need to keep their bones nice and elastic for these contortions.

          • Dave Snyder

            Well that is certainly an interesting response. I must say that I obviously don’t know you from Adam but if you actually think someone who orchestrated the murder of 30 million innocent people is morally superior to anyone then I would say your moral compass may be in need of some major recalibration.

          • EdBeem

            So are you suggesting that the Nazis and the Allies are morally equivalent? I disagree.

          • Dave Snyder

            I understand that nuance and depth of thought can be difficult for some people. Many find viewing the world in very basic terms such as good vs evil or right vs wrong to be cathartic or easy. Others simply don’t have the emotional capabilities or basic intelligence to truly analyze and understand a situation. Still others intentionally simplify matters in order to sway or prey on those less advanced than themselves. I am not sure which of those camps you fall into but best of luck to you. I truly hope for your sake that ignorance is bliss. Godspeed.

      • poppypapa

        Obviously you don’t want to fault both sides, because that would mean forsaking your progressive ideals. And, oh the horror of it all, it would mean Trump spoke accurately, and you could never, ever do anything that would lead to that point. Why don’t you just admit it?

        You can’t, because your ‘journalistic’ reputation is based on personal destruction of those who drift however slightly from the only truth, which is held firmly by you. BTW, do you think even one member of your church voted for Trump? Have they been excommunicated?

        I have a friend who lives in Charlottesville. He reports locals were split on removing the statue before this all began. Including the town council. It seems to me that locals were having a civil debate and disagreement over the issue until violence was visited upon the area by two groups looking for trouble. He also reports that last minute changes dictated by the Governor exacerbated chances for violent confrontation, or as you see it, for the nobles to whack the infidels.

        I’ll ask you too: why aren’t you assailing the officials who granted the permit?

        When do you suppose the masked nobles will descend upon WVa and destroy the 90+ public shrines to a senior KKK official? Can’t you at least be consistent, Eddie? Wouldn’t that be creating peace through justice?

        After reflecting on this exchange, and your insistence on making me out to be a devil, I’m beginning to think realizing you are a straight white American male progressive weighs heavily on your head as you watch your brethren rampage at will. Leaving no option but to demonize those who don’t align with your on each and every conviction.

        • EdBeem

          I don’t fault both sides because racists are wrong and those who oppose them are right.

          • poppypapa

            So BLM’ers aren’t racists? And it would have been okay for the alt-left to mow them down with automatic rifles?

            And this is all you want to say about that, Edith Ann?

    • Kevin McCarthy

      Snide characterizations and preening sarcasm aside, you’ve proven my point about the content of the photo caption. Your goal here eludes me. Frankly I don’t want to know. Since you’re so fixated on the thoroughness of a picture caption, it’s probably true it could have been worded more carefully
      to prevent those like yourself from engaging in ridiculous false equivalency arguments. Really, is it that important whether those Yarmouth folks were protesting only “bigotry and racism” generally or only insofar as they related to the violence in Charlottesville?

      Oddly enough you claim to “have no problem imagining the helmeted, club wielding leftists deciding to descend upon those protesting the removal of the statue as they marched.” Apparently you do do have a problem imagining that the Unite the Right protesters consisted of various organized groups of neo-Nazis and white supremacists/nationalists chanting white power and anti-semitic slogans and that they showed up with handguns, rifles, clubs, helmets, shields and who knows what. So to suggest they came in peace is disingenuous at best. Violence erupted because that’s what they came for. The instigation of that violence is almost irrelevant given the circumstances. Yet you use that uncertainty to equate morally the Unite the Right protesters and the assemblage of counterprotesters. You further try to paint the Unite the Right group as innocent history buffs concerned about preserving regional heritage.That sort of fallacy is dangerous. Maybe you’re just trolling; actually I hope you are because you can’t seriously be defending the morality, propriety or acceptability of neo-Nazis and white supremacists.

      • poppypapa

        Well, there you go again. Hair on fire, runaway imagination, joining Eddie’s leaper colony, and so much more. I believe the post you are replying to was an attempt to state most of the basics of the events, and nothing more.

        My goal? An attempt to agree on what went on as a prelude to discussing it. Your goal, to demonize me whether you have any factual indications in my posts for doing so.

        I tried to paint them as innocent history buffs? How is that?

        I identified the components of each faction as best I could. Why don’t you correct the record if the assertions are wrong, rather than going off on a tear?

        Defending their morality, propriety, or acceptability? Where do you come up with that?

        Where is your disdain for the officials who granted the permit? Where is your disdain for violence? Or are you of a mind, like Eddie, that vigilante justice is part of the nobility of the alt-left? And BLM?

        You know, like violence against UC Berkeley facilities when there’s no one around to beat up on? Or destroying CVS stores in an act of innocent demonstration? While being given official “space” to do so?

        Somehow I get the sense that it’s getting harder and harder to engage in virtue signaling when those you identify with are in fact fascists and cop-haters and masked thugs. And this inner conflict is causing you to lose it when I try to get the details straight.

        Rather than offer your corrections to the details I presented, you fly straight off the balance beam and attack me up one side and down the other. With assertions not backed up by citations from my posts.

        Take some deep breaths; walk outside and look at the trees and listen to the birds.

        • Kevin McCarthy

          Now you’re being purposely obtuse. You don’t appear to be that stupid. But if you want to be go right ahead. What started out as a complaint about a photo caption has disintegrated into incoherent rants and what about this, what about that.

          Look, there’s a default position here which is recognizable to most people, even, I suspect, you: Nazis, neo- or otherwise are bad. White supremacists are bad. Anti-Semitic slogans are bad. When they band together in some semi-organized way and then present themselves as armed, helmeted thugs giving full voice to their hatred, they can’t expect to be treated kindly.

          Violence is bad. The counterprotesters did themselves no favor by engaging in it. But that violence in no way justifies the vile nature of the Unite the Right protesters. To suggest that “nice people” were among that crowd is naive, if not dishonest. An awful lot of people seem to get this – most notably the leaders of the Unite the Right group and other luminaries like David Duke. Trump was given one of the biggest opportunities of his presidency to demonstrate some moral clarity and leadership and he failed miserably. Trying to rationalize away that failure by complaining about permits (by the way, both sides had them, contrary to your suggestion that only Unite the Right did), who issued them, why they did, police tactics, etc. doesn’t alter that failure.

          • poppypapa

            Please point me to the info on Antifa’s permit.

          • Kevin McCarthy

            Kind of a startling admission from one who deems himself the arbiter of the facts. I’d have thought with your expertise that this would have been something easily discoverable. It was widely reported (but maybe not so much in your echo chamber). You can even read the actual statements from the city officials who granted the permits.

            Did you know that Unite the Right did not technically have a permit for their event Saturday, but relied instead on a court order? They also didn’t have a permit for their Friday night torchlight parade; they never even applied for one. In the end, none of that really matters except to point out that the President didn’t get it right, and in using the permit issue as a signifier of the counterprotesters’ alleged disregard for the law, he lied about it.

          • poppypapa

            Oh, humble apologies for the micro-aggression of not calling the “counter-protesters” by your preferred appellation.

            To help we the benighted, please provide the approved nomenclature for your friends of the alt-left.

            I’m afraid that I have fallen off on my zealous research on the details of the matter after asking you and the Eddie for agreement on the simple declaration I posted.

            Neither of you did so…no comment was the response, either that or demonization. Like most stories of this sort, “details” dribble out days and weeks later. You keep up with them for us, and make sure to post periodic summaries, and not just of those that make you fell better about the left, please.

            Maybe including the drive for “peace through violence.” And the unfolding story of Boston. etc.

          • Kevin McCarthy

            I get it. Except that your shtick is really tiresome. What you lack in coherence and reason you compensate for with an equal lack of self-awareness.

          • poppypapa

            So you don’t care for my shtick? In stead of sarcasm, would you prefer the more vicious approach embraced by Eddie?

            Ever consider that what you label “coherence and lack of reason” might in fact be your slowness on the uptake?

            Oh, and I’m just fine in the self-awareness category, thank you. Your claim that I am deficient in that regard is really a reflection on yours.

            By the way, you could always demonstrate your cogency by offering a point by point response to my 6 point post of several days ago. Instead of soft-shoe’d dodging and weaving.

          • Kevin McCarthy

            Obliouvness, thy name is poppyappa. Sorry, obliouvness,

          • poppypapa

            Thanks for the spelling and transcription lesson. And more name calling, in the mode of Eddie.

            Have no answers? Strike out….

          • poppypapa

            My day gets nicer each time I read this brief message from you. Laughs are always welcome, and this is one of your best.

          • Kevin McCarthy

            Gald to be of sevrice.

          • poppypapa

            Quoting you is being obtuse? Clever!

  • poppypapa

    These couldn’t be the same nobility described in comments below, could it?

    https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/videos/10155846612526336/

    The only reason for those black face coverings has to be the chilly weather; their mothers told them to “stay warm, honey. And have a good time; I love you!”

    • poppypapa

      Well? Where’s the defense of these nobles striking out against evil? At least they didn’t douse her with their bottles of urine. Ah yes….gentlemen at battle following the rules of civility in such matters.

  • poppypapa

    Well, Eddie, I think you’ve got me right where I want you.

    Your visceral hatred of Trump, LePage, me, and anyone else to the right of
    far left, and your unconditional love for mask-wearing, club-wielding
    facists who claim not to be facists; who drag senior ladies carrying
    US flags along the ground on the Boston Commons; destroy public property; etc., speaks volumes about you. Not to mention your affection for “noble” BLM’ers who
    want dead cops now; who want to fry them like bacon and equate them
    to the KKK; all while being given ample “space to destroy.”

    Your combined hatred and worship so overwhelms whatever clarity of thought
    and analysis you might have once had as to make you a poster child for
    the incivility and rancor of modern-day politics. Simply put, you can’t
    see beyond your anger and rage. You will do anything to rationalize
    labeling me and others who disagree with you bots, racers, Nag
    sympathizers, and anything else your vitriol suggests. While at the
    same time dodging legitimate challenges to your theses.

    Not to mention your complete aversion to discussing progressive leadership and
    murder rates in big cities like Chicago, because that would threaten the
    very essence of your ideology. No; better to cherry pick news that
    fits your narrative,so you can keep your fan club happy. Are they still meeting at the local Hannafords?

    Given your recent ramblings, I’m trying to remember how you dealt with W’s
    “you’re either for us or against us” comments. Care to remind us, oh
    warm and sensitive one? Seems to me you’re spouting the same sentiment
    vis-a-vis Charlottesville and the rest.

    Which reminds me, I think you’ve vowed 39 times (remember Jack Benny?) not to respond to me in any way. Why are you so easy?

    And why don’t we see the Beemie Babies any more who used to cheer you on as
    you trashed the likes of me? Have they abandoned you in favor of
    trendier progressive supermen? Are you losing your grip on them at
    the same time you’re losing your grip on yourself? Have you become “so yesterday?”

    Well, anyway, thanks again for giving me the opportunity to make you keep
    your repeated promises. When there’s no comment in response, I’ll know
    it’s you.

  • poppypapa

    It occurs to me that what we have here is an evolution, for the
    realities of the internet age, of the old “mine is bigger than
    yours” hydraulics contests in the locker rooms of the past.
    Nothing seemed more important at the moment to young adults with
    raging hormones than a claim on size superiority. Judging that both
    were the same size just couldn’t stand when establishing the local
    pecking order.

    To current day progressive supremacists, nothing is more important to
    their self-image than moral superiority. Their embrace of that
    identity explains why they can so easily label those who challenge
    them as bots, racers, sewists, evil, Nags, hemophobes,
    trainphobes, or whatever else seems appropriate in the circumstances
    of the moment. An objective survey of Eddie Beem’s columns over the
    years would find an impressive collection of such hostile epithets,
    and instances of their use beyond counting.

    Almost without exception, application of this overarching precept
    and its specific tactical application, besides signaling the virtuous
    superiority of the user, is intended to summarily end any debate or
    discussion. Rather than respond to logical points or questions
    coming from those outside the progressive fold, label the respondent
    as a morally inferior idiot on their face. This theory even allows
    progressive supremacists to elevate the likes of Ted Kennedy and
    Robert Byrd to legendary status in the annals of American
    socio-political purity and policy.

    Moral superiority, of course, can not allow for even the slightest
    hint of “moral equivalence” (whatever that is!) in discussing and
    comparing the behaviors of conservatives and progressives.

    Which brings us to discussions about Charlottesville over the last 10
    days or so. Progressives are outraged that President Trump asserted
    “moral equivalence” about the events. Participants on
    various web sites and newspaper comment threads are rife with the
    same accusations hurled at anyone who suggests that Antifa, BLM, and
    the rest of the alt-left are violent thugs, many dressed in
    monochrome outfits with matching headgear showing only eyes to
    minimize the chance they would be recognized (sound familiar?), and holding to the
    belief that a simple proclamation like “all lives matter” is
    racist and calls for abject humiliation in public, if not loss of
    employment. How do you even characterize demands for dead cops,
    Now!

    To be clear, I haven’t heard a single example of an individual
    claiming that the protesters on the left and the protesters on the
    right were “morally equivalent.” And I mean by using those
    specific words; none-the-less, numerous residents on the progressive
    axis have hurled those charges about freely, including at the
    President.

    Moral superiority and moral equivalence are complex terms in such
    circumstances. Are there ten (or more? or less?) measures of moral
    behavior that add up to a combined score? Or is it simply a matter
    of performance in challenging circumstances, such as being on camera
    or microphone?

    Such specifics aside, demonstrating moral superiority to avoid moral
    equivalence ‘charges’ can be done in at least two ways. One is to do
    your best to elevate perceptions of morality for your favored side.
    The other is to lay a barrage of moral inferiority charges upon your
    opponents. Either way, it’s clear moral superiority and relevance
    are relative, comparative terms, not absolutes.

    This is at the crux of hyperbolic progressive objections to any
    statements or comments made by anyone who is not a progressive
    supremacist. It’s simply impossible for such a progressive to put
    forward arguments that prove Antifa, BLM, and their fellow alt-left
    soldiers are nothing but a bunch of good-hearted, moral, principled
    advocates for lively debate and protection of the interests of all.
    At least not arguments that decent people could believe and hold dear
    (see Eddie Beem’s work).

    Given that situation, the alt-left Antifa/BLM moral stature is pretty
    much what it is, and on the record. As is their record of violence
    and destruction. Not much can be done about it.

    So, there is no choice but to attempt to make them look superior
    except by pounding on the alt-right participants until they pale in
    comparison to the upstanding model activists on the alt-left. Heaven
    knows white supremes, Nag sympathizers, and strike-out zealots are
    unworthy of respect, support, or any other defense of their tenets
    and behaviors.

    No matter; anyone who makes the slightest mention of alt-left
    anarchy, lawlessness, and police hatred is immediately charged with
    being an evil Nag sympathizer because of it. Again, this is to stay
    as far away as possible from any challenge to the self-perceived
    moral superiority of progressive supremacy.