‘We Go Where They Go’
Kevin D. Williamson’s “Whose Streets Indeed?” (December 31, 2018) notes that anti-fascist activity has the potential to be authoritarian itself, a perception buoyed by the chaos of street action featuring much that may be only tangentially related to “crushing the fash.”
It is often assumed that Antifa is naïve to this insight. Yet most earnest Antifa members focus on research and education, not spectacle. If anyone is likely to have more than cursory knowledge of the totalitarian school of fascist scholarship while still confronting the Richard Spencer followers and Aleksandr Duginists of the world, it is they.
The militancy of today’s Antifa springs from pragmatic concerns rather than any gnostic Voegelinian bloodlust. Whatever Antifa’s flaws, and indeed there are many in their methods, they do not massacre worshipers or ram cars into crowds, as neo-Nazis do. Antifa don’t stab do-gooders on community trains, as Patriot Prayer participant Jeremy Christian did here in Portland.
Williamson’s calling Antifa “fascists” seems an extension of his belief that all leftism is Stalinism, even as today’s radical Left is largely about opposition to both capitalism (including the centrist liberal variety) and Bolshevism. He might as well reduce all of Christianity to the Inquisition.
To grasp the real nature of Antifa, Williamson only need pass by the Portland street corner where neo-Nazis fatally beat Ethiopian student Mulugeta Seraw 20 years ago and ask: Would I have intervened? Would I hesitate to take action?
Kevin D. Williamson responds: And it wasn’t right-wingers trying to gun down a chunk of Congress during softball practice or conspiring to blow up a bridge in Ohio. Mr. Ha-Adom is welcome to his tedious game of did-not/did-too, but I will take a pass.
In “Snowplow Politics” (January 28, 2019), Douglas Murray argues that the media are exacerbating and perpetuating a myth about how populist movements (e.g., Brexit and Trump) have increased “hate” crimes. But he fails to use the statistics from the FBI itself, which say that hate crimes increased 17 percent in 2017, led by anti-Semitic crimes. So I’m unclear how this is a “narrative”; it looks like facts to me.
Douglas Murray responds: There are two especially good reasons to be skeptical about statistics involving “hate crime.” Firstly, the element of “bias” that turns something from a “crime” into a “hate crime” is to a very significant extent in the eye of the beholder. The second reason is that there are many explanations for a rise in these statistics apart from some upsurge of bigotry. Law enforcement openly encourages people to report cases of “hate crime.” Awareness of such a thing can never have been higher, and when awareness of a category rises, the reported incidents will rise too. I know personally of a number of cases in which law enforcement encouraged people to report crimes as hate crimes, the better to meet their targets. This is not to say that all such reports are bogus. But there are strong reasons to treat the statistics in this particular area with special caution.
Something to Consider
If you enjoyed this article, we have a proposition for you: Join NRPLUS. Members get all of our content (including the magazine), no paywalls or content meters, an advertising-minimal experience, and unique access to our writers and editors (conference calls, social-media groups, etc.). And importantly, NRPLUS members help keep NR going. Consider it?
If you enjoyed this article, and were stimulated by its contents, we have a proposition for you: Join NRPLUS.