No fair-minded person can look at these signs and not understand the eliminationist threats and gun-menacing ideas implicit in them as solutions for this political movement if it didn't prevail, whether that meant defeating the passage of legitimate legislation or defeating politicians they disagree with.
This country allows for this sort of free speech; but what people don't seem to understand, or want to face, is that when you encourage these kinds of extreme solutions in political movements, some crackpot will feel free to take the action that is suggested by the extreme rhetoric in these signs and in politcal speech where their candidates and leaders encourage "second amendment solutions," and the exhortation to "not retreat but reload," or using crosshairs and gunsights to target political opponents.
There has to be another way for people to register their disagreement with their government without threatening revolution and mayhem if they don't get their way.
Do we really want to continue down this destructive path?
10 comments:
Shaw, you know none of these people have ever really considered the type of 2nd amendment remedy their brethren and folks like Ms Angle have ever encouraged.
At least that is what we keep hearing...
Dave,
Words have meanings.
When I see a sign with reference to health care legislation that says "If Brown can't stop it a browning can." I understand exactly what that means.
There's no wiggle room to equivocate on that threat.
Where were the people within the TP movement who, we are told, are reasonable Americans with reasonable complaints about the government when all this eliminationist rhetoric and demogoguery was going on?
I read somewhere over the weekend that Michael Moore observed that if a Muslim had put gunsights on American politicians and then one of them was shot in the head, where do you suppose that Muslim would be right now?
We're awfully selective about who can get away with violent rhetoric and who cannot.
do you remember the 5 man electrical band and the sign song.
Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign............
i don't know what percent of the tea party crowd are reasonable but they must get pretty mad at the lunatic fringe with the signs.
Shaw - Each and every day liberal and conservative bloggers, as well as liberal and conservative politicians (and leaders) put cross hairs on the views {philosophy} of those they disagree with and wish to disect in the hopes their own views {philosophy}prevail.
This is America and this is as it should be.
Having said the above, I will not disagre with the point that the level of public vitriol is getting out of hand. The posters you displayed serve no purpose and in fact are not neccessary to make the point conservatives, Libetarians, and limited government folks of all stripes argue.
The vast majority of people understand this. It is but a small percentage that carry signs like those you pointed out. And it is likely but an even smaller minority that do produce such signs would act out the violence you are refering to and happenned thispast Saturday.
I am glad that you support our first amendment rights of free speech, as I and most all Americans do. It is indeed unfortunate that there exist sick and deranged individuals in the human race here,as well as everywhere, that no matter what is said or not said will act out violently simply because they have no respect for the rights of every single individual to their life, liberty,and pursuit of happiness.
I see and am sympathetic to your points. It is my opinion we walk a fine line as to were precising the line should be drawn with respect to freedom of speech.
Public dialouge should be at all times civil and respectful. This does not mean that becoming heated and emphatic in making a point should neccessarily be out of bounds.
As I said on my post, there is plentry of vitriol from both sides. I agree it is time {for both sides} to step back, take a deep breath, and work to win the political dialouge based on philosophy that is supported by historical and or empirical data.
As we live in America, and are human, acheiving universal agreement will never happen. That is why we have a republic {based on democratic principals}, and not a democracy.
A good,and thought provoking post Shaw. Well done.
Of course, the problem here is that the other side is not even a tiny bit interested in living in a free society.
Whether they want a theocracy, an authoritarian strongman, a plutocracy of wealthy oligarchs or some combination of those, appealing to freedom and decency is not going to convert anyone away from their particular subset of fascism.
It's funny - or not - every time a rightie claims the left uses hate speak too and I ask for an example, they can't produce one.
Limbaugh is claiming that to ask people to tone down their rhetoric is a violation of free speech!!!
Yeah. Limbaugh loves his 1st amendments right so that he can say inspirational things like this:
"I tell people don't kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus—living fossils—so we will never forget what these people stood for."
I could go on and list dozens of other examples of eliminationist rhetoric from prominent right-wing hate talkers, but what's the point?
All I'll get is a bunch of denialists running here to say "the left does it too!" Which, of course, we know is silly.
There is no equivalent on the left to Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Malkin, Savage, Palin, Coulter, Bachmann, Angle, and the rest of that group.
I don't recall ever hearing, say, Rachel Maddow suggest that a US Supreme Court Justice be poisoned. Neither have I ever heard eliminationist rhetoric from her or Matthews or Olbermann or O'Donnell.
"Let's Get This Straight," there is no equivalency.
Post a Comment