“Violence” at Trump rallies is fine for some as long as they start it
posted at 2:31 pm on March 16, 2016 by Jazz Shaw
Isn’t all of the violence at Donald Trump rallies awful? Any right thinking American should reject it out of hand. Of course, the fact that actual violence inside of Trump assemblies is nearly nonexistent doesn’t seem to factor into the media equation. There was definitely one person who got sucker punched in the head at a recent speech, but the perpetrator was correctly identified, booked and will be prosecuted on some minor assault or battery charge.
And yet the panic over this presumed violence is clearly situational among the commentariat. People decrying “violence at Trump rallies” certainly seem excited about the prospect of violence if the purpose is to shut those rallies down. This appears to be true across the entire Left side of the spectrum, but the phenomenon is ably demonstrated by Washington Post editorial board member Eugene Robinson this week. Despite the normal amount of despair over how far our cultured, polite society has fallen, Mr. Robinson definitely finds room for a bit of eye for an eye justification. (Some emphasis added)
Desperate times call for desperate measures. The organized protest in Chicago that led Donald Trump to cancel a planned rally Friday may someday be remembered as the dawn of the resistance.
There is a school of thought that says, in effect, do not push back against the bully. Those who take this position argue that protests only heighten the sense of persecution and victimhood that Trump encourages among his supporters. And the net effect may be to win him more primary votes and make it more likely that he gets the nomination.
I understand this view, but I disagree. I believe it is important to show that those who reject Trumpism are as passionate and multitudinous as those who welcome it. Passivity is what got the GOP into this predicament in the first place; imagine how different the campaign might be if so many Republicans who abhor Trump hadn’t meekly promised to support him if he became the nominee.
Wait a minute.. the dawn of the resistance? Are we talking about a United States presidential election here or one of the opening scenes from The Terminator? Using a term like, “the resistance” is, to borrow a word from our friends on the Left, a dog whistle. It summons up images of French fighters blowing up the telegraph lines used by the Nazis, as well as many other war time scenarios.
And what’s with the equivalency on display when it comes to “passion” in this context? The Trump rallies I’ve seen are certainly full of passion, with loud, cheering crowds who chant along with commonly known hymns based on who will pay to build the wall and assorted other topics. The sounds in the halls can be deafening. But that’s really not the same as lining up in the streets to scream obscenities at those trying to attend the rally and chucking a bottle at the head of a policeman. And let’s be honest here… even before we learned the details of what happened to the cop, who did you really think did that? One of the Black Lives Matter marchers or a member of the audience which regularly cheers when Trump talks about needing to take better care of our police?
The stage was set for violence outside the cancelled Trump rally in Chicago, but it wasn’t created by the people who showed up with tickets to hear a political candidate speak. Say what you will about politicians being responsible for the results of their rhetoric, but no amount of speeches can force a brick into your hand and make you throw it. That’s up to the individual. And in Chicago, a mob of people showed up looking for a confrontation. Perhaps that’s the dawn of the resistance as Robinson says, but it’s a violent resistance. Don’t blame that on Trump when you should be looking in the mirror.