Right wing militia arrested for preparing to kidnap Michigan Governor

[em2nought]

The mainstream media are vile. 

[JasonPratt]

There are two quite different concepts of right and left wing in US politics, unfortunately.

On one paradigm, left wing is progressive and right wing is conservative -- although even then that doesn't necessarily cash out to clear distinctions in ideas, since established progress acknowledged as such becomes honored and protected by conservative movements later. (On a trivial example, a lot of the music beloved by US conservatives today, were radical left-progressive in their day.)

On another paradigm, right wing to left wing tracks the level of governmental power and authority, with total anarchism on the far right and total autocracy on the far left.

These terrorist militia are right wing on the governmental authority scale, anarchic; and (so far as I've been able to tell, granting that media spin may be dizzying the details) conservative in mood, or maybe regressive, on the progress vs preservation scale, thus right wing again by that standard. And thus why I titled the thread originally. (This might change in the future with more information released.) That doesn't mean they agree solidly with 'conservative Christian' beliefs or values, for example -- as a general rule, conservative Christians wouldn't agree with their plot, and might go so far as to regard it as literally God-damned! (Raising my own hand on that one.  >:( ) But then again they might be trinitarian Christians at least in the shape of their theology, and so be classified as conservative in that regard, compared to people trying to get rid of what they regard as errors in established majority theology (who themselves may be attempting to recover conservatively what they believe to be a truer original belief.)

Most conservatives in US political parlance are lawful about protecting what has been established to work against threats of false progress, and are willing to support strong government rather far on the left wing of autocracy vs anarchism; but also tend to demand that the strong government should leave individuals alone as much as feasibly possible, for which they're willing to sacrifice some power of the government (not power IN the government of course) to reduce the influence of government over the individual. So they're more right-wing on the anarchic scale than most progressives, relatively speaking; although there are progressive anarchists, too, who are right wing in one regard (anarchism) but left wing in the other (progressivism).

This double-mixing of paradigms makes it easy for propagandists to switch for convenience between meanings, naturally.

[SirAndrewD]

This double-mixing of paradigms makes it easy for propagandists to switch for convenience between meanings, naturally.

Yet again, it all goes back to my old Poly Sci professor at Auburn, Dr. Kelley. 

The scale of "right" and "left" is false.  It pretends that the farther away from center each side gets, the farther away from each other they get.  The more accurate way to look at it is as a circle.  The farther to the extremes you go, the closer the ideologies get back to each other. 

We're too black and white on trying to do tick boxes of everything just having two ideologies.  Authoritarian thought can mix in either way, so can anarchic thought.  Both Marxism and Libertarianism shift to archaism as you take both ideologies to their most extreme interpretations. 

[Gusington]

^That's how I was taught as well, especially old school WWII era fascism and communism...they are so far apart on the circle that they are almost right next to each other.

[SirAndrewD]

^That's how I was taught as well, especially old school WWII era fascism and communism...they are so far apart on the circle that they are almost right next to each other.

Exactly. 

Anarcho-Marxism:  Eliminate private property.  Redistribute to the masses and end government.  The exploiter/producers will adapt, die, or be eliminated in the process.  In the end utopia will be achieved because we'll achieve post scarcity by forced redistribution and the elimination of authority.

Anarcho-Libertarians:  The Individual is supreme.  Eliminate the government and allow the producers and strong to rise to the top unfettered.   The weak and the parasites will learn to produce, die or be eliminated in the process.  In the end utopia will be achieved because we'll achieve post scarcity by the producers and the strong surviving and the weak and parasitic dying off via the elimination of authority.

[al_infierno]

Anarcho-Marxism:  Eliminate private property.  Redistribute to the masses and end government.  The exploiter/producers will adapt, die, or be eliminated in the process.  In the end utopia will be achieved because we'll achieve post scarcity by forced redistribution and the elimination of authority.

Anarcho-Libertarians:  The Individual is supreme.  Eliminate the government and allow the producers and strong to rise to the top unfettered.   The weak and the parasites will learn to produce, die or be eliminated in the process.  In the end utopia will be achieved because we'll achieve post scarcity by the producers and the strong surviving and the weak and parasitic dying off via the elimination of authority.

:clap:

[JasonPratt]

While the right-wing anarchic description may be correct, word is coming out now that some of those arrested were BLM supporters, which would be more left-wing in the progressive/conservative sense.

Of course that depends a lot on what it means to 'support' BLM the idea (which idea(s)) or BLM the movement (which movement(s))? More details as I run across them, or if anyone else has info.

[airboy]

Regardless of the specifics of their ideology, they planned to kidnap/kill an elected governor.  They deserve a lot of hard time at minimum.

[JasonPratt]

One hundred percent agree.

[Sir Slash]

Yes, but isn't it funny how this story has dropped-off the radar screen? Kind of like it doesn't really fit someone's narrative or not scary enough for Halloween. 

[JasonPratt]

Every once in a while I'll search around for a current update analysis of the car attack in Charlottesville. I know the driver was eventually found, captured, tried, and convicted, but while the Democrats keep talking about the "very fine people" comment (which they take totally out of context of course), they never seem to talk about the actual casualty of a murderous attack that same day.

This baffles me; and I see quite a bit of misinformation (including today by the way) going around on right-side circles about what happened during the attack, which also needs clearing up -- they treat the attacker like he was innocent and only trying to escape from people in fear they were going to break into his car, which is NOT AT ALL TRUE (there's clear and extended video evidence about this, including his approach to the target point minutes before the attack) -- and granted the fatality wasn't from being actually struck by a vehicle so far as I've been able to tell so far, although if the Democrats are willing to continually take Trump's statement out of context and misconstrue the deaths of various people since then (as being innocent victims of racial police genocide), I don't know why they wouldn't bother to continually misconstrue this either. (And if I've gotten the wrong idea about this, and she was struck, then their silence is even more confusing to me!)

It's like something about this incident turns out to be hugely inconvenient to their rhetorical strategy, so much so that they leave the topic totally untouched in their official rhetorical strategy. But I haven't been able to find out what it is.

Anyone who has a detailed after-action report (dating after the arrest, prosecution, and conviction; I've seen ones before the arrest), or finds one, post it along. I'm very curious.

[airboy]

If the death was not from vehicular homicide (or something similar like car hits person, person falls and cracks head on a curb) what was the cause of death?  I thought this was vehicular homicide - and that the guy was convicted of either manslaughter or 2nd degree murder.

[JasonPratt]

What I understood was that the girl (Heather? -- I'm bad with names) died from shock-related underlying health complications from having been near the impact of the Dodge Charger (?) attempting to push the minivan into the crowd which was passing in front of the minivan. That would have been a conviction of manslaughter on charges of reckless endangerment, of course, and maybe attempted murder, though not of her specifically. But so I came to understand (perhaps wrongly) she wasn't actually struck. (The attacker, whose name I've totally forgotten, did strike numerous people backing up after ramming the minivan, but it was sort of incidental contact with them rolling off the car after they had jumped on it.)

But I haven't found much information about the case so far, post-trial.

[jejo68]

^That's how I was taught as well, especially old school WWII era fascism and communism...they are so far apart on the circle that they are almost right next to each other.

Classical left wing strategy to distance themselves from nazis and fascist.

[al_infierno]

^That's how I was taught as well, especially old school WWII era fascism and communism...they are so far apart on the circle that they are almost right next to each other.

Classical left wing strategy to distance themselves from nazis and fascist.

:DD   ::)