Are conservative activists more violence-prone than liberals?

Great Debates
1

As a left-wing activist who sometimes tries to provide a dissenting viewpoint at conservative rallies, I have sometimes felt as if I were taking my life in my hands.

I don’t think I do anything particularly provocative. I am not a shouter. I do not go in for insults or verbal confrontation. It could be some people are put off by my long hair and slovenly appearance, but that is no excuse for violence. I am just exercising my free speech rights.

For example, in '96 there was a pro-police, anti-immigrant rally in Riverside. (A carload of undocumented workers had been beaten up by sheriff’s deputies.) I went there to protest police brutality and two people attacked us and I got a gashed elbow that lasted for a month.

In '99 there were huge demonstrations in Orange County because one Vietnamese man had had the temerity to express support of the current Vietnamese government. People who went to express a different viewpoint, including Vietnam veterans, got the shit kicked out of them. I didn’t go that time–everybody was too scared to drive down there. (Same sort of thing in Miami during the Elian crisis.)

Currently, there are weekly demonstrations at the Federal Building about the disputed election thing. A friend tells me that the Republican protesters, who are by far the majority these days, have taken to pushing people around, including little kids. That is really disgusting.

Not to mention the orchestrated Miami-Dade riot that changed the course of American history. Yes, some people did get shoved and roughed-up there.

I definitely do not believe beating up the opposition is just “something that hjappens,” like an American tradition or a natural law. Liberals and mild socialists do NOT get violent when conservative dissidents try to infiltrate their rallies.

For instance, at the very FIRST post-election Federal Building rally, which was nearly all liberal or leftist “Count Every Vote” protesters, there was a lone young man supporting Bush. He was verbally harrassed, made fun of, and argued with, but nobody touched him. (And he attracted a disproportionate share of the media coverage.)

Is this type of thuggish behavior a particular characteristic of the right-wing mindset? Yes, I think it is.

2

JESSE JACKSON: ‘WE WILL TAKE TO THE STREETS’

Suffice it to say that those of us on the other side feel quite the opposite.

3

In Houston, a few months ago, some black muslims were protesting at a Republican function armed with semi-automatic weapons (apparently technically still legal) and allegedly pushed an elderly man to the ground.

Of course, many of the anti-Vietnam war protests got out of hand during the 60’s and 70’s. What about the Democratic convention in Chicago during 1968?

It may have to do with the fact that the Republicans are more conservative and the Democrats are less liberal now. The Rpublicans also have more power, even in the south, and that makes them more of a target for the extreme factions trying to push their agenda. They may be more violent right now but over time both seem to have their wild streaks.

4

Seattle WTO Riots in 1999.

5

I do mostly write on the fly. I make grammatical errors. The black Muslims were armed, not the Republican function.

6

at some point some right winger is going to have to come up with a good explanation why there seems to be such pervasive impressions of the right wing as hateful, mean, and now violent. This is the 3rd or 4th thread, all started by different people, inquiring about why the right wing seems so damn mean/hateful/violent, not to mention the peripheral comments that crop up. But I think the fact that threads are started specifically to discuss the issues is meaningful.

They come in and say “we’re not! What are you talking about? We think you are!” which is to be expected, and may in fact be the case. But 42 years of living has taught me that if a perception keeps coming up repeatedly, then the entity or person that is the subject of the perception is doing SOMETHING to contribute to it. Now, it’s possible that the perceptions are wrong on their face…but why do they continue to surface? I think some right wingers should try to answer that question.

stoid
peace and love, man

7

Because liberals are completely blind and think the other side are just a bunch of hatemongeres and they cannot see a opposing viewpoint. Its the only valid explanation, all perceptions ive seen were from liberals. None of them from an independent or a republican which proves my point.

8

ooooh I wish that were in the Pit!
Ya mean like greedy jews, drunk irish, lazy blacks, conniving arabs, conspiratorial catholics, racist whites, dumb poles…

…those kinda perceptions?

oh, you mean those other perceptions- the ones Democrats have against anyone who disagrees with them
!
They’re just fine and must have some validation if they have been bandied about so much
:rolleyes:

9

Stoidela - Instead of asking conservatives to answer this question, why don’t you ask some Jewish holocaust survivers or some victims of black stereotyping ?

10

Meeting the standard of “good explanation” is going to be about as subjective as the vote counting in Palm Beach:)

Here is an explanation that “I” consider good.

Since pretty much all people tend to think of themselves on the correct side of things, it makes mis-understanding the “other” side fairly easy. I’m tempted to jump in here and throw around arguements proving you wrong. I would like to illustrate how “Right-Wingers” constantly publicy chastise and distance themselves as a whole from the rabble rousers on our side, while liberals tend to embrace all sorts of radicals like Farrakan and Sharpton. I could cite all sorts of “hate” lingo the left loves to throw around.

But I’m going to try and take a different path here…

Suffice it to say that it is easy for each side to generalize about the other side and project the worst perceived parts of the other side onto the ENTIRE other side. When either side is taken to it’s extreme (facism or Communism) the masses tend to start dying in large numbers.

Personally, I think the left is much more likely to bring about the next war in this country (eventually in some far off future), but I can be intellectually honest enough (at times) to admit that both sides are prone to violence and hate at their extremes.

11

Man…

The more I think about this, the more it gets me riled up.

FWIW…

I have seen this same rumor repeated on the conservative sites with the democrats cast as the bad guys.

Since the entire thing was filmed by the media and the security cameras at the court house, I suppose you have evidence of this? How about even ONE affidavit or person pressing charges?

Any real cites at all for this?

The exception does make the rule. But anyway…

Teamsters Beatings

There have been trials and convictions in the this case. Just run a search on Google to get more info.

12

There’s plenty of examples of violence on both sides (however, I fail to see where Freedom’s Jessie Jackson quote displays any). There does seem to be a slight difference of where each side focuses their violence, though. The left tends to favor clashes with authority figures (police) and trashing material objects. The right, however seem more comfortable with personal confrontations.

By their very definition conservatives are more unwavering in their positions than are those on the left. That sort of certainty makes them less tolerant of those with contrary beliefs. In many cases they may even feel that God is on their side.

An anti-abortion protester can easily rationalize using violence, because he is convinced that he is doing so against murderers. Not so for the pro-choice protester. To him, the opposition are, at worst, religious zealots.

13

I might also add that though they may be Democrats, the Teamsters are,in general, by no means liberals. Their connection to the party is strictly founded on labor policy and not on political philosophy.

14

Elmer J. Fudd, I agree with you on Jesse Jackson. He is promoting civil disobedience, not violence.

15

Not that I AGREE with J.J.

16

Stoid <<But 42 years of living has taught me that if a perception keeps coming up repeatedly, then the entity or person that is the subject of the perception is doing SOMETHING to contribute to it.>>

I see.

So blacks really ARE criminals, Mexicans are lazy, women are irrational, Asian women are submissive, and Jews are really and truly running a secret cabal of international Zionist banking interests?

Nah. I think you’re simply justifying your own prejudices to yourself.

<<at some point some right winger is going to have to come up with a good explanation why there seems to be such pervasive impressions of the right wing as hateful, mean, and now violent.>>

Well, why was there such a pervasive impression among whites in 1920 that blacks were not our equal, and ought not to be quite equal under the law? Why was there such a pervasive impression among prewar Germans that Jews were responsible for stabbing the German people in the back in WWI?

I’ll tell you why…because people were willing to manipulate and spread these lies and distortions around enough, that’s why. It’s called “mobilizing the party base.”

Your party does it by demonizing Christians and conservatives in general. It plays on feelings rather than on the intellect, and therefore gets people like you (who buy into their self-serving distortions) to the polls.

<<Now, it’s possible that the perceptions are wrong on their face…but why do they continue to surface? I think some right wingers should try to answer that question.>>

I’m more curious as to why it is you don’t take people one at a time, rather than paint everyone who disagrees with you with such a wide and slanderous brush? I’m more curious why it is you seem so unusually susceptible to the lowest-common-denominator rhetoric of your party?

As for the original post, I once with my own eyes watched my neigborhood in Los Angeles get burnt like a forgotten piece of toast thanks to left-wing mobs…the second time in 30 years that has happened to that very city.

So the the assertion that liberals and Democrats are not prone to mob violence strikes me as a breathtaking example of self-serving delusion.

17

Any time you get a bunch of angry, passionate people together in large groups, you’re going to see violence.

Let’s stop pointing accusatory fingers at one another and start some rational discussion, okay? Most liberals and conservatives are decent people. Those who resort to violence and hateful rhetoric, on either side, are reprehensible. Those who characterize the “other side” by a small group of extremists are missing the big picture.

–Caliban

18

quote:

quote:

Not to mention the orchestrated Miami-Dade riot that changed the course of American history. Yes, some people did get shoved and roughed-up there.

Since the entire thing was filmed by the media and the security cameras at the court house, I suppose you have evidence of this? How about even ONE affidavit or person pressing charges?

Any real cites at all for this?

 Well, Freedom2, try http://www.msnbc.com/news/494375.asp

(third paragraph)

 panzerman: I doubt if you could call the L.A. rioters "left-wing mobs." I doubt if you could call them political at all. (They weren't carrying signs.) When I get pushed around by right-wing mobs, they ALWAYS have signs. With great big sticks attached. And pepper spray. And...
19

I don’t see any evidence in that link, just claims. Funny how no one in this highly bitter partisan election saw fit to press charges, or make a statement under oath. Funny how we never saw any violence on video, even though America LOVES to see that kind of stuff. Talk about a ratings boost…c’mon…

Where is the video?
The claims in your link are pure propaganda, nothing more.

20

Violence Flares Outside Gore Mansion

And just to let you know the kid story is on both sides…