Pretty much all of the campus violence has come from the left. Conservative students just want to speak their mind, while progressives want to beat them up for doing so.
@JBStillFlying - Since your inquiry appears to be sincere, I will attempt an answer.
This was the best description I could find on-line.
I think the most important thing that one can do to promote a civil discussion is to try to put yourself in the shoes of the other person before you begin.
If one views it as a debate to be won, then usually everybody ends up losing…
If one views it as an opportunity for an enlightening discussion, then usually everybody ends up winning…
[quite]“Oh, my. It’s the right’s fault the left is rioting.”
If you can’t see at least some of this factoring in, you are drinking too much Kool-Aid. To use another often quoted saying, “You reap what you sow.”
[/quote]
You better hope this isn’t true. Because if the reaction to MAGA hats and “coded racism” is beating up people at Trump rallies and what we are seeing now, God help us when the next escalation starts.
And I have read a fair amount about BLM. Even if you find them to be the most wonderfulest group in the world it does not explain why ALM is a hate group. And google can be your friend. If you are open minded enough to read a few things even slightly right of Mother Jones, Vox and Salon.
@mom2and, the country is not progressive. It hasn’t been since the early thirties, if even then. The US is far to diverse, geographically, socially and culturally, to ever have a single dominant political strain. But the last administration was perhaps the most progressive since the first two FDR terms, and colleges and the dominant media have been trending that way for a generation at least. As these groups become more and more insular (which is obvious from every single poll and survey) they move farther from the mean of the population. It has happened before, it will happen again. I read a great article several months ago that made the point that our society goes through a social upheaval every fifty years or so. I think that is where we are now. We have had an obvious drift of certain regions and certain institutions away from others, and there has to be some type of correction.
Excuse or reality? We can talk here endlessly about what is and isn’t right but the reality is that faced with certain environments, you get a certain reaction out of certain people. As others have pointed out, this isn’t the first time in history. Do you sit around and whine about why things are happening or honestly try to understand why? And it’s not apparently students who turned violent at either UCB or Middlebury from most accounts, including Milo himself in the case of UCB.
“If you are open minded enough to read a few things even slightly right of Mother Jones, Vox and Salon.”
I read and watch from the whole spectrum. It’s how I know where you are going to to get your stuff you like to drag into discussions. 
I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread. It’s been one of the most interesting and informative (and dare I say a nice across the spectrum representation?) threads I’ve read. I appreciate everyone’s input.
@Mastadon
The above omits the fact one major factor in the anti-fascist movement in the '30s becoming militant was precisely because Fascist movements whether it’s Mussolini’s Blackshirts, Nazi Brownshirts, or Franco’s military units were actively going around violently attacking and killing those who disagreed with them…and those killings weren’t restricted to the militant Communists…but also Social Democrats, proponents of parliamentary democracy, marginalized minority groups regardless of political affiliation, etc.
Here is an article explaining the reasoning behind listing WLM as a hate group:
Apparently other members of the WLM protest group were wearing t-shirts with symbols/wording associated with white supremacist groups. (A video is included with the link).
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/white-lives-matter-hate-group-splc_us_57c3c23ee4b085c1ff2a05d3
I start my day reading both CNN and Fox. Same events, different spin. Then the NY times, Washington post. Then left and right blogs. In between ABC, CBS, NBC. New Yorker. Atlantic.
I Google phrases I read in posts on this board and follow those blogs for a while. That is always educational.
I keep reading a book: How Propaganda Works, by Jason Stanley, trying to understand.
Breitbart, too.
@Mastadon at #361: a valiant effort and I see the point you are tying to make. However, unfortunately I’ve witnessed first hand that BLM can very quickly mean: “Black Lives Matter more than your white life matters.” Throwing concrete on someone from an overpass is NOT respectful of life and has NOTHING to do with getting a fair opportunity or wanting to participating in the rich bounty provided to so many others in this country of plenty. Blocking traffic, including emergency responders who are attempting to get someone quickly to medical care, isn’t respectful of ANY life, black, white, etc.
When the person comes to table and says “May I have my fair share (too)?” he/she is asking for the providential care that is owed him/her by virtue of being a human person, worthy of dignity. This country is filled with heroic and beautiful examples of African Americans bravely standing up and demanding this dignity (Rosa Parks, MLK, the list goes on and on). Not only are they entitled, they should be thanked for waking up the conscience of America.
A child at table who screams, throws food and tosses his cup at whichever target is nearby, merely because of an injustice (perceived or real), is rightly sent to his room and advised to think over his actions. He may return when he chooses to act in a civil manner. ALL are entitled to be treated with dignity, including those others at the table. The tantrum-thrower is on the hook as much as everyone else. Following this scene, if the other family members roll their eyes with a “thinks he’s the only one who counts around here” look of exasperation - well, who can blame them?
“Since your inquiry appears to be sincere, I will attempt an answer.”
Guess it wasn’t. Glad I didn’t take the bait.
@doschicos what part of my response do you have a problem with, and why?
No, unfortunately it is more complicated than that.
One needs to divide the left and right into micro segments on a continuum. The more militant FAR right (neo- nazis and other groups) have become more visible over the course of the last decade. This seems at least loosely correlated with the 2008 elections. The appearance of a more militant FAR left (antifa and maybe there are others that will emerge) seems at least loosely correlated with the 2016 elections. In turbulent times, transitions of power are more likely to cause a reaction in the side that looses power.
It does appear as though the FAR left is behind some of the recent rioting on campuses, but we also have seen an uptick in hate related incidents off campuses, so there has been an escalation at both ends of the spectrum, which is not good.
The danger in painting either the left or the right with a single brush is that it tends to define each group by its militant minority rather than by its majority. This tends to escalate things further - which is not what we need right now.
@mastodon – your link:
contains the following statement, “young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers [by police]”, as justification. It’s repeated in many other places, for example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/31/the-counted-police-killings-2015-young-black-men
That article says blacks are killed by police at more than twice the rate of whites. While it is true that the rate-per-million of the general population for blacks is over twice that for whites, those statistics are misleading at best. We’re not dealing with the general population … we’re dealing with a small subset of the population that have a confrontation with the police. According to the FBI arrest page for 2015:
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/table-43
The arrest rate for blacks was … you guessed it … a little over twice that of whites. It looks to me like the killings by police are related to the rate of confrontations/arrests, not race.
Pograms were ethnic and class-based riots. They were never done in the name of Christian values.
And the crusades and the Inquisition?
@Mastadon, so the Anti Defamation League, according to your article, says the protest was organized by something called the aryan renaissance society, but the SPLC says, no it was White Lives Matter. And by the way, SPLC also says one of the leaders is a racist freak. Fair enough.
Here is a leader of black lives matter saying whites are sub human
Here are a few links recording the rhetoric of BLM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-black-lives-matter-police_us_57824c9ce4b0344d514fa8c5
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438034/black-lives-matter-rhetoric-culpability
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/07/democrats_endorse_blm_and_pigs_in_a_blanket.html
Do you see a reason why the one action justifies designation as a hate group but the others do not?
<and the="" crusades="" and="" inquisition?="">
Let’s not forget that our ancestors raped Neanderthals and killed them all (genocide).
Which has been directly contradicted by several Berkeley students, and fairly reading the one published account from Middlebury students, them as well.
Like what, specifically? Until this last post, which went up after your assertion above, the most conservative source I believe I have cited is the WSJ. So what exactly are you talking about?
“And the crusades and the Inquisition?”
@Doschicos: First of all, if you have to reach back that far to find offenses “in the name of Christian values” that’s kinda pathetic. There was this entire period of time called “The Twentieth Century” in which a whole lotta people died for some ideology or other.
Also, just for clarification, quite a few Christians (including some Catholic saints) were subjected to the Inquisition. Those Spaniards could be cruel!
Very interesting considering many of them were organized by local leaders of the Orthodox Russian Church and tacitly sanctioned by the Russian Imperial State in which Orthodox Russian Christianity was the official state sanctioned and supported religion.
It was even more the case in the medieval period when the Jewish people were scapegoated for everything from being tarred with the pernicious blood libel to being blamed for witchcraft/all the ills of the prevailing medieval societies.
Incidentally, many areas which were most susceptible to such scapegoating in the medieval period ended up being most receptive to supporting the Nazis before and during their rise to power precisely because of the strong latent anti-semitism in the Protestant/Catholic majority areas of what became the Nazi German state and Nazi occupied Europe.