🐱 “Own the Libs” Is Gradually Morphing Into “Kill the Libs”

CatParty

If Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis gets his way, people who merely attend a protest that results in property damage will be prosecuted for felonies. Yelling at someone in a restaurant as part of such a protest will be a criminal offense. And a driver who kills demonstrators with his car will not be liable for their deaths, as long as he is “fleeing for safety from a mob.”

These are just a few of the policies proposed by DeSantis in a package meant to chill dissent and punish those in the streets demanding an end to racist police violence. Republican leaders in the Florida legislature have promised to file the bill in 2021. By introducing it now, DeSantis clearly hopes to rile up Trump’s base in Florida, one of the most crucial swing states, with fears of black-clad cabals rampaging through their gated communities. But the specifics of the proposal are worth close consideration, because it represents a rising consensus among conservative leaders under Donald Trump: A governing ethos that once boiled down to “troll the libs” is steadily escalating toward “kill the libs.”

As my colleague Tom Scocca observed one year ago, Trump was elected as the ultimate expression of a political party more concerned with taunting and obstructing its opposition than with any specific governing agenda. Others have notedthat, for decades, the driving principle behind the Republican project has been the conviction that people of color and their political allies are undeserving of full participation in American democracy. The push to shield those who murder protesters with their cars from criminal or civil liability, which Republican legislators have attempted to do in at least 8 states, is a particularly gruesome offshoot of these two philosophies. It’s also not solving any problematic gap in the legal sphere: Property damage is already a criminal offense; self-defense is already an accepted legal defense for causing others harm. DeSantis and his peers are simply trying to create space within the law—or the perception of it—for their political supporters to kill their political opponents.

A few years ago, after Black Lives Matter demonstrators staged protests on highways and demonstrators blocked roads at Standing Rock, Republicans around the country proposed protections for people who drove their cars through crowds of protesters. James Alex Fields Jr., who killed Heather Heyer at a Charlottesville Unite the Right rally in 2017, may have been emboldened by these bills: According to a civil suit, before Fields drove his car into a crowd of demonstrators, one of the rally’s organizers falsely claimed that “driving over protesters blocking roadways isn’t an offense,” pointing to states that had considered such bills.

This hideous tactic of suppressing political dissent is spreading. This year, in the months since protests first erupted around the country after Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd in May, two people have been killed by drivers who drove their cars through demonstrations. Dozens more have been hit. At one June protest in Memphis, two separate drivers, both of whom appear to have exhibited animosity toward protesters on social media, hit demonstrators within the span of one hour. The Sioux Rapids, Iowa, police chief called protesters “road bumps.” The Auxvasse, Missouri, police chief posted on Facebook, of protesters blocking roads, “You deserve to be run over. That will help cleanup [sic] the gene pool.”) Officers in severalother states have endorsed using cars to murder protesters.

Instead of taking action to quell this type of violence at protests, Trump and his supporters are attempting to incite more violence, and create more victims. After Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old who traveled from his home in Illinois to fight protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin, killed two demonstrators with a military-style firearm he was not legally permitted to carry, Trump called it an “interesting situation” that looked justifiable. Rittenhouse “was trying to get away from them,” Trump said, of the victims. “[Rittenhouse] would have been—probably would have been killed.” That’s certainly a possibility, but instead, he killed two people.

As more Republicans spoke up about Rittenhouse, the rhetoric they used shifted from simple defense to full-on admiration. Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin said Rittenhouse’s victims were killed because the governor of Wisconsin didn’t accept Trump’s offer to send the National Guard to Kenosha. This lead people to “believe they’ve got to protect their own property and take matters into their own hands.” CNN’s Dana Bash asked him multiple times whether he condemned the shootings. All he’d say was “it’s a tragedy.” Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky has actually praised Rittenhouse for his “incredible restraint and presence and situational awareness.” Again, he killed two people.

In the popular conservative imagination, Rittenhouse has become more than just a teen who did something regrettable in the process of defending himself. By killing two protesters at a protest for Black lives, he became a righteous crusader for the Americans who really matter. Fox News host Tucker Carlson said Rittenhouse “had to maintain order when no one else would.” Former Florida attorney general Pam Bondi called him “a little boy out there trying to protect his community” and “mitigate the chaos out there.” Conservative writer Rod Dreher maintains that “Rittenhouse did no wrong”—he was ridding Kenosha of “the enemy of civilization,” the people “vandalizing, burning, and looting.” Trump supporters have called him a “hero” and raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to support his legal defense.

This applause for the killing of the right’s political nemeses is everywhere these days, popping up wherever the GOP can be found. It was there in one of Trump’s first tweets about the George Floyd protests: “When the looting starts, the shooting starts.” It was at the Republican National Convention, which honored Mark and Patricia McCloskey, a random St. Louis couple who earned a moment of fame for threatening protesters with guns, as esteemed representatives of the party. It’s in ads for Republicans like Georgia Sen. Kelly Loeffler, whose recent TV spot suggests she’ll “eliminate the liberal scribes,” and QAnon supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene, who posted a photo of herself brandishing an assault rifle next to images of Reps. Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Rashida Tlaib. “Squad’s worst nightmare,” it read.

The rhetoric is repulsive. But the GOP’s kill-the-libs ethos is not limited to violent rhetoric. It’s becoming policy. And I don’t just mean DeSantis’ bill—indifference to American death, as long as the Americans dying are liberals, is one of the many horrors we’ve been forced to witness this year. From the very start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump has explicitly, shamelessly hastened the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans living in blue states, then smirked as they perished. Every step of the administration’s pandemic response has been undergirded by the assumption that it’s fine for the president’s putative opponents to die. In March, the federal government shorted several blue states on the protective equipment and ventilators they’d requested from the national stockpile (while furnishing GOP-led Florida, which carries the most electoral votes of any swing state, with far more supplies than it needed at the time). One public health expert involved in the White House’s coronavirus task force told Vanity Fair that “the political folks” on the team dismissed the idea of producing a national pandemic response plan once it appeared that the virus “was going to be relegated to Democratic states.” According to a “senior administration official” who spoke to the Washington Post, it took evidence that COVID-19 was killing “our people” in red states and would probably start killing more people in swing states to get Trump to care about stopping the spread of the virus. Trump has also publicly argued against coronavirus-related relief bills because he believesthey’d help blue states more than red states.

These have always been the stakes of politics: When lawmakers block Medicaid expansion, slash funding for affordable housing, bow to police unions, or redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top, they’re expressing their beliefs about who deserves to live and who deserves to die, whose lives matter and whose lives don’t. The pandemic and the national uprising for racial justice are slightly new terrains, but the stakes haven’t changed. The quiet part is just getting louder.

Earlier this month, the president encouraged his supporters to stop counting the people who’ve died in blue states as part of the official U.S. COVID-19 death toll. “If you take the blue states out … we’re really at a very low level,” he said. It was as if their deaths, which resulted from his politicized negligence, were no loss at all.
 
These lunatics are the reason I got my CFL and started carrying again. Luckily things in my area aren't bad, but you just never know anymore.

Honestly, if the nation was as bad/intolerant as these morons claim it is, none of them would be around to protest/loot/riot/burn down communities/attack Conservatives from ambush like the chicken-shit cowards they are. The Right has the privately owned gun market mostly cornered and has for a long time. If they really wanted to "kill the Libs to own the Libs", there's not much to stand in their way. As others have pointed out, all the actual violence has come from the Left. The Right just wants to go to work, raise their kids, own their guns, go to church (or not), and grill. Most Conservatives have jobs and mortgages. They have families to think about. That's why you don't see as many of them out in the streets to counter the Left whenever a riot starts up. They prefer to live their lives in peace and quiet and counter whatever they don’t like at the polls. But I know a LOT of Conservatives who won't stay quiet forever, and won't hesitate to take a stand when working things out at the polls is no longer viable and it's time to fight for their lives and what they believe in.

I think atricles like this show the Left's rising fear and desperation. I think it's finally dawning on them that, despite their Twatter and Reddit echo chambers, that they actually AREN'T in the majority and most people don't think like they do.

The line of thinking that "if things were as bad as they claim, they wouldn't be alive, let alone free to loot and burn" doesn't work on them. They see themselves as heroic freedom fighters taking a dangerous mission to free themselves from the grasp of tyranny. They are so far down the path that logic and reason are pointless, they outright refuse to see reality.
 
They've been at a few protests. The problem with "lifted" trucks is that it allows the person being run over to "roll", limiting the severity of the injuries.

Don't get me wrong, they will not be walking away from the encounter, but they have a better chance of surviving.



Liberals can't do consistency. Best I can tell they are all either Bi-polar or straight up schizophrenic to pinball between the extremes they believe in.



I attempt to. I got to the point about Rittenhouse and bailed.

As for the topic at hand, I had hoped that time would calm people down after the 2016 election.

Instead people are more wound up than ever. You can't reason with these people. The only thing they understand is fear.

At this point I get the creeping feeling that Evo is right. Our generation is going to have to accept fascism and violence to protect ourselves from the barbarians inside our own house.

I'll be honest, I do worry sometimes that @Evo probably is at least partially correct about having to resort to genuine fascism to save the country from total collapse, although I always figured it would probably hew closer to the populist approach of Mussolini and Franco as opposed to the racialist and more occultist mindset of Nazism.

Part of why Nazi race views were able to fly in Germany was because the country was extremely racially homogenous and also ethnically homogenous with the only significant minorities being the Ashkenazi Jews and the widely reviled Gypsies.

Plus you had the major interest in racial occultism and theosophy in the Wilhelmine Era and the Weimar Republic that preceded the Nazi takeover to help guide it along

With America, the only ethnic groups that are truly seen as "dysfunctional" are the joggers in the inner city and maybe the hillbilly Whites of Appalachia. Jews are also distrusted by both the far right and the far left, but for normies it's a lot less universal and socially unacceptable than the more common disdain for hood rats or rednecks

Latinos would mostly have wound up in the same club as Italians, Irish, Hungarians, and Poles by now if it weren't for the major issues regarding immigration and the border (and how both corporations and politicians like to exploit illegal immigration) even with the Indios and the Mestizos taken into account

Then again, I think 2020 might be more of the absolute last second of the eleventh hour to save the country through normal political means as opposed to collapsing into fascism or a second civil war. I really think the reason why the Woke Left, the Democrats, and the corporate bigwigs have doubled and tripled down since 2016 is because they're sincerely convinced 2016 was a highly aberrant fluke. Hillary won the popular vote and thanks to Bernie Sanders going from a literal who to a household name thanks to his early successes in the primaries, I think they thought they needed to go further left to win 2020.
 
Last edited:
The line of thinking that "if things were as bad as they claim, they wouldn't be alive, let alone free to loot and burn" doesn't work on them. They see themselves as heroic freedom fighters taking a dangerous mission to free themselves from the grasp of tyranny. They are so far down the path that logic and reason are pointless, they outright refuse to see reality.
They genuinely believe they’re the heroic badasses in the media they consoom. They’re so full of themselves they think they actually are fighting against actual totalitarian regimes.
 
Except he didn't do a good job and made their future actually seem pretty rad. I haven't read the novel but I've heard that it was a much more serious political commentary than the film ended up being.

I can't find it now, but I remember hearing of a "law" that said something like "if you try to make a movie showing how awful war is, it will inevitably have the opposite effect and make war seem more exciting."

I read an analysis that song of ice and fire (game of thrones) had a strong anti-war theme and that the most sensible conclusion would be to not only make peace with the wildlings, but somehow make peace with the others (white walkers).

It would have made thematic sense and it would definitely be another subverted expectation.

Of course, they had a much better plan for the ending to support an anti-war theme. They ended it so depressingly bad than rather makes you want to fight, it makes you never want to get out of bed again.
 
They've been burning down their own cities for months, and tanking the economy with excessive lockdowns and restrictions, just to try and destroy their own country to "own" Trump.

It's essentially "if we can't run the country then there won't be a country at all"

Fascism didn’t work the first time. It escalated the situation into WWII and now the Hellbound commies are even stronger.

This may be what leads to WWIII.

They genuinely believe they’re the heroic badasses in the media they consoom. They’re so full of themselves they think they actually are fighting against actual totalitarian regimes.

I wonder how much The Hunger Games is to blame for this when it comes to female Antifa.

Twilight made a generation of women narcissistic, Hunger Games made them want to be violent revolutionaries.
 
What would be needed to defeat the left would be destroy the funding, their communication, and their means of propaganda and indotrination. That would end them quickly
It would be simpler to just tar and feather their politicians, bureaucrats, and their journalists. Remove the institutional support they're shielded by and watch how quickly they get stomped out.

It wasn't the double murder that was covered up that led to CHAZ being shut down, it was them going after a member of the city council or mayor.
 
It would be simpler to just tar and feather their politicians, bureaucrats, and their journalists. Remove the institutional support they're shielded by and watch how quickly they get stomped out.

It wasn't the double murder that was covered up that led to CHAZ being shut down, it was them going after a member of the city council or mayor.
Yeah that what I meant by destroying their support. Going after them with direct violence plays into their little propaganda game. Whats that meme? With plan a and plan b? Plan b has worked spectacularly.

So discretely going after their propaganda machine, means of commincation and finance would be the way to go. For example a computer virus on signal to screw up their phones. Not saying go do that. I am saying that is one way.
That albino who got money and bought a new house. Thats another. Jewing them. Misinformation is another. The classic proud boy trick of announcing a parade or protest, dont show up akd watch antifas eat each other is one way to shut down propaganda.


Hell you can do a fake out and claim a Nazi parade in the ghetto or one of these politicans houses. Dont show up and watch the chimp out.
 
They are so far down the path that logic and reason are pointless, they outright refuse to see reality.
Agreed. Reality needs to start smacking them in the face harder and harder until they snap back on their own. Words haven't done the trick, so we've started seeing physical pushback. And that's what it's going to take.

ETA:
Hell you can do a fake out and claim a Nazi parade in the ghetto or one of these politicans houses. Dont show up and watch the chimp out.
I'm pretty sure the Proud Boys have done this to Antifa at least once, and it was hilarious. They immediately started fighting amongst themselves and with the police. Absolutely beautiful.
 
Agreed. Reality needs to start smacking them in the face harder and harder until they snap back on their own. Words haven't done the trick, so we've started seeing physical pushback. And that's what it's going to take.

ETA:

I'm pretty sure the Proud Boys have done this to Antifa at least once, and it was hilarious. They immediately started fighting amongst themselves and with the police. Absolutely beautiful.
What real Nazis do is have a parade through the ghetto. Black neighborhoods. Then leave. The result is the black residents burn their own neighborhood down.

But no, I think more fake out campaigns is ideal or ideas similar to that. Exposing frauds who raise money in name of social justice is another cause it raises doubts on the validity of the movement. Or starting a bunch of fake charities in name of social justice would create the same doubt but only try that in Minecraft.


My favorite was when a bunch of scientists got a bunch of prank entries accepted and published by highly esteemed grievance journals.
Thats another great tactic.

Edit:
Actually I thought of one. Look for the companies who push this stuff the most. Then look for lower middle managment individuals who might have committed some "sin" according to social justice. Then let the mob go after them.

I donr know. Just shooting off ideas.
 
Last edited:
For my part, I think the larger issue is the fact that both sides seem to be glorifying and accelerating the extremist tendencies. It feels like there's no solution to the partisan accelerationism at this point outside of outright war.

Is it okay for me to say I don't want that, and I'd rather have peaceful protest and peaceful dialogue?

>inb4 b-but the libs already gave up on peaceful protest with the riots!!!
Most of the rioters are either retards taking advantage of chaos, or Antifa extremists riling up the local populace. This is a perfect example of the symptoms of accelerationism, and this is the fault of extremists having a larger voice among the voting base.
If only that PATRIOT act would actually use their powers to suppress domestic terrorism and extremism.
 
For my part, I think the larger issue is the fact that both sides seem to be glorifying and accelerating the extremist tendencies. It feels like there's no solution to the partisan accelerationism at this point outside of outright war.

Is it okay for me to say I don't want that, and I'd rather have peaceful protest and peaceful dialogue?

>inb4 b-but the libs already gave up on peaceful protest with the riots!!!
Most of the rioters are either retards taking advantage of chaos, or Antifa extremists riling up the local populace. This is a perfect example of the symptoms of accelerationism, and this is the fault of extremists having a larger voice among the voting base.
If only that PATRIOT act would actually use their powers to suppress domestic terrorism and extremism.
Terrorism is defined by anyone who makes the rich and powerful feel threatened or uncomfortable.
 
My favorite was when a bunch of scientists got a bunch of prank entries accepted and published by highly esteemed grievance journals.
Thats another great tactic.

But when the fraudulent and unscrupulous institutions and their affiliates are exposed so brilliantly, no one cares at all, and nothing changes. It's essentially an idealistic type of experiment. If anything what changes is the quality of life of the people who expose the corruption decreases. I think in the example of the grievance journal thing they didn't experience that because the target of their exposition wasn't "serious." Don't get me wrong, I still think it was cool...
 
But when the fraudulent and unscrupulous institutions and their affiliates are exposed so brilliantly, no one cares at all, and nothing changes. It's essentially an idealistic type of experiment. If anything what changes is the quality of life of the people who expose the corruption decreases. I think in the example of the grievance journal thing they didn't experience that because the target of their exposition wasn't "serious." Don't get me wrong, I still think it was cool...
The end goal of such tactics is to seed doubt about what action to commit to.

The fake parade by proud boys. Great example. This puts doubt into antifa on what to do next.

The same with fradualent social justice charity. The goal is to seed doubt about commiting cash to any cause. To create hesitation. Like I said you could create a bunch of fake charities to create the same effect but thats highly illegal and will give ammo to liberal media once caught. So dont do it.

Also you could look for slip ups in lower middle management of various left wing companies. Get the mob to attack them. What this does is destroy a company to operate. Kinds like what america did to al Qaeda. Except with rumors instead of drones.


Another idea is push for legislation which bans any idealogy seeking to legitimize pedophilia. That might work
 
Back