🐱 “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.
 
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.

But among the retards who would still be aspiring to contribute to such journals, to keep that example, or riot, donate to lib orgs, whatever, such tactics don't dissuade them in general. If anything, it makes them double down when they are confident they've found a "legitimate" outlet shortly afterward. It's a nice short term social upset, but rallies people long term, imo.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Troonologist PhD
But among the retards who would still be aspiring to contribute to such journals, to keep that example, or riot, donate to lib orgs, whatever, such tactics don't dissuade them in general. If anything, it makes them double down when they are confident they've found a "legitimate" outlet shortly afterward. It's a nice short term social upset, but rallies people long term, imo.
I still like the idea of banning any political philosophy seeking to legitimize pedophilia. Someone here mentioned social justice plans to do just that.

Another idea I had is offer 10 to 20 grand to any illegal migrant who can prove their employer is using them as slave labor. That would be a nice kicker.

Anyways the riots have allowed people to call them what they are. Communists. Which makes it easier to denounce them.
 
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.
In what way are extremists on the right being encouraged?
 
I still like the idea of banning any political philosophy seeking to legitimize pedophilia. Someone here mentioned social justice seeks to do just that.

Another idea I had is offer 10 to 20 grand to any illegal migrant who can prove their employer is using them as slave labor. That would be a nice kicker.

First idea is good intentioned but you can't really ban a philosophy, I mean openly pedo groups have been around for decades.
 
First idea is good intentioned but you can't really ban a philosophy, I mean openly pedo groups have been around for decades.
Its a right wing form of kalafta trapping. Except it wont be a lie.

Another is pay migrants gibs to stay home in exchange turning their neighborhoods into American territory.

Those are the best ideas I got.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Articuno4
Its a right wing form of kalafta trapping. Except it wont be a lie.

Another is pay migrants gibs to stay home in exchange turning their neighborhoods into American territory.

Those are the best ideas I got.

I don't know what kalafta trapping is. Paying people to leave a country is a classic, it's not bad all things considered.
 
The right has been ignoring the issue of neo-nazis and white supremecists for a long time.
That's because it's a non-issue. Even according to the Antifa-friendly FBI that's actively hunting down white supremacists, there's maybe (at most) a few thousand people in the US who openly identify as "neo-nazis" and a few thousand more openly associating themselves with white supremacist groups like the KKK.

They're not a real threat. It's a bogeyman. If you're tallying up everybody the left calls neo-nazi or white supremacist, then you (and they) are still wrong; if there were really that many of either group in this country for real, they'd have taken control long ago. Ergo, there aren't.
 
The right has been ignoring the issue of neo-nazis and white supremecists for a long time. Ever since the Tea Party came into power, and Obama was elected into office, they've just been sitting there slowly festering in their own fumes against "the libs" until it all came to a head within the past 5 years or so. Trump's election, arguably, was a symptom of that. If the Republicans did their part to actually try and discourage the less savory parts of their voting base, things wouldn't have gotten this bad, but due to the Tea Party being too concerned with capitalism and making sure the rich stay rich, the poor white retards have gotten more and more delusional and fell into really believing in the gospel of wealth being the only solution.
This isn't a problem exclusive to republicans, for the record. Democrats have also been doing basically nothing for discouraging the rich, and the only person who even dares to go against the grain is Bernie at this point. They've also done nothing to discourage tankies and other leftist extremists. All the filibustering and sitting around bitching between each other in congress is what led to where we are now— individual parties not doing their part to improve the lives of local voting bases and moreso being concerned with large-scale issues. The extremists are trying to rectify that fact by taking power for themselves, and this is on all sides.
We're a government of the people, by the people, for the people. If our elected individuals only care about one out of the three principles in place here, what's the point of our government in the first place?
Ok lol. So you're just both sidesing. Name one death caused by white supremacists or neo Nazis in the usa in the year 2020. Or any arsons, assaults, or anything else for that matter.

And characterizing the tea party as "the rich stay rich" is idiotic. Is this ben rhodes?
 
The right has been ignoring the issue of neo-nazis and white supremecists for a long time. Ever since the Tea Party came into power, and Obama was elected into office, they've just been sitting there slowly festering in their own fumes against "the libs" until it all came to a head within the past 5 years or so. Trump's election, arguably, was a symptom of that. If the Republicans did their part to actually try and discourage the less savory parts of their voting base, things wouldn't have gotten this bad, but due to the Tea Party being too concerned with capitalism and making sure the rich stay rich, the poor white retards have gotten more and more delusional and fell into really believing in the gospel of wealth being the only solution.
This isn't a problem exclusive to republicans, for the record. Democrats have also been doing basically nothing for discouraging the rich, and the only person who even dares to go against the grain is Bernie at this point. They've also done nothing to discourage tankies and other leftist extremists. All the filibustering and sitting around bitching between each other in congress is what led to where we are now— individual parties not doing their part to improve the lives of local voting bases and moreso being concerned with large-scale issues. The extremists are trying to rectify that fact by taking power for themselves, and this is on all sides.
We're a government of the people, by the people, for the people. If our elected individuals only care about one out of the three principles in place here, what's the point of our government in the first place?
Kamala Harris incarcerating black men and turning them into slaves for profit = anti racism

Trump giving millions of dollars to the black community = proof trump is a Nazi.
 
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.

Part of "them" do. Some of them are just thugs who think that they can get some kind of advantage by going along with the grievance crew. Some of them are the leaders who do all of this purely for their own political power.

And all of this applies to the other side as well.
 
Part of "them" do. Some of them are just thugs who think that they can get some kind of advantage by going along with the grievance crew. Some of them are the leaders who do all of this purely for their own political power.

And all of this applies to the other side as well.
What other side? Where are the republican hordes trying to burn down courthouses?
 
your terms are acceptable.png


The only good communist is a dead communist, when you start shooting them I'll be sure to come over and help you Americans. They've destroyed my Country, Killed my Czar, and worked my Family to death, I want payback with interest.
 
If there really were as many nazis in the US as they act like there are, we'd all be speaking German right now and these slacktivists would be nothing but blood stains on some nondescript concrete wall. Some of them like to claim that centrists and right-leaning Americans are literal nazis, so that's well over half the American population. If half of America suddenly went full nazi overnight, people like this wouldn't stand a chance. It'd be all over before their mass-produced protest signs could even leave the warehouse on a U-Haul.
I've seen analyses of real world historical coups that suggest you only need the support of 8% or less of the population to overthrow a seated government. If even half of Trump's supporters decided to go full "basket of deplorables", that'd be over 20% of the US population. In reality, white nationalists are a very small percentage of the population compared to the extremists on the communist/socialist side.
someone clearly needs to go to these protests with a big sign that says LOL CALM DOWN
This post wins the kiwifarms award for excellence for today
 
That's because it's a non-issue. Even according to the Antifa-friendly FBI that's actively hunting down white supremacists, there's maybe (at most) a few thousand people in the US who openly identify as "neo-nazis" and a few thousand more openly associating themselves with white supremacist groups like the KKK.

They're not a real threat. It's a bogeyman. If you're tallying up everybody the left calls neo-nazi or white supremacist, then you (and they) are still wrong; if there were really that many of either group in this country for real, they'd have taken control long ago. Ergo, there aren't.

It's not just a numbers game either, it's societal. Go out wearing a Che Guevara shirt and the worst reaction you will get is that someone will think you're an idiot hipster, go out with an Adolf Hitler shirt and see what kind of reaction you get.

One of these is very obviously culturally inert, the other can still get the ball rolling in the public sphere.
 
There is only one shirt with Che on it that I would wear and it definitely is no longer for sale in any shape or form, concealed or otherwise, on Steven Crowder's shop ;)
 
Back