There *was* political violence, from the left, 30+ years ago

[Recursion]

I guess the last example of it I can think of was Jonestown, or maybe Hinckley and Squeaky Fromme if we add the "nutballs who could tangentially be associated with the left". There's nothing magical about being liberal that makes us immune from going down that path, it's just that we're in general a lot more bourgeois than movement conservatives today are (and these demographics were sort of reversed back in the 1960s).

But that's why the "both sides do it" crap is disingenuous: the left hasn't done it for 30 years. A lot of the conservatariat is trying to come up with examples of leftist violence against people (there's still some anti-property violence on the fringes) in the US and that's why they have to keep going back that far. Or, then again, maybe they're still mentally stuck back then.

[Zoeisright]

1. Who were the left wing elected politicians and talk show hosts who called for death for

their opponents? There weren't any. There is no equivalence.

[Carolina]

37. Thank you!

So true, no comparison, no equivalence, zip, nada, zilch! :hi:

[mscuedawg]

56. Really!! (nt)

[Hannah Bell]

78. +100. The violent talk on the right comes from people in positions of POWER as well as their

followers.

There was nothing equivalent, even in the 60s.

[Spoonman]

87. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.

Sound familiar?

Bill Maher - Sarah Palin needs to be one of the first of the useless people to be killed.

Ed Schultz - has stated many times that conservatives need to be killed.

I'm not taking a stand on this issue, because we do not yet know why the sick little fuck did what he did.

I'm simply pointing out your oversight.

[blondeatlast]

89. Bill Maher isn't Left--and cite one example of where Big Ed said that. nt

[blondeatlast]

88. Zoeisright--again. nt.

[seabeyond]

2. i had that conversation already. asked if they could bring it to the present

they couldnt.

but still cant say left doesnt do it.... whatevah. conversation stopped.

[sharesunited]

3. This is the best reason why the focus should specifically be on access to guns and ammo.

Neuter the hate, because the hate can come from anywhere.

[eShirl]

35. and anything that can be used to improvise explosive, chemical or biological weapons

maybe add to the list all flammables such as kerosene, gasoline, propane

[sharesunited]

38. On any day of the week I can show you news of gun violence involving multiple deaths.

You are making a facetious implication that consumer fuel is an equivalent scourge upon the nation.

[WinkyDink]

4. Jonestown? Um, no. And FYI: Violence advocated by private citizens is not the same as by POLITICIANS

[Recursion]

10. Yes, Jonestown (nt)

[kestrel91316]

41. Jonestown was private violence by a private citizen against a liberal politician.

Leo Ryan was a Democrat.

Again, this was not a liberal killing a Repuke politician.

[arikara]

43. The killing wasn't politically motivated though,

if a republican politician had been the one down there the result would have been the same. There is no equivalence then is there?

[Recursion]

63. The relocation to Guyana certainly was

Though I'll grant that violence was "operational", for lack of a better word.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

5. I see you one Jonestown and raise you one Timothy McVeigh.

[Recursion]

12. Isn't that my point?

The rightwing stuff is decades more recent.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

55. Let's not forget the villificatoin by the RW of the DHS and SPLC

... warnings of the 'rise of' and 'potential violence' from....................

[wishlist]

6. Wasn't Hinckley's family pro-GHWBush preferring him to Reagan?

As I recall Hinckley did not have any left wing connections, but instead his parents were close personal friends of the Bushes who supported GHW instead of Reagan when the two were rivals for the Repub nomination which could have influenced Hinckley to have a negative view of Reagan.

[Recursion]

17. I was thinking of Foster "hating Reagan" as being his motivation

But then again I was a kid at the time and I might be misremembering it.

[wuushew]

29. Hinkley was obsessed with the movie Taxi Driver

and was playing out the De Niro character, it goes no deeper than that. Apparently he wanted to kill President Carter prior to Reagan, which would cast doubt on some secret agenda on behalf of Jodie Foster.

[proud2BlibKansan]

51. Hinkley was (is) mentally ill. He wanted to kill Carter too.

Not political.

[Recursion]

57. McVeigh, Loughner, et al weren't mentally ill? (nt)

[proud2BlibKansan]

67. Which is exactly what I said!

:sarcasm:

[TBF]

61. You are misremembering a lot -

The Hinkleys are close personal friends of the Bush family and Jonestown was not a politically motivated event.

I imagine we'll be subjected to a lot of this today.

[Recursion]

66. How in the world was Jonestown not political? (nt)

[TBF]

69. That group was a cult - much more like a religion than any sort of

organized political action. I know their origins were in the States, but they moved to another country (Guyana) and committed suicide. How in the world do you possibly compare that to Sarah Palin? Except for the part about being crazy ...

[Recursion]

74. Jones's involvement in Bay-Area politics and the Temple's push against Apartheid (nt)

[TBF]

77. OK, let us say they are leftists who committed suicide. How then do we get to leftists shooting?

nt

[Supersedeas]

7. Jonestown....what!?

[Recursion]

13. Yes, Jonestown. Jones funded Moscone's entry into politics

and wanted to created a non-racist utopia.

Edit: I misspelled Moscone.

[WinkyDink]

20. The followers' deaths were not politically-motivated. IOW: Jones didn't target his "enemies."

The slain politician was "the intruder."

[Recursion]

22. If Jonestown freaks people out, replace it with MOVE

That was about the same time.

[TBF]

70. Who did MOVE kill? I thought they were attacked by the police? nt

[Recursion]

73. A few of the police who set their building on fire (nt)

[Hannah Bell]

79. bunch of red herrings & straw men. In the present instance it is highly-placed politicians

& national media personalities ramping up the violent talk.

MOVE members were neither.

[readmoreoften]

75. Yeah but they were black people with guns for self-defense. So that's just as bad as killing people.

:eyes:

Don't you get it? Anyone who's right wing merely HAVING a gun for self-defense is "just as violent" as a right-wing paramilitary thug who kills and assassinates anyone left of Reagan.

[valerief]

8. The left M*E*D*I*A hasn't done it AT ALL!!!!!! You can't be a real person. nt

[Recursion]

32. No, it hasn't

And?

[peacetalksforall]

9. PLEASE don't miss the point that events by 'lefties' are all independent. NO DEMOCRATIC

UPEER ECHELON DEMOCRATS ORGANIZED AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY DIDDLED THEIR MINDS LIKE BACHMANN, GINGRICH. ARMEY, KING, DAVIS, MCCONNELL, ALEXANDER ETC ETC ETC.

THERE WERE NOT SEVEN CORPORATE TV NETWORKS DIDDLING WITH THEIR MINDS _ IN UNISON.

THIS is in caps because it is important. I'm not yelling at you except for this -

PLEASE don't bring in Jonestown or please explain why you would label that a valid example.

[sinkingfeeling]

11. Jonestown and Squeaky Fromme aren't examples of violence from the 'left'. The Weathermen and others

would be more apt. There was a lot of destruction of government property via bombings and fires during the 1960's, but no assassinations that I recall.

[Recursion]

26. I said Fromme and Hinckley were at most tangentially linked

I stand by Jonestown, and I'll add MOVE to the same time period. My point was that period ended decades ago.

[Pyrzqxgl]

14. Jim Jones was no leftie. He was a crazy religious fanatic.

Squeaky Fromme was associated with Charles Manson who has a swastika carved in his forehead (not exactly a leftie symbol).
Don't know as that Hinckley had any politics to speak of.

[Recursion]

16. A crazy, left-wing, religious fanatic (nt)

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. I believe that conclusion is being drawn because

he encouraged his church members to help on political campaigns in San Francisco before he moved the church to Guyana. And SF is largely Democratic.

But still, it's reaching. Jones was a lunatic far more interested in controlling people than in promoting Democratic policies.

[Recursion]

24. He left the USA because it was too right-wing for him

Of course he was crazy; so are the righties who kill people.

[proud2BlibKansan]

36. He left the US so he could completely control his followers in a place where he wouldn't be watched

Same reason any cult leader isolates his group.

[kestrel91316]

42. 1 still does not = 100. FAIL.

[Recursion]

46. "FAIL" at what, exactly? (nt)

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. Jonestown??

Jim JOnes was NOT a leftie. :rofl:

[Recursion]

19. Yes he was

He funded Moscone and a lot of other SFO politicians, and he wanted to create a non-racist utopia.

[proud2BlibKansan]

27. He wanted to control people and used the local politicians to further his agenda

If SF had been republican, he would have worked with that local party.

HIs 'utopia' was the best way to attract uneducated poor people in his community, many of whom happened to be African American.

Jim Jones was into it for control and power, not to promote any political agenda. It's a major stretch to call him a left winger.

[Recursion]

30. No true Scotsman?

If we disqualify people for insanity and insincerity we have to give up all of the conservative violence, too.

[proud2BlibKansan]

33. OK, get back to us when you find where Jim Jones wrote anything as political as the kid in AZ

[Recursion]

60. Some of his anti-Apartheid sermons come to mind

So does his earlier anti-Korean war stuff, "the North is an example of what socialism can overcome and should be a beacon to the South" or something like that.

His sermons are transcribed online: http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/AboutJonestown/Tapes/Tapes/tapes.htm

The one on Apartheid is here: http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/AboutJonestown/Tapes/Tapes/TapeTranscripts/Q1028A.html

Here's the one (towards the end; he's clearly fully unhinged at this point) where he talks about relocating the community to the Soviet Union http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/AboutJonestown/Tapes/Tapes/TapeTranscripts/Q217.html

[proud2BlibKansan]

68. The rantings of a deranged lunatic engaging in mind control

You should move on to David Koresh now. He took his followers to Texas, and since that's where LBJ was from, he was probably a Democrat too!

[Recursion]

72. The Davidians did have some things in common with the People's Temple

Particularly in their emphasis on racial equality, but the Davidians weren't nearly as political in their outlook as the People's Temple.

[AngryAmish]

76. winner!

[ClassWarrior]

18. And which of our elected leaders and media figures were egging it on?

Oh, that's right, WE HAD NO MEDIA FIGURES back then.

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

44. Well? Which elected leaders?

Hmmm?

NGU.

[Recursion]

47. What? None

And?

[seabeyond]

23. i was given rodney king. said wasnt political. what, cause he was black libs get the riots?

they also mentioned the 60's. what? when whites and blacks murdered for black civil rights?

[Recursion]

25. I'm torn on whether the '92 riots should be called "political"

But it's hard to find another word for them. Were they "liberal"? *shrug*. They certainly weren't conservative, which is not to say that they were liberal.

[valerief]

28. MEDIA PERSON ON THE LEFT. MEDIA PERSON ON THE LEFT. MEDIA PERSON ON THE LEFT.

WHAT MEDIA PERSON ON THE LEFT INCITED VIOLENCE?

Are you a conservative or something? Why don't you get it?

Gotta use IGNORE now.

[Recursion]

31. MEDIA PERSON ON THE LEFT

WHAT MEDIA PERSON ON THE LEFT INCITED VIOLENCE?

Nobody mainstream at the time. I never said they did.

[seabeyond]

34. lol. ya and i kept going to give me a politician or media person.... couldnt do that either. nt

[kestrel91316]

45. Which media person or political figure on the left called for rioting

in '92?

I'll be waiting for your response with link.

[Recursion]

48. None. And? (nt)

[seabeyond]

62. the point is our olected official and media talk have a responsibility to keep hate and kill out of

their speech. that is what this shooting has brought up. that is what the issue is. not rodney king, or us calling repugs.... well, repugs.

[Recursion]

65. Of course they do. (nt)

[T Wolf]

39. This is the same bullshit as the pukes having to go all the way back to Lincoln (Abe)

to find someone in their party who is not racist.

No longer relevant.

[Recursion]

49. Thank you! Someone finally gets my point (nt)

[cynatnite]

40. n/t

[totallynext]

50. Really - Jonestown

An fanatical religious person - newsflash that is from the Right.

[Recursion]

52. All religious fanatics are right wing?

Where did you get that idea?

[Vickers]

53. Unrec for seriously thinking Fromme, Hinkley and Jones represent the Left. n/t

[leftstreet]

54. +1

[Recursion]

58. No more than McVeigh "represents the right" (nt)

[Vickers]

85. So you *admit* your OP isbullshit?

There's progress...

:eyes:

[Recursion]

86. What? How? Did you even read my OP

I said the political violence from the left was so long ago that it was irrelevant, but apparently I pissed people off by simply admitting there used to be political violence from the left in the US.

[Vickers]

90. Yes, you said it was from some time ago, then you listed several people

who have nothing to do with the Left.

Ewe fell!

[JDPriestly]

59. It is not magical. Our nonviolence is due to the fact that our

heroes are Martin Luther King, Ghandi and other nonviolent individuals.

Also, our goals cannot be achieved through violence. And we all know that, so we don't want or need violence.

For example, one of our goals is a society in which discourse, communication and action are all nonviolent and in which we insure the necessities of life for all without violence. Using violence or violent rhetoric would be counterproductive for us.

The violent "leftist" movements discussed in the OP did not have the goals that Democrats or even people on the left have today. Their goal was rapid change at all costs and taking their violent urges out on others. That is incompatible with our commitment to non-violence.

Unfortunately, our non-violent movement is often ignored by the press because it isn't sensational. Therefore when people in our country feel frustrated and angry, they turn to the right because the media is focused on the sensational, sometimes violent rhetoric and actions of the right. Demonstrating by carrying a gun on the hip is much more shocking, dramatic and therefore newsworthy (in the view of the press) than demonstrating by pushing disabled people into a public area or simply marching peacefully in large numbers.

The press should take some responsibility here and use its power to communicate to pay more attention to the "boring" movement of nonviolent change in the US. When only the violent can get their way, when violent rhetoric and action is afforded publicity, but peaceful, nonviolent action is ignored and not publicized, then you get a very violent society.

Television programs in which speakers espousing opposing ideas are permitted to interrupt each other constantly is a form of verbal violence for which television producers are themselves responsible. That kind of programming excites emotional, hate-filled thoughts in viewers, not patient, reflective thought. It is perfectly legal, but not good for our country.

It is important that nonviolent movements be favored and more successful -- be positively reinforced by the media. The media, especially Fox News and right-wing radio have not been rewarding nonviolence.

Much of the frustration of some of us here on DU with Obama is that he has not found a way to make his message of working together toward our goals dramatic and interesting enough to get good media coverage. He does not seem to be reaching out to grasp people's imaginations. I think more than anything that is the reason the conservatives did so well in the last election.

It isn't so much Obama's legislative agenda that caused the problem. It is more the way in which it is presented as a compromise -- as a second-best solution -- as less than what we want -- as lacking in drama or commitment or excitement -- as boring and thus not newsworthy, than what he espouses or does or doesn't do.

We want Obama to make our non-violent path to change just as exciting as possible. That's the challenge for the new staff in the White House.

And that is the only way we can prevent our country from spawning more Loughners.

[TBF]

64. Unrec for magical thinking. nt

[readmoreoften]

71. How is Squeaky Fromme a LEFTIST? Is carving a swastika in your head "leftist"?

There was nothing "leftist" about the Manson family cult, including trying to start a race war. :crazy:

[Waiting For Everyman]

80. The only actually political Democratic violence was outside the 1968 Dem convention.

But then, that was violence against other Dems, not against the Rethugs.

So I guess it's true then, that "both sides do it"... not the "hate speech thing" but both sides HAVE committed violent acts against the left.

[Recursion]

82. I don't think any violent leftist movements in the 60s were involved with the Democratic party

Though some of the violent right-wing movements of the 60s were involved with the right wing of the Democratic party.

[Waiting For Everyman]

84. I think it's safe to say that Chicago Mayor Daley was involved with the Dem party.

Although what he had was more of a machine than a movement.

[Spoonman]

81. Political Violence?

First off, no one even knows why the lunatic did what he did!

But seeing as you opened the can of worms, I'll bait the hook and start fishing!

Most of the examples of violence committed in the name of leftist ideologies were thousands of times more heinous than the shooting that just occurred.

Regardless of the amount of time that has past, the acts of Che Guevara FAR exceed this event.
As do the acts of Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Chavez, and Castro, all of whom would be considered far left.

You want more recent times?

Ted Kaczynski
Matthew Murray
Daniel Andreas San Diego
Norman Leboon

I'm so sick of this shit I could just puke.

I'm not a "liberal", I'm not a "progressive", I'm not a "leftist".............

I am a GOD DAMN AMERICAN DEMOCRAT, and there needs to be more of us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Recursion]

83. Kaczynski was a mixed bag

I don't think he fits neatly into "right" or "left".

[upi402]

91. I read that Ted hated lefty's -soft minded or something n/t