X-Post: A Douglas Hirabah Against "the Left," continued

The majority of Donalde's Leftist Violence and the Los Angeles Times Bombing post is made up of a lengthy cut and paste of an LA Times article titled "Bombing of The Times in 1910 set labor back a generation, by Lew Irwin. Much as the title says, it's a story about the 1910 bombing of the Los Angeles Times building, an act committed by two brothers on behalf of the Ironworkers union, and one of many bombings and other acts of domestic terrorism committed by union workers throughout the country between 1907 -1911, as they fought against anti-union shops. (There was a fair bit of ruthlessness and inhumanity visited on unions and union workers by the other side, as well, but nothing approaching the dynamite campaign waged by the unions. And union or not, it was working people who suffered the most from the bombings, both in terms of those killed or injured, and those left without work.)

After reading the story, Donalde's reaction is thus:

This is frustrating since Irwin is so unhappy that the bombing was a "setback" for organized labor. I see it for what it was: typical of the left's inherent impulse toward destruction and death. And like we saw in the late-60s with the Weather Underground, and later in Germany with Baader-Meinhof, the cycle turns and political violence becomes respectable. Violent provocateurs are gearing up now. We saw the potential in Toronto last summer. The left's own frustration will stay capped for only so long.

Of course Donalde is again misstating the case in his seemingly endless and unhinged war on "the Left." If "the Left" had an inherent impulse toward destruction and death, such acts of domestic terrorism would be common here in this country; such acts are not common. When they have happened here, such acts of political violence have not become respectable. (I can't speak to Germany with as much certainty as I can the US, but I seriously doubt domestic terrorism became respectable there, either.)

I can't say much about Donalde's violent provocateurs except that it's kinda hard to tell who they are, how many they represent, or what kind of violence they're provoking. Conveniently, Donalde neglects to say, either. As a person on "the Left," I only agree with a portion of their goals and even less with some of their methods for achieving them, but perhaps I'm just too moderate... ...though I'll bet Dr Douglas doesn't think so, which in turn calls his judgement into question.

The Toronto link points to a story about blac-block anarchists who, for the benefit of our erstwhile PoliSci professor, are not a part of "the Left," pretty much by definition. (I mean, aside our friend Donalde, apparently, who has ever heard of a big government, pro-tax, anarchist? Yeah, me neither.) Anarchists are opposed to right wing conservatism, to be sure, but they're just as opposed to big government liberalism of the sort championed by many on Donalde's mythical "Left." Anyone who fails to understand even that much isn't worth his daily ration of salt... or air. (It'd be like saying "Because Iran opposed Saddam Hussain' Iraq and the US opposed Saddam Hussain's Iraq, Iran and the US share the same political philosophy.")

There are legitimate ideological differences between folks on the left and folks on the right in this country, and they are worth discussing. There's no need for Donalde Douglas to stoke the fires of distrust and discord with ginned up bullshit about an evil monolith called "the Left," that largely doesn't exist. Not that that'll stop him, of course...
---

American Nihilist X-post