There isn't a single detail of this entire event that makes even the remotest bit of sense.
It'd be amazing and wonderful if we did have a militant movement on the left that caused havoc and made republicans fear walking the streets, but... come on... really? Does anyone really think a leftie would actually firebomb a GOP office? AND paint swastikas on the walls?!?
That's just ludicrous.
It'd take a leftie about three practice runs with the spray paint can to be sure the arms of swastika were pointing in the right direction.
This is a grade-school level false flag effort, comical in its ineptitude.
Paint peace symbols on the windows? Sure.
Paper over the pace with Bernie silhouettes, or Birdie mems? Absolutely.
Picket outside the office? Yep.
Put pressure on the building owner to kick the GOP out of their building? Totally.
Surround the door with breastfeeding mothers on bicycles? Yeah, sure.
But... firebombing?!? And painting swastikas on the walls?!?
That's conservative republican thinking, right there.
I think you've forgotten that the median age of Reddit users is 17. Know any 15 or 16 year olds that know how to make a molotov cocktail? I haven't seen this repeated within the less-fringe press, but the far-left wing is all twitterpated that the office apparently was holding absentee ballots, which is against the law. Again, not sure this is legit, but if it's even vaguely legit, the odds of a local office being dumb enough to draw attention to themselves while also violating the law are even slimmer than the odds of a local office being dumb enough to draw attention to their not-very-good firebombing.
Er, most of my friends knew how to make molotov cocktails at 17. Thermite was more fun though. And yes, spend a little time with fuckwits who can't stop quoting The Coming Insurrection and it becomes very plausible that someone thought firebombing the GOP would help.
Well, being the standard-bearers for dumb self-defeating stunts is not new to the Republican Party. But. Something just plays very false about those particular methods of defacing a GOP office... it takes a different mindset to choose those two methods, specifically, and it is not a mindset I have seen in even the anarchist May 1st set. These feels oddly on-tone for way right-wing rural Republicans.
You're talking about sex hypocrisy though, which speaks to a deep, long-term hypocrisy. And you forgot Ted Haggard. How the fuck do you forget Ted Haggard? I still think it "plays very false" because it seems like the sort of idea a couple well-meaning stoners would dream up while bored at detention. Because I think it was dreamed up by a couple well-meaning stoners while bored at detention.
But fuckin' A they all wish they could draw them on their trapper keepers 'cuz swastikas are a fuckin' bitchin' symbol appropriated so utterly and completely that generations of idle doodlers are still mad at Hitler. Dunno about where you grew up, but where I grew up, there was a gross overrepresentation of Jewish intelligentsia and a dire shortage of white power rednecks and every overpass and every culvert and every men's room and every phone booth was still covered in swastikas.
Oh, the anarchy symbols were common, as were the peace signs. But swastikas weren't "the whole nazi thing" it was "this is a cool-looking symbol that's easy to draw that offends parents real good" and they were EVERYWHERE. It's entirely possible that the graffiti crew in my 'hood led a less-examined life than the graffiti crew in your 'hood. "What do swastikas symbolize" was a level or two deeper than anybody went around me.
I was older than I'd like to admit before I heard Siouxsie Sioux. AND it was Superstition. I choose to salve my ego by blaming the fact that I was fuckin' an hour from the nearest record store and the radio had both types of music, country and western.
If I thought it was a false flag, your words would already be making me doubt it was. That's conservative republican thinking, right there. And they should be stopped! Wait, hold on... You are responsible not only for your words, and the actions you state should occur, but the emotional ideals your words create, and the actions those ideals inspire. Both the left and the right are guilty of saying one thing, while meaning another. What I get from your post is "conservatives are evil and I wouldn't be too mad if they were made to be fearful". This is not good.It'd be amazing and wonderful if we did have a militant movement on the left that caused havoc and made republicans fear walking the streets, but... come on... really? Does anyone really think a leftie would actually firebomb a GOP office?
But... firebombing?!? And painting swastikas on the walls?!?
Might wanna turn that lens around onto yourself, my friend. I never said conservatives were evil. You decided to read that into my words. And the violent ones? Well. Documented. All. Over. The. Place. What I get from your post is "conservatives are evil and I wouldn't be too mad if they were made to be fearful".
I read: Do you think normal not-evil people deserve to fear walking on the streets? I never said conservatives were evil. You decided to read that into my words.
It'd be amazing and wonderful if we did have a militant movement on the left that caused havoc and made republicans fear walking the streets
Yes, the idea that republicans should be fearful of liberals, or made to be so. I do not agree with this notion, and think that supporting such ideals is directly harmful and negative. This is true regardless of if you feel fearful of republicans. back to the premise I put forth in my original post.