Anarchists vs Whitmer

I don’t even know which headlines are serious anymore. Anarchists tried to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer? And do what with her?

This has gotten too crazy.

31 thoughts on “Anarchists vs Whitmer”

      1. He has been trolling for his entire presidency and now we’re more divided than we have been in a long time. I’m glad you recognize he is a troll, because that’s the feeling I get as well.


        1. ” now we’re more divided than we have been in a long time”

          It takes two to tango… the democrats and the systematic refusal to recognize the result of the 2020 election are every bit to blame as Trump.


          1. We used to complain that both parties were pretty much the same. Now they are no longer the same. One has radicalized dramatically. But it’s really much worse.


        1. Please. As soon as I saw the news reports of “far-right white-supremacists” I thought “let’s wait a week and see what comes out”. Sure enough, one of the guys arrested had conveniently posted a video, of himself, trashing Trump. What’s that’ in the background? An anarchist flag? And he’s delivering a classic “I just want to burn it all down” message. Convenient that so many people can’t tell an anarchist when they see one.

          Will the corporate media report that? I’m not holding my breath.


            1. Please, everybody notice that I said EXTREME. I’m not dissing the whole political label, much as I disagree with it. There are perfectly intelligent, normal libertarians around.


              1. In my misspent youth, I was a right-anarchist. Total Murray Rothbard fangirl (It’s OK I got over it). These guys in the Whitmer debacle don’t look like anything I’m familiar with.


              2. Because they’re not, they’re militia, it’s a different thing, and it’s not the same “anti-government” analysis, and these guys aren’t very coherent, I’m sure they have all kinds of flags and a hodgepodge of symbols in their gear


              3. You do realize there’s right-militia and left-militia as well, right? Those NFAC chaps marching about with rifles are not “right” by any stretch of the imagination.


        1. Think that one through, Z. Why would he need to “purge” if it was already on his side? How long does it take to actually re-make a whole organization so that it says what you want? There is no way that job is complete yet– it takes time to replace all the little operatives who do the day-to-day stuff to keep the thing running. They had decades to hire cute liberal fresh-out-of-college kids to those secure government jobs. This report is from June.


            1. I have lost the thread of the argument but I saw this guy’s video. He’s against any government. How you can be against any form of government and be right-wing is a mystery to me. No government is extreme left. Extremely strong, all-powerful government is extreme right. And all the normal people are in-between.


            2. The point is that the leadership has been replaced, so now it’s a mixed bag, and very likely that most of the article-writing sorts are still the same old employees who’ve been there for the last decade or so.


          1. OK so – what is considered a reliable news source over here other than Fox? I’ve heard people are against: CNN, WaPo, NYT, Guardian, and Independent. How do you feel about the Christian Science Monitor?


            1. Good question! The best recommendation I’ve seen on that is to simply have a handful of right-leaning and left-leaning sources, and read them in tandem, keeping in mind their biases. Between them it is possible to scratch out something resembling the truth– tiresome lot of work, though. In general, it’s best to stay away from the big three-letter corporate sources, because they mostly regurgitate party talking points. FOX is less and less reliable as a right-leaning source these days. Murdoch seems to be steering them into the same well-trod corporate news path: never say anything your (rich) advertisers might not like. Right or left, all of these sources will be pro-giant-corporation above all else.

              On the right, I like Disrn for quick headline scanning, the Washington Free Beacon, and The Federalist for commentary, and the New York Post for tabloid stuff. On the left, I have a harder time with sources, because as soon as they’re caught engaging in outright lies and fraud, it becomes really hard for me to trust anything they say. Until recently, I would have recommended The Hill, but then they ran, without apology, a picture of a Trump rally talking about how dangerous it was that these people were gathering without masks… and you could clearly see in the picture that most of them were, in fact, wearing masks. So they’re out… The Guardian is OK for some things. NYT and WaPo still let a decent article slip in here and there, but are going downhill the last few years. Wall Street Journal, maybe?


              1. “simply have a handful of right-leaning and left-leaning sources, and read them in tandem, keeping in mind their biases”

                That’s basically what Europeans have done since…. forever? There’s no mythology about an unbiased press but if you know the biases and read from different viewpoints you can get an idea of what’s happening.

                US journalism seems to have devolved to a degree that I find shocking… I remember a few years ago on vacation (no smartphone or internet) and only having CNN and BBC (maybe Sky) for news and feeling my brain atrophying… I honestly had the feeling I had no idea what was going on in the world.


      1. Although at one point it was illegal to broadcast VOA in the US in Southern Florida in the 1970s I could hear some Spanish version some times. Mostly pretty boring.
        Their Polish service in the 1980s seemed to be mostly staffed by Polish Americans who had very bizarre American accents (I wonder about other regional services then….).
        It’s also (in)famous for their ‘special English’ broadcasts delivered at a snail’s pace (torture for native speakers though I can understand it’s helpful for some learners)


  1. “which headlines are serious anymore. Anarchists tried to kidnap ”

    I don’t think there’s anything like a coherent political or socio-economic view behind these people. It’s like the marxist that doesn’t believe in economic forces… people have regressed to childlike political make-believe dressing up and mixing bits and pieces of different political slogans in search of some kind of self-identity…

    As a natural eclectic I do that a bit myself (since strong and consistent ideologies usually result in repression and worse). But I do have an overarching theme and goal: I’m in favor of nation states with functioning civil societies and support ideas that help that and don’t support ideas that don’t.

    But I don’t think these guys (or any of the protestors or 90% of young disaffected people) have any coherent idea at all of what they want to accomplish or how….


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.