Proud Boys’ planned tactics from the man himself.

Uncategorized 1 Minute

https://parler.com/post/c741b78505a54150bdf63d079952e8f0

I suspect than many, if not most, of the disruptions attributed to Antifa this year were really Trump supporters who want violence. This post is from the leader of the “stand back, stand by” troops for Trump. Violence and conspiracies pushed by the right are nothing new. The test of our nation is how we deal with this mess.

Published by lenrothman

Published

51 thoughts on “Proud Boys’ planned tactics from the man himself.”

    1. ‘That is power. The mob is Rome. And while Commodus controls them he controls everything.’

      “The Gladiator”

      “In the nation’s early years, Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin used the term vrag naroda (enemy of the nation/people) to refer to those who disagreed with the ideologies pushed forth by the Bolshevik government and, later, adopted by the newly-formed Soviet Union. This could include anyone from the clergy who did not want to adopt state-enforced atheism to writers to political opposition that questioned the ideologies of the new government.”

      https://www.businessinsider.com/history-of-president-trumps-phrase-an-enemy-of-the-people-2017-2

      History of power is like an elevator. From the basement to the penthouse and back, the car always stops at the same floors. Over, and over again.

      “5th floor: lingerie, housewares and pogroms…”

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. Your history link is pretty good at making vague and tenuous connections, but it omits a detail that would account for Donald Trump’s use of the phrase, “Enemy of the people.”

        An Enemy of the People is the title of a classic play published in 1882 by Henrik Ibsen. Arthur Miller wrote an adaptation of it that opened on Broadway in 1950. Miller’s adaptation was also produced for television in 1966 and made into a movie in 1978. The BBC also produced a TV version in 1980.

        It is most likely that Trump became familiar with the phrase through one of these sources.

        Wikipedia provides an excellent plot summary. In it, a doctor discovers that the water in the baths of a local spa is poisoning people. The doctor wants to alert the public, but he encounters great resistance, especially from the press and the politicians, because the spa is key to the prosperous economy of the town. The climax occurs at a public meeting where the doctor delivers a passionate oration in which he condemns the “colossal stupidity of the authorities” and the small-mindedness of “the compact liberal majority” of the people, who may as well “be exterminated.” His words anger the people, who then shout him down, chanting, “He is an enemy of the people!” The doctor’s house is vandalized and he may be driven out of town. But in the last scene he vows to stay and make the people understand “that considerations of expediency turn morality and justice upside down.”

        It is ironic that media as enemy of the people would have been understood in the last half of the 20th century, but now is an “unapproved” idea.

        Like

        Reply

        1. “It is most likely that Trump became familiar with the phrase through one of these sources”

          Source? Or are you just guessing?

          I find it a stretch that Trump was making references to enemies of the people from an Ibsen play. But, aside from that, if the media, Democrats and me are “enemies of the people” what are ISIS and Al Qaeda? Or, for that matter, Putin and his cyber warriors that have crashed into the current administration’s computers for 9 months on a grand scale? Or domestic terrorists? Crystal meth gangs?

          Trump is using an inflammatory phrase to turn mobs into political gangs to do his bidding. So the source of the phrase, nuanced as it might be, is actually immaterial to the gangs. That is like rationalizing a man killing his adulterous wife because she practiced oral sex on her lover, but not the husband. The act was still murder most foul.

          I, and all (or most) Americans for that matter, hope that January 6 will be peaceful. Hawley will do his thing, a few hours later a vote is taken and Congress accepts Biden as the new president.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

        2. Where did you dig THAT one up?

          Here is a more “plausible” explanation than that Trump ever read an Ibsen play. Or a Miller play for that matter. One of Trump’s early mentors was none other than Roy Cohn whose pal Joseph McCarthy was very free in labelling someone as an “enemy.”

          I am not the first to see how Trump channels McCarthy . . .

          And in case you do not get this let me remind you . . . Freedom of the Press is a bedrock principle of our Constitution. It follows that Trump’s heinous attacks on journalists reporting the truth about him is an attack on the Constitution.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. RE: “It follows that Trump’s heinous attacks on journalists reporting the truth about him is an attack on the Constitution.”

            Ridiculous. The First Amendment also protects freedom of speech in general, including the freedom of the president to say what he wishes.

            I haven’t read Kalb’s book, but the notion that opinions expressed by a president are even capable of threatening American democracy strikes me as insane. In fact, it strikes me as McCarthyism in its own right.

            Like

          2. I guess all the state officials, elected and otherwise, who got death threats after Trump lambasted them for not defying the law and overturning the election might have something to say about Trump’s right to incite.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. “Ridiculous?”

            Uh, that would be no. Trump having the freedom to say what he wishes does NOT give him a pass when he uses that freedom to undermine the Constitution. Maybe you have not noticed but being President includes a sworn obligation do defend the Constitution. Attacking one of its pillars – the free press – is a seditious violation of that oath.

            Liked by 1 person

        3. RE: “I find it a stretch that Trump was making references to enemies of the people from an Ibsen play.”

          I do, too. But a hit Broadway play by Arthur Miller, made into a movie (staring Steve McQueen) and a TV show) makes more sense than arcane historical references to Stalin and Hitler.

          RE: “Trump is using an inflammatory phrase to turn mobs into political gangs to do his bidding.”

          I find that a stretch. Media as “enemy of the people” has long been a recurring theme in Hollywood films. Think A Face in the Crowd (Andy Griffith), Ace in the Hole (Kirk Douglas), or even Citizen Kane (Orson Wells).

          Point being, to draw a line that links Trump with evildoers of the past based on this one phrase you have to ignore America’s own culture to which he would have been exposed as a young man.

          Like

          Reply

  3. What is it you think that means?

    The hotel they have used in the past, as well as many others, were pressured by Antifa and other left wing groups to close to make attending a rally in DC more difficult, effectively an effort to cancel free speech with which they disagree.

    The Proud Boys intend to participate anyway, but expecting they would be targets of violence, they are choosing to dress incognito for safety. Since the violence is expected to come from Antifa, dressing in black would be the safest way to avoid being attacked.

    Are you just upset their free speech is not being effectively canceled or that they will be harder to target with violence?

    Like

    Reply

    1. You can’t be that naive. Really.

      Just a few weeks ago, the yellow bellies were attacking and beating random folks in DC.

      Stabbings at Harry’s bar was by a man attacked by those gang members and defending himself.

      Trump is encouraging his fans to be “wild”. His word. Expecting an East Coast Mardi Gras perhaps? Trinkets, floats and krewes?

      This is all part of Trump’s efforts to steal the election. Reality TV on steroids. “Be right back after this word from our sponsor…RT.”

      Yes, those miscreants will have their day in the sun, permits and all.

      So long as it hinders the transition, it is all well and good.😇

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    3. Atifa is an ideology, not a movement. Even the FBI said that. So a movement was so powerful it would cause a hotel owned by Trump (not his organization, but the man himself) to close down is the cause of all of this? More beer out the nose. Glad it’s just Bud Light today.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. And yet the hotel. among others, which has not closed since it opened in 1920, is closed.

        Of course, when you’re dealing with a gang which routinely engages in arson, that will happen.

        Like

        Reply

        1. I think they are a lot more concerned with the yellow bellies packing into Harry’s Bar. Evidently, the hotel did not close for any other protests this last year. And there have been more than a few of those.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. They weren’t threatened before.

            It’s getting to be pretty much a standard tactic, to silence the opposition rather than meet it in the marketplace of ideas.

            We know what the Proud Boys stand for. Western civilization and capitalism, with no apologies.

            What does Antifa stand for?

            Like

          2. Proud Boys stand for violence. Both them and Antifa are a bunch of punks and mostly worthless trash.

            “Stand back and stand by” were orders from the chief and we are not referring to a rope line at the theater waiting for the stars to come out the stage door.

            And since the logo is Trump’s, we have a situation in which our president has aligned himself with thugs and gangs.

            Pretty normal for many autocrats, but not here, thank you.

            So if you support the yellow bellies because they tout lies about being patriots, you are one of them.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. Please show me your proof that the Proud Boys advocate violence, and not simply preparedness to defend against violence.

            What you think people mean is not evidence of anything other than your own thought process.

            Like

          4. You can look that up by just checking the recent unrest in DC. At night, the yellow bellies went around the city picking fights.

            Plenty of videos of them earlier attacking lone folks near or at demonstrations.

            They are scum. Fitting partners for the sitting president. Street thugs with uniforms have been used many times in the past. These thugs are no different with one exception. They are supported, abetted, praised and glorified by a president of my country. Shameful. Antifa are no better, just not as well organized.

            I can’t believe you endorse them, but I have been surprised before.

            FYI:

            From:
            https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/gavin-mcinnes-proud-boys-poisonous-violence/

            “McInnes is open about his glorification of violence. In a speech, he described a clash with Antifa outside a talk he gave at NYU last year: “My guys are left to fight. And here’s the crucial part: We do. And we beat the crap out of them.” He related what a Proud Boy who got arrested told him afterward: “It was really, really fun.” According to McInnes: “Violence doesn’t feel good. Justified violence feels great. And fighting solves everything.”

            And, again, you really endorse them? “And fighting solves everything”.

            You might want to reconsider your membership with them.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. You have not shown me an instance of the initiation of violence by the Proud Boys, though they definitely display a warrior spirit in responding to violence initiated against them.

            I have no problem with that. Someone has to impose a price for the violence directed at our country by Antifa and BLM, and other violent extremists.

            Like

          6. Soonly progressives are “violent extremists”? Seriously Don. You are not that naive. You are that hypocritical. THere is as much, if not more, extremism from right wing aligned gangs. And these are actually organized gangs, not ideology believers that come together.

            You cannot call out one side of the extremists without calling out those on the other, as Len and I and others have done here.

            Like

          7. OK, I will write slowly.

            Being prepared to resist aggression is not aggression.

            Warning people that you will respond effectively if attacked is not aggression.

            Show me where the Proud Boys have initiated violence.

            Like

          8. You can write as slowly as you like. It just continues to show your willful blindness to actual facts and not the ones that support your ideology.

            It has beewn shown numersou times how PB and the like have initiar=ted violence at what were peaceful rallies and protests. You ignore that fact because it doesn’t support your view.

            Willful blindness to progressivism is willful blindness to the ever-changing world we live in and ignoring those who want us to be living in the 1950’s (or 1850’s in some cases) because they believe that is the only utopia possible is idiotic and regressive.

            Liked by 1 person

          10. I will write slowly:

            “Violence doesn’t feel good. Justified violence feels great. And fighting solves everything.” Yellow bellies founder.

            So, who decides the justification for violence? You.? The yellow bellies? Trump?

            There is good reason to believe that much of the violence you attribute to BLM or Antifa is perpetrated by right wing actors. Particularly if you add up the murders.

            So if you have no problem with that, then you are the problem.

            Liked by 3 people

          11. If there is good reason to believe those false flag operations, show the proof.

            Violence is justified when unlawful force us directed against you.

            Like

          12. You’ve seen them before and rejected them as unimportant.

            I don’t care about your misguided theories of self defense. This is a matter of a president deciding to incite violence for political purposes.

            You are in favor of that apparently.

            Liked by 2 people

          16. What do you mean there is no connection? The reason the yellow bellies are showing up is to heed Trump’s call to steal the election. Just like Gohmert.

            Why else would they show up?

            Liked by 2 people

          17. First, your name calling is juvenile. They are the Proud Boys, not yellow bellies.

            And, they have every right to peaceably assemble and seek redress of grievances, just like everyone else.

            But no one has the right to initiate violence.

            Like

          18. They wear yellow and have fat bellies.

            Nothing to be proud of that is for sure.

            They are a gang. No better than drug gangs or those jerks in Michigan.

            And they are cowards, just like most Republicans.

            Gangs deserve no respect and I refuse to endorse them.

            Liked by 3 people

          22. “ The significance of one video was immediately clear. It showed a Proud Boy, Maxwell Hare, initiating the conflict by charging at the protesters, including one who THEN [my caps] hurled a plastic bottle that flew wide. Within moments, a crowd of Proud Boys could be seen streaming down the street to join the fray.”

            He was just trying to defend himself AFTER your boys attacked him.

            Yeah, these guys are no better than MS-13 except for yellow uniforms.

            And these are your defenders of the Constitution?

            Liked by 2 people

          24. The bottle was thrown when the man was attacked. That was the whole point of the article. And, FYI, the reason why those thugs were convicted in court.

            Liked by 1 person

          25. The reporter was specifically trying to find videos that showed what led to the melee. He found a parking garage video and it told the tale.

            Those thugs are bad news punks, period.

            So we have a replay of 1930’s Germany with Nazis v Antifacists. Except the demonstrators were leaving when the brave yellow shirts took off after them. And they were not Antifa.

            Proud boys in yellow instead of brown shirts.

            Liked by 2 people

          27. Read your own link.

            He didn’t advocate initiating violence against anyone.

            What he did assert was that if leftists were going to attack someone, let it be his guys, because they were ready to respond.

            Of course, antifa prefers to stalk and attack people when they are isolated from support.

            Like

          29. “Warrior spirit” from yellow bellies?
            You are one of them after all.

            They are a gang that Trump encourages to be violent.

            So I guess it fits. After spreading lies about the election, which didn’t work, you endorse this scum with warrior status?

            Liked by 2 people

          30. “We know what the Proud Boys stand for. Western civilization and capitalism, with no apologies.”

            LOL!

            Neither term has any definite meaning. The exact same thing could be said just as accurately about Bernie Sanders or Angela Merkel or Antifa. But it is exactly the kind of vacuous declaration one might expect from simple-minded, gun-toting pinheads who are stuffed full of themselves, hate women and hate “urban” people.

            So, what do they stand for when they say they stand for “Western civilization?” Before you respond, be aware that ALL three of the Abrahamic cultures are part of it. So you can drop your usual sliming of Muslims if you have any sort of meaningful response.

            Liked by 1 person

          31. “OK, I will write slowly.”

            This smarmy condescension does not fit well with the utter stupidity of your Proud Boy apologetics. Do you not know history? Do you not see the OBVIOUS correspondence between The Brown Shirts and the Proud Boys? Do you not know that EVERY armed jackass claims that his posture and threats are purely defensive?

            But, the obvious is wasted on you since you believe that an armed mob threatening the government is a demonstration of how peaceful they are because, gee, they did not actually kill the governor or the Legislators or the election volunteers when they easily could have. One could not make this stuff up.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. The good news is he cites the 48 Laws of Power, and then specifies 1/2 dozen or so. Of those specifically noted, 4 or 5 require planning and secrecy. No sweat. These are thugs, not thinkers. They’re the kind who think that kidnapping a Wisconsin governor and taking them to Michigan will result in a putting the governor on trial by the Michigan AG.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

Leave a comment