If Horst Wessel Were a Woman


“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana

The attempts by Trump, his “conservative” followers and some of the people who post here to make a martyr out of this tragic dope is a bellwether of the rising threat of fascism and political violence wrapped in a cloak of “Americanism” – whatever that is.

40 thoughts on “If Horst Wessel Were a Woman

      1. A witch-hunt, or a witch purge, is a search for people who have been labeled witches or a search for evidence of witchcraft. The classical period of witch-hunts in Early Modern Europe and Colonial America took place in the Early Modern period or about 1450 to 1750, spanning the upheavals of the Reformation and the Thirty Years’ War, resulting in an estimated 35,000 to 100,000 executions. (Wikipedia)


        1. Other than Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris and AOC I cannot think of any leaders who have been accused of witchcraft.

          Your “witch hunt” response is nonsensical. I believe the threat of political violence remains real and serious in spite of the failure of this first major attempt on January 6th. The parallel between the glorification of the death of the thug Horst Wessel and the glorification of the death of the thug Ashlii Babbitt reinforces my belief.

          In truth there is a real parallel – both were sacrificed to the ambition and vanity of corrupt leaders.

          If by “witches” you are referring to those who organized and carried out the attempt to overturn the election then I say, let the hunt continue until we can “lock ’em up.” All of them.


          1. Christine O’Donnell

            Yeah, I remember her. She is an early example of the “conservatives” destroying the GOP from within. Mike Castle was a slam dunk to win the Delaware Senate seat until the Trump crazies (called the Tea Party in those days) chose her instead of him.

            And, BTW, there was no need to hunt – she admitted that she had “dabbled in witchcraft.”


          2. “To be clear: I accuse YOU of hunting illusory witches.”

            Yeah, I got that right away. Your response is still laughably lame. I guess you have heard Trump say “witch hunt” so often that you think it is a phrase that fits every occassion. It doesn’t.


          3. RE: “I guess you have heard Trump say “witch hunt” so often that you think it is a phrase that fits every occassion.”

            It fits YOU perfectly in light of your post, especially as a case of remembering history.


  1. The article is behind a paywall so forgive me if I miss the point, but I actually do think it’s bad that the cops killed her. Is the right cynically feigning outrage and coopting activist language that has found purchase in the mainstream? Absolutely; but a police murder is a police murder.


    1. If you had a store and a rabid mob starts pounding on your locked doors, breaks the glass and starts to come in do you or your hired security guards have the right to use deadly force?

      “Hang Russell” was the chant, BTW.

      And you were trying to evacuate your employees out the backdoor before the mob broke in.

      I think there is a parallel there.

      On the flip side of the universe, some underage kid goes to a protest and kills two people, maims a third, starting with one who threw a plastic bag with some soup. He is a “hero”.

      Gaslighting is all the right has and they are convinced it is their only chance to justify election support.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. We all know the right are shameless hypocrites who exalt violence. That doesn’t mean we should be. And while I understand your point, I don’t think a comparison can be made between a cop and a private citizen. I’d have to actually prove I was in danger.


      2. Not a parallel at all.

        Each person Rittenhouse shot was directly threatening him, individually, with a weapon capable of killing him. And a plastic grocery bag with a can of soup in it can definitely kill you, as can a skateboard used as a club or a handgun.

        Babbitt was not a personal threat to anyone.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. She was the point person ahead of a vicious mob and the first to crash through the newly destroyed doors.

          You suggest waiting until the security staff was immobilized by tasers, bear spray, clubs, lances and firearms that we now know were present according to admissions but the officer had no way of knowing otherwise.

          The officer was most certainly threatened imminently with violent attack. And he was the last line of defense before the targeted people.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Was she holding a taser, or pepper spray, or any other weapon?

            Wera any of the others immediately behind holding a weapon visible to the officer?

            Would you excuse the shooting of a Black woman at a BLM riot because others in the crowd might be armed?

            I know a lot of 2nd Amendment supporters and not a one of them would have felt they were justified in shooting under those conditions.


          2. Who could tell in that mob?

            So they should just have let them pour into the chambers. There were only a few, if that many, defenders at the last point of entry.


            Liked by 1 person

          3. “Was she holding a taser, or pepper spray, or any other weapon?”

            You are either blind or dishonest. I do no think you are blind. The officer in question was cowering behind a door being bashed down by people wielding blunt instruments (more dangerous than a cup of soup in a plastic bag, by the way). When their bashing succeeded and the first of the mob burst through NO ONE could make the kind of judgment of threat from any particular individual that you claim – following your Dear Leader’s Lies – should have been made.

            Your very obvious racial double standard on when deadly force by law enforcement is justified ought to embarass you. The threat presented by this mob was an order of magnitude greater than that of the many times you have justified deadly violence against unarmed black people. If they did not IMMEDIATELY obey police orders their lives were forfeit and it was their fault. Why not in this case?


          1. The news reports only said a can of soup, not the flavor.

            In any case, that is irrelevant. From Rittenhouse’s point of view. the bag held something heavy, he couldn’t know what. He could only see that it was heavy enough to crack his skull.


          2. Not irrelevant. Reports also said that the bag with soup was from his discharge from a hospital. Soup in a styrofoam cup is hardly a deadly weapon.

            The threat against Rittenhouse was all self imposed, most emphatically after he killed the bag tosser. People were then trying to apprehend and disarm an active shooter. Brave, but obviously foolish in the face of a well armed killer.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. So, Rittenhouse was supposed to allow himself to be clubbed with a skateboard and shot with a handgun?

            Do you have any evidence that it was not a can? Or any way for Rittenhouse to know? All he would have been able to tell was roughly how heavy it was based on the stretch of the bag. Whether it was a Styrofoam cup, a can, or a brick would be unknowable.

            Remember that no matter what he did before, when he was threatened and no longer able to retreat, he is allowed to defend his life. even if he provoked the confrontation, and there is no evidence he did even that.


          4. By your logic, a person could enter a crowd, shot one person, then mow down the rest because they tried to subdue him and call it self-defense.

            This is the stuff that happens when an underaged gang worshipper is heavily armed, (illegally to boot) and thinks he is Wyatt Earp. No one requested his services.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. That is a poor straw man,

            Rittenhouse did not initiate violence, he responded to repeated attacks by members of the mob. He did not pursue anyone, or fire at anyone not actively attacking him


          6. Indeed there should be an investigation as to why, in so many Democrat controlled cities, the police stepped back and allowed the mobs to loot and burn businesses and homes, leaving it to the citizens to try to do their jobs for them.

            Rittenhouse, and others, were only out there because to the police were not.

            As to who should do the investigation, good question. It can’t be the local governments who abandoned their duty to keepo the peace. So who?


          7. Most states have some kind of state bureau of investigation or state police investigators that are brought in when cities need independent studies.

            Liked by 1 person

          1. He provoked violence by brandishing his assault weapon. Duh!

            He had no legitimate reason to be anywhere near the protests that night, much less armed with a military grade weapon. Militia midgets taking on the duties of law enforcement is not acceptable in a civil society. Period.


    2. It IS bad that the cops HAD to shoot to stop the progress of a bloodthirsty mob attacking the Capitol. Calling this a police “murder” is ridiculous, IMHO. Watch the video, if you haven’t, and share what alternative at that point did they realistically have? Let the mob have its way with Pelosi, AOC and Pence?

      In fact, she was shot in the shoulder and it was bad luck that the wound was fatal.


      1. AOC, no. Pelosi and Pence, meh. 😉

        Every other cop in the place managed not to kill anyone. Many of them appear to have opened doors and barricades to let the people in, but that’s another conversation.

        We spend so much time and effort trying to help the right wingers understand that black men are people too and that it’s bad when cops murder them to then turn around and gloat at their indignation when the cops murder a right wing white lady. The story here is that the racial makeup and political orientation of the crowd is why there was only one killing. If this had been minorities, people aligned with BLM or (gasp) Antifa, there would have been an airstrike.


        1. If we’re going to bring race into this issue, we should probably note that the officer who shot Ashli Babbit is black. The exercise seems superfluous to me, however.


          1. Superfluous is the race of the cops, rather than their victims. But you know that, you’re just trying to obfuscate.

            Do we know he was black? Looks white in the video to me. Would be helpful if they made these things public…

            Liked by 1 person

        2. The fact that guns were not employed until the breach of chambers occurred showed remarkable restraint. Obviously by this point other defensive measures were not stopping the mob.

          Some of the officers said afterwards that they did not want to get killed themselves if they started shooting. The mob was wearing camo and body armor and clearly stated their mission to kill Pence. No reason not to believe they had guns too.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. Pay walled but attempting to compare Babbit to a Nazi is really a desparate move. Rolling eyes, shaking head with the typical smile at the inane Trump, Trump, Trump, Fox, Fox, Fox, blah, blah, blah resonating from left wing terrorist extremists show of desparation.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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