the inaction toward the KKK is implicit consent toward their activities.
I’m not certain how you could draw a connection given the two groups respective statuses.
Their labeling of antifa as a terrorist organization sets the precedent that ANYONE engaging in antifascist activities or in opposition of fascism is a terrorist.
It's rather surreal to watch this all happen -- the gaslighting, the racists crawling out from under their rocks, the blatant corruption, and the fomenting of hate amongst the populace. I think things are going to get a lot uglier before November, and after the election to get even worse.
We live in perilous times.
Or, alternatively, you could formulate a more nuanced criteria for when the government should or should not surveil people.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Enforcement_Act
Edit: It should be noted that this statue only applies to actions of representatives of the government[2]. It does not necessarily apply to the general public; the context of this comment chain is vague but implies a context that at least could include the public. I don’t mean to misrepresent the law. I am not a lawyer.
> The courts consider it unconstitutional to label any domestic organization as a 'terrorist organization', in the legal sense.
I don’t doubt this, but a citation would help me see where you’re coming from, in a legal jurisprudence sense.
To be honest, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/grou...
I can't directly cite the negative of never lynching anyone, of course. But a google search should reveal it. AFAIK Andrew Anglin of The Daily Stormer has never lynched anyone either. I still hope the FBI is keeping tabs on him, though.
Amren may have never done a lynching, but the shadowy nature of how think tanks can launder money may implicate an associated group in modern-day lynchings covered up by the police[0].
The Koches, one of the largest financiers of right wing groups was built oil refineries for both Stalin and Hitler(the reich’s second largest refinery). They scrubbed the latter from their corporate history and were never tried at Nuremberg.
As it stands today, an average high school girl attending a BLM protest from twitter is likely surveilled far more heavily than Taylor or Anglin from the revelations in new surveillance articles. And that’s terrifying.
[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/22/black-vict...
I agree. But the right would say the same thing about Antifa. Antifa, as a loose organization, has certainly engaged in various forms of violence and crime. Maybe not as much as the far-right groups, but not none, either. If the standard is simply non-zero levels of criminality, than that standard has been met.
> As it stands today, an average high school girl attending a BLM protest from twitter is likely surveilled far more heavily than Taylor or Anglin from the revelations in new surveillance articles. And that’s terrifying.
That's a nice thing to say rhetorically, but it's almost certainly not true. Anglin and Taylor are public figures who have substantial influence. I don't think you seriously believe that the average high school girl in BLM is getting more attention than Andrew Anglin.
If the point you really want to make is that BLM is getting a disproportionate share of attention relative to its violence or criminality, that's something I could agree with.
With that said, I agree with you on most of your other sentiments.
Liberalism simply can’t handle plausible deniability.