As Ed Morriseey asks, if right-leaning people declared an autonomous zone and nominated their own (violent) members to impose their idea of street justice on the “soverign zone,” would the left cheer it?
Or would they demand that the military roll in and kill these rightwing fascist warlords?
Obviously the latter.
Which suggests to me that we have to start making this a real thing in the real world, rather than a hypothetical. If the left can declare “auotonomous zones,” then so can we.
I don’t like that I have to repeatedly point this out, but if one half of society decides that it is now permissible to violently attack the citizens of the other, the latter group of citizens will soon begin doing the same — and perhaps escalating.
The Washington Post heaps praise on the “sentinels” — the “safety” squad, the writer calls them — for various actions. One bit of “policing” they praise is the sentinels’ “confronting” of a vehicle that was merely circling around and taking pictures:
Among other incidents, these volunteers have confronted a man throwing apples and threatening punches, a car driving toward a large crowd of pedestrians and a vehicle circling the block repeatedly and taking photos.
Repeatedly taking photos? Is that a crime? They were “confronted” for perpetrating an act of journalism?
Antifa of course has a “no pictures, no names” rule that they impose with vicious violence on reporters (real ones, including citizen journalists), and these “sentinels” have deciced Antifa Law is now CHAZ Law.
The Washington Post actually praises and armed vigilante gang for “confronting” (nice euphemism) a Photographer!
Does that mean I can “confront” leftwing reporters attempting to report on me or take my pictures? Or does this power of vigilante “confrontation” of reporters only apply to leftwingers “confronting” assumedly rightwing Subversives?
Because a lot of us would sure like to “confront” some reporters. So do clarify, Washington Post, if this is the law going forward.
The Post also praises the “sentinels” for… illegally seizing and ejecting “armed visitors from outside the city” who were apparently there to counter-protest the leftwing protesters:
Volunteers say they have engaged with armed visitors from outside the city who came to the zone convinced that Seattle needed saving from left-wing agitators.
So these “volunteers” — actually Vigilante Committees — may eject anyone from a different political strain, using violence or the threat thereof to make sure there are no Subversives or Troublemakers permitted in the liberated area?
Again: May we on the right begin utilizing this wonderous innovation in democracy (actually, it’s millennia-old savage tribalism), or is this once again a special privilege for the Lordly Class of Leftwing Revoluntionaries?
Only towards the end of the article does the Washington Post admit the “model does have its challenges.”
Such as using violence and a choke-hold to silence a preacher offering a message the vigilante squad did not like:
The Washington Compost needs to think without being Stupid
Does it simply not matter to anyone that these criminals are OCCUPYING and CONTROLLING property that is not theirs?