Political violence is always wrong and should never be tolerated from anyone. Once "protesters" threaten lives and property, their grievances and ideology should become absolutely irrelevant to the situation.

That is, obviously, not the country we live in.

Long ago, we had an attitude of zero tolerance for terrorism, "we do not negotiate with terrorists," etc. One reason for this was the implicit understanding that negotiating with terrorism legitimizes it. Violence becomes an instrument of politics.
Some of us warned all last year that treating violence as acceptable, even laudable, from SOME people would mainstream it and touch off an arms race. Everyone would start getting the idea that only groups with a demonstrated capacity for violence are taken seriously.
When violence becomes acceptable from one party and its clients, one ideology, it becomes an instrument of authoritarianism. That's why authoritarian regimes frequently have violent vigilante groups roaming the streets in addition to their vast security and military forces.
Iran, for example, has all sorts of heavily armed police and security forces, working for both its secular and theocratic governments, but it ALSO has ultra-violent "vigilante" groups indulged by the State whose "grievances" supposedly justify vandalism and murder.
Either political violence is rejected in total - from everyone, for any reason, no matter who they are or what they believe - or it isn't. Once the tolerance level is no longer zero, we become locked in a vicious and endless struggle to control exactly what the level should be.
This is similar to the detestable way modern society handles racism. The tolerance level should be zero, but it isn't. Racism, prejudice, and discrimination are acceptable from SOME people toward SOME people. "Anti-racism" is an instrument of totalitarian power, not a principle.
Of course the particulars of protecting vital government facilities are different, but in principle the law-abiding residents and shop owners of Kenosha should have the same expectation of protection from political violence as politicians in D.C. But they don't, do they?
Every time a left-wing group gets violent, we're immediately told the protest was Mostly Peaceful, and the people who assembled peaceably - and their political leaders, no matter how incendiary their rhetoric - are 0% responsible for any injury or destruction that occurred.
We're told it's really all OUR fault for not listening to the grievances of the "protesters" who turned violent, even as we watch video of them merrily looting retail stores. We forced them to steal those TV sets by not yielding to their political demands!
Irresponsible political leaders who fanned the flames of left-wing violence and help the perpetrators escape accountability for their actions are never held to account, never told they must resign, rarely even advised to tone down their rhetoric.
And many - most - of the left-wing riots and killings of recent memory were based on falsehoods and misinformation. Outright lies were blasted by left-wing politicians and media without consequence, entirely BECAUSE they wanted to whip people into a frenzy.
And we were told all of that was fine, acceptable, even praiseworthy because their violence brought CHANGE and their lies illuminated DEEPER TRUTH. Okay, sure, we got everything about Mike Brown or Trayvon Martin's deaths wrong, but there were legit grievances to be addressed!
We have to stop doing that. We have to insist that every quarter of our political spectrum renounce violence, and the willful incitement to violence, completely and absolutely. No more cutesy-poo nudge-nudge wink-wink when lefties burn and pillage. No more double standards.
No more celebration of Noble Lies that illuminate Deeper Truth by the light of burning homes and businesses that were destroyed by mobs with Legitimate Grievances. No more indulgences for those who wantonly break the laws of the System That Failed Them.
That is a principle, and we should all be able to agree on it, no matter what else we disagree on. Absolute zero tolerance for political violence is a message that can save lives and prevent destruction if we all say it together and demand our government acts accordingly.
But if we decide the tolerance level for political violence will not be 0.0, then all that remains is for our armies to meet in the streets. Violence is too powerful, too USEFUL, and too profitable to be ignored when it is indulged. /end

More from John Hayward

More from Politics

We’ve been getting calls and outreach from Queens residents all day about this.

The community’s response? Outrage.


Amazon is a billion-dollar company. The idea that it will receive hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks at a time when our subway is crumbling and our communities need MORE investment, not less, is extremely concerning to residents here.

When we talk about bringing jobs to the community, we need to dig deep:
- Has the company promised to hire in the existing community?
- What’s the quality of jobs + how many are promised? Are these jobs low-wage or high wage? Are there benefits? Can people collectively bargain?

Displacement is not community development. Investing in luxury condos is not the same thing as investing in people and families.

Shuffling working class people out of a community does not improve their quality of life.

We need to focus on good healthcare, living wages, affordable rent. Corporations that offer none of those things should be met w/ skepticism.

It’s possible to establish economic partnerships w/ real opportunities for working families, instead of a race-to-the-bottom competition.

You May Also Like

The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.

View the resolutions and voting results here:

The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.

Israel and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr


The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.

Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab


The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF


The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW