Rioting at Trump Rallies, 2015

Here.

Put together by Trump supporters. Most footage from Fox News and local channels. It is said to be a compendium of video of the violence that Trumpsters have been “suffering” for about a year now.

That’s fake news right there.

Most of the video appears to be from a large Trump rally in San Jose that took place last year, I believe in the Spring. There was some pretty serious rioting at the rally from anti-Trumpsters.

Black bloc antifa are present but only in very low numbers.

Instead the rioters are regular Californians, mostly young people. Most of the rioters and protesters are Hispanics, and I would gather that almost all of them are Mexican-Americans. Chicanos in other words. I can assure you that there were few to no illegal aliens at that rally. I know how illegals look and act, and further, the language of the protesters is all or almost all perfect unaccented English. The only accent you can here is “Barrio English,” which is just a dialect of English adopted by Chicanos, almost all of whom have English as a first language. The dialect is an affectation and is not the result of interference from Spanish.

There are broadly two types of Chicanos, where Chicanos refers to mostly 2nd and 3rd generation Mexican Americans especially in California. These people have traditionally been ~70% White and ~30% Indian. The more Indian types have come in large numbers only in recent years.

These Chicanos are all native English speakers, and by the third generation, most no longer have fluent Spanish skills. So the language is going out in the 3rd generation, which is typical for any assimilating US immigrant group. These Chicanos are assimilated Americans in that they for the most part have given up Mexican culture for American culture. They retain somewhat more conservative values as far as sexual activity (favoring monogamy, especially for the females), sex roles (traditional roles are preferred), family ties (the family structure is usually very strong), and respect for elders (still strong, especially for parents).

The problem is not that Chicanos are not assimilating. It is that they are assimilating to something lousy. A lot of them assimilate to Barrio Culture. This is a subculture that is heavily gang-involved and is present in a lot of the poorer Chicano neighborhoods. However, many other Chicanos, even those who live right next to the barrios, are assimilating more or less to regular American culture, and they act little different from you, me or any other White person, which the exception of some the conservatism you see above.

This crowd is clearly a mix of Barrio types and more assimilated Chicanos. The Barrio types are mixed between overtly gang-involved types and others who are simply barrio dwellers who are not gang-involved.

Believe it or not, not everyone in a barrio is a gang member. Gangsters are only a small group, mostly young men, and most of them stay in the game for only a few years, often on the fringes, before they marry at age 18-23+, move in with a woman with kids or have kids or their own, and retire, usually completely, from gang life. Most so-called gang members are just wannabes who form their own fake sets by claiming a legitimate gang and try to say that they control some neighborhood. They are considered poseurs by the true gang members who might beat them up if the poseurs tried to claim the gang because all true sets have to be approved by the official gang in the area.

Even among the wannabes, most are not even members of the fake set. Instead they are hangers-on or so-called gang associates, who much outnumber gang members. Most of these types see almost no inter-gang warfare, do not spray much graffiti and do not victimize neighbors. They’re just trying to look hard by claiming Nortenos or whatever.

There are also quite a few of the more assimilated Chicanos mixed in with the Barrio types. Barrio Chicanos are pretty hard and tough, and you do not want to mess with them. Many have street gang experience. Beatings, knifings and shootings are quite common and Barrio Chicanos kill an awful lot of people, mostly rival gang members. Police often call these crimes as “NHI” or “No Humans Involved.” They are also referred to as “Public Service Killings.” It’s just one scumbag killing some other scumbag and doing society a favor in the process.

Most of the violence here seems to be coming from the Barrio types. These people have few inhibitions and low self-controls. They get riled up very easily. If these Barrio Chicanos ever start rioting over Trump, it is not going to be pretty. These guys don’t mess around.

There are also some militant young people there, often young White women. But these are in the minority. These are more or less university-aged SJW’s.

I was very surprised to see ordinary White SJW’s, Barrio Chicanos and Assimilated Chicanos burning US flags. I’m not sure if I have ever seen them do that before. That’s not a good sign, as a lot of these folks are pretty assimilated. When a lot of your assimilated, relatively nonpolitical citizens start burning your flag, that’s a bad sign for your country.

Some of the video also shows what looks like anti-Trumpsters blocking a highway in Arizona to try to stop a Trump rally there. This happened over the summer.

Bottom line is this is not the Left or liberals or even Democratic Party people. These rioters young people are on the fringes of active politics, if they even vote at all, and many of them don’t even bother to do that. This is more of an out and out ethnic riot between two ethnic groups, Chicanos and their White supporters versus mostly White Trumpsters. Sort of a Chicanos vs. Whites street battle if you wish. On the other hand, more or less openly ethnic riots pitching mostly one ethnic group against another is not a good sign at all. That is called ethnic strife, and it can lead to some pretty bad things, like Yugoslavia.

Discussion: Are the Riots Helping or Hurting Our Cause?

Discuss.

Ryan England: The antics of antifa and the black-bloc are a concern of mine. My issue with them isn’t so much their ideology – the endgame for the kind of society and world I’d like to see looks very much like something out of anarchist and communist theory. This has been the case for me for decades now. But going out and smashing windows and lighting trashcans on fire isn’t going to result in the democratization of capital or even garner popular support for anti-capitalist ideals.

Leftwing politics have been struggling with a serious image problem for years now. We need to think in terms of how the moderates see us. We have to stop LARPing and beware the tendency to descend into an ideological purity spiral. This has been a concern of mine going back to the 1990’s, and with the rise of the Social Justice Warrior as the Internet’s favorite punching bag, it’s only gotten worse. Shit, the annoyance they’ve caused for so many people recently is a contributing factor to Trump getting in the White House.

The Left fails because it’s an insular little clique with its own lingo and its own little subcultures, and the bulk of the population – the people who most need to know what we have to say – are put off by it. On top of that, people get expelled from Leftist circles for the most frivolous and stupid of deviations from the ideological line – the big Alt-Left groups on Facebook are constantly getting posts from newbies talking about the stupid shit they get banned from anarchist and communist groups for.

We can’t riot. We can’t smash windows. We can’t shut down campus speakers we don’t like. That’s what Milo Yiannopoulos and his ilk want us to do. Did you all know that sales of his books SKYROCKETED since the Berkeley riots? He’s laughing all the way to the bank because of what happened, and many thousands – hundreds of thousands – more people who otherwise wouldn’t have otherwise have become interested in and even sympathetic with Milo’s thought. Goading dumb Leftists into doing dumb stuff is Milo’s whole business model. Why would we want to feed it?

We can’t sucker punch Nazis – not unless it’s clear that they’re out to cause trouble, and they were at one time. I remember Nazi skinhead gangs. They were bad news. You need antifa to deal with that. But socking a goofy civvy in the face, even one who has Nazi views, might make us feel good but also makes us look bad. Maybe not bad in our own books, but bad to the Average Joe whose long-term decision on whether to go Right or Left may ultimately hinge on which faction abstains from needless violence. Notice that the rightwingers stand off or even retreat when the shit hits the fan now and let the Left make asses of themselves? They’ve learned their lessons and are playing a long game here.

If Leftists keep rioting, we’ll burn not just our colleges and neighborhoods to the ground. We’ll burn our futures to the ground as well. We have to stop it. We have to stop LARPing, we have to present ourselves in a calm and rational manner so that our critiques of Trump and the deeper historical materialist ideas that our critiques are rooted in get taken seriously.

I am unsure.  The peaceful protests and even the property-destroying riots and Trumpster-assaulting riots are not increasing Trump’s popularity or decreasing the popularity of our side.

Yes, there are posts on Trump groups by people saying, “I am on your side now!” but most of them we don’t want on our side anyway. I am inclined to say, “Go vote for the Right!” for these people. A lot of these people call themselves moderates, but in the US, that means, “Trump and the Republicans are right 50% of the time.” That’s not moderate.

Since January 26, support for our side has gone up 3 points and support for Trump has fallen by 7 points. So even the violent riots are not hurting us yet. As long as they are not hurting us, I’m not inclined to support the argument that we need to stop this stuff because we are turning people off. In fact, we may even be converting some people. Antifas went to the Women’s March and tries to explain why they were rioting in DC on Jan. 20 (mostly property damage) and they said some of the liberal women were saying, “Well, maybe so. Maybe it needs to come to that.”

A lot of others on the Left, not just Leftists but often regular liberals, are acting nuts now too.

Sarah Silverman called for a military coup to oust Trump.

Kaine just told Americans to “take it to the streets.” This is being framed by the Opposition as a call for street violence.

Police refused to make even one arrest for the Berkeley riots. The mayor apparently gave them a stand-down order. There are photos of hundreds of police standing around doing nothing on the second floor of the Student Union while the Opposition is getting pummeled outside. They let the vandalism go on and not one person was arrested for a lot of serious assaults on Trumpsters. It sure looks like the police are implicitly saying they will not interfere when people smash stuff and beat up the Opposition. Few if any prominent liberals have even criticized the Berkeley riots, and the media is pretty much blacking them out, which is tacit acceptance at least for media cover-up.

I have not seen the Left so activated since the 1970’s. The anarchists themselves say that anarchism has never been so popular.

There are regular calls to assassinate Trump. Madonna practically threatened to blow up the White House. A BLM speaker the other day advocating “Killing people…killing the White House.”#killtrump tags have appeared in the 10,000’s on Twitter. There are so many that I am certain that the SS is hardly investigating them. There are SS agents themselves saying they will not protect him from assassin.

And Trump’s actions by themselves are quite violent. So we are comparing the structural violence of Trump with the street violence of antifa. I must say Trump’s violence is worse. Until it can be shown that these riots are objectively hurting us, I won’t agree with an argument that they are bad tactics due to decreasing our support and driving support to the Opposition.

Schoolteacher Attacks Trump Image On Blackboard in Front of Her Class of Cheering Students

Wow.

An image of Trump from a projector is being played on the board in front of class. The cute young teacher charges the image and sprays it multiple times with a squirt gun,screaming, “Die! Die!” as students cheer her on.

Good job!

Let us praise this teacher for a job well done and a teachable moment.

 

Most Shocking Video Yet of Berkeley Riots

There first 15 seconds of this video are incredible. It looks like some Trump supporters got stranded on the other side of a barrier. Most of the Trump people were on the opposite of the barrier. On the other side were antifa, etc. So she was stranded with her back up against the wall on the antifa side of the barrier. Antifas start attacking her and other Trump supporters stranded on the antifa side with flagpoles. The young blond woman is hit several times with flagpoles. The camera moves away and towards the end it looks like they are attending to a Trumpster who has been knocked out by the antifa. It looks like he is out cold on the pavement.

Wow! These antifa guys don’t mess around, do they? Scary dudes. They mean business!

Trump Supporter Assaulted on Berkeley Street Today

Here.

The link says Trump supporter attacked at UC Berkeley today, but that’s crap. First of all, that event did not occur at “UC Berkeley.” It occurred on a street somewhere in Berkeley. I am not sure where, but that’s not on campus. The campus does not have city-style roads running through it. It does not have rows of shops on a street with a sidewalk crowded with pedestrians. It does not have city buses running on streets inside campus. I am not sure where it took place, but it was not on campus.

A black buy, a hippie guy and a Trumpster get into it at the start of the video. It looks like the Black guy clocks the Trumpster with a punch in the face. A wild fight is on very fast and they both stumble towards the road. The Black guy breaks away. The Black guy’s friend is a hippie guy. The hippie throws some red object at the Trumpster. But it does not look dangerous. It just looks like a garment. Then the Trumpster and the hippie are locked in wild combat. People try to pull them apart. The Trumpster recovers his glasses that fell on the ground. The hippie and the Black guy drive away, but they are stopped very quickly by police. Those are city police too, not campus police.

The incident may have occurred right next to campus, but no one knows that. The hippie and the Black guy obviously are not UC students. The Trumpster may well be as he is very well-dressed.

Things are hotting up awful fast in these blighted United States.

Schizoid Personality Disorder Vs. Asperger’s Syndrome

Ultra Cool: Is Asperger’s not the same as schizoid? They do seem to be VERY similar, at least on a superficial level.

Apparently quite a bit different, though the last DSM seemed to be saying that they are the same thing.

Schizoids do not seem nearly as weird and out of it as Aspies do. Schizoids seem like perfectly normal people who just want to be alone all the time and are perfectly happy that way. I don’t get the impression that they cannot read social cues or act odd or strange, etc. Also schizoids are rather muted emotionally, while Aspies are commonly wildly emotional to the point of frequent temper tantrums.

There is something really weird about Aspies. On some level, they just don’t get it. You do not get that impression with Schizoids at all. They seem absolutely sane, other than just wanting to be alone all the time. Also, Schizoids do not react much to either praise or criticism. If you come down hard on an Aspie, they might flip.

Aspies sometimes strike me as resembling retarded people in some ways. Now, they are typically much smarter than retarded people, but I have seen quite a few Aspies with that “retarded person” look on their faces like they are completely out of it and have no idea what is going on.

Schizoids are almost excessively rational and cool. If you go to their forums, you would be surprised at how shockingly sane they are.

Schizoids could change but don’t want to. Aspies usually have no idea that anything is even wrong with them. Studies have shown that Schizoids tend to cluster a lot more with other personality disorders than with forms of autism.

Alt Left: Civil War? Bring It On!

Well, low level civil war in the present form of pre-civil war or civil strife anyway is just fine. It’s not ok to promote anything beyond that right now though.

Here.

A new article in Salon says that Trump has set off a civil war in America. As a supporter of the very similar Revolutionary movements of the 1960’s and 1970’s, which also erupted into a near civil war, the Alt Left supports this low- level civil war (civil strife) completely. Right now what is going on is like a pre-civil war or what is often referred to as civil strife. The civil war will pretty much only start if and when people start killing each other, and that’s not happening…yet. Hopefully it will not come to that because not only will the enemy start dying but we will too. That means you, me, our friends and loved ones. It’s generally better if civil strife does not move to a shooting civil war level barring extreme circumstances.

The only thing that is happening now is street fights between the Left and Right, similar to the Left vs. Right street thugs fighting in the streets in Germany in the 1920’s and 1930’s. It also similar to civil strife that goes on in Latin America. Particularly in Chile, left vs. right street fighting is very common. The Right is fascist and supports Pinochet. The Left is almost Communist or socialist and supports Salvador Allende and his followers. A woman from Allende’s own party is now governing the country. The Left regularly stages what can only be called pro-Allende demos, which are regularly raided by fascists who support Pinochet. Similarly, fascists regularly stage what are more or less pro-Pinochet demos which are regularly invaded by leftists. Street fighting between the two is very common.

People do not realize it but rioting is very common in Latin America. Venezuela had regular riots, often led by university students, even before Chavez came to office. After Chavez came in, the Opposition staged regular riots and demos in their neighborhoods. After a while, the Chavista police just sat back and let the Opposition trash their neighborhoods. The Chavista police must have had one of the most hands-off approaches to rioters in the world.

In Chile once again, high school students are now staging regular demos which typically turn into riots. This is because in this wealthy country, the schools are literally falling apart. These riots have been happening about once every three weeks now. The Chilean Indians are a much discriminated against population and popular racism against Indians is at a very high level.

I had a friend in Chile whose father worked for Allende and considered himself a progressive guy. He was majoring in sociology and he planned to go to the Indian regions to do fieldwork. However, this anti-Indian racism was off the charts from an American point of view. He also had wildly classist views which would be shocking in the US. Obviously any country afflicted with crazy high levels of classism and racism along with some of the worst wealth inequality on Earth is a pretty shitty place. In a shitty country, you might as well demonstrate and riot all the time because that is exactly what shitty countries deserve. If they ever clean up their act and turn into decent countries, I think the rioters in general should knock it off.

Rioting should only be for protesting truly noxious systems, not, for instance, against Swedish social democracy. It’s a very civilized and decent system and there’s nothing to riot about. But rightwing shitholes can have all the riots in the world for all I care. They asked for it by being rightwing shitholes. If they don’t want riots all the time, all they have to do is create a decent country.

Needless to say, the Chilean Indians riot on a very frequent basis. And Indian riot is almost banal down there. That’s how common it is.

I was very close to the politics of Peru for a while there and I got regular updates of the situation on the ground. Even leaving aside the fact that there was an armed and very deadly insurgency going on, besides that, on the Left in general (which did not necessarily support the insurgency at all) there were regular strikes and demonstrations.

A lot of the strikes were by people like teachers and physicians. Teachers’ unions are very militant in Latin America, they go on strike all the time, have regular demonstrations and they even riot quite a bit. Schoolteachers rioting seems odd in a US context but down there, it’s just normal. There are also almost constant demonstrations against mining and really for all manner of leftwing causes. It’s quite common for these to turn into riots. Even setting aside the insurgency, Peru struck me as a place where leftwing riots were quite common.

I don’t know much about civil strife in the rest of the continent. I saw a recent video of young people mostly in their late teens to mid twenties who appeared to be actually demonstrating in favor of the FARC guerrillas and against death squad activity directed at civilian supporters of the guerrilla. I was surprised that the FARC had that much support. The demonstration was quite violent to say the least.

I believe demonstrations are very common in Brazil and if I am not mistaken, they regularly become riots also.

This low level civil war or civil strife is a good thing in the US right now. Bottom line is we deserve it. We are turning into a true rightwing shithole along Latin American lines, and shitty countries deserve all the riots that rioters can unleash against them. Don’t like the rioting? Fine, put in a halfway decent government. Unless and until that happens, I say let the riots go on.

All of the following are important:

• Calling or writing to your Congresspeople.
• Attending town hall meetings of Congresspeople.
• New laws at the state level
• Anti-Trump lawsuits by states
• Anti=Trump lawsuits by individuals and aggrived parties, often being taken by the ACLU right now.
• Appearances by Congresspeople at areas of controversy, such as Congresspeople who tried to get travelers released from airports
• Journalists writing highly critical and rabble rousing articles
• Openly defiant and angry press organs, even such staid venues as the New York Times. There’s nothing with the NYT calling Trump a liar on the front page.
• Letters to the editor
• Signing petitions
• Refusing service to Trump supporters in the workplace
• Ending as many friendships with Trump supporters as you can handle
• Various organizations leading peaceful demonstrations of all sorts such as the women’s march. Those demos can get pretty loud and rowdy, but without overt violence, they are still peaceful
• Blocking highways
• Walkout strikes
• Wildcat strikes
• Boycotts
• Shopping strikes

And also nonpeaceful protest would seem to be in order. If we are truly turning into a nightmarish Latin American style rightwing shithole, then this country deserves as many riots as rioters can stage. Shitholes deserve nothing less until they clean up their act and turn into decent countries.

Among forms of nonviolent protest:

• Looting of noxious corporate venues, especially window smashing.
• Bonfires
• Fireworks
• Smoke bombs
• Rocks, bricks and police barricades at windows of some venues, the purpose being merely to break windows at the venue.
• Vandalism, especially of corporate property. Window smashing is just fine.
• Arson, particularly of corporate property but especially of the property of our class enemies, such as the limousine burnt on January 20.

Violence against people.

• Generally not recommended at this point.

This is a very tricky area and I am wrestling a lot with this one. In wars, the civilian supporters of the insurgency or state are supposed to be left alone. They seldom are in wars anymore, but they are supposed to be. This is why the fire bombings in Germany and Japan were so wrong. Even if Germans were supporting Nazis, it was not ok to set their cities aflame with the sole purpose of incinerating as many civilians as possible. Something very similar but much worse happened in Japan.

Of course the purpose of the atom bombs was to slaughter as many civilians as possible in order to end a war. The argument is typically raised that it was worth it to murder 300,000 Japanese civilians in a couple of days to end the war and that alternatives would have been more costly. Even with a goal of ending a war and supposedly saving lives by ending a war prematurely, it’s awful hard to justify mass slaughter of civilians, even if they are supporting a noxious regime. Killing thousands of civilians even for this purpose seems wrong, not to mention 10,000’s. Killing 100,000’s of civilians even for some supposedly noble goal gets very hard to justify under virtually any circumstances.

So if civilian supporters even of armed insurgencies and noxious regimes are not to be killed or even harmed for that matter, how is it ok to beat up Trump supporters. Now granted, things are much worse in hot wars. If all Assad’s army and supporters were doing was punching out rebel supporters, I doubt if anyone would care. I doubt if many would be bothered by German patriots clocking Nazi supporters during the war, assuming they could even get away with it. Likewise in Japan. The main argument in all of these cases is that state are actually mass murdering civilian supporters of insurgencies and civilian supporters of enemy states during state to state war. The argument never gets down to the level of if it’s ok to punch out guerrilla supporters or people backing a state in wartime in a state to state war.

Nevertheless, attacks on Trump supporters leave me a bit queasy. It may come down to that at some point, but for now, political violence against Opposition civilians doesn’t rub me the right way. Of course the antifa will do it anyway, we don’t have to stamp our approval on it. And it’s a thin line that separates a right hook from a group beating stomping someone to death. Single punches can turn into fatal beat downs faster than you can think.

For right now, nonpeaceful tactics should be limited to property damage, particularly of noxious corporations. Destroying the property of class enemies such as limousines is certainly acceptable. Even arson is ok against their property and that of noxious corporations, especially if you clear out the civilians just stick to burning stuff, not other people. A lot of limousines deserve to be torched and a lot of banks are asking for it too.

But I am going to butt out of attacks on people of the opposition. And surely, attacks with guns, bombs and whatnot are completely out of line at least at this stage. Now it may come down to a 1970’s revolutionary scenario where as late as 1972, 1,900 bombs went off in the US. That’s six bombs a day. Very few of them killed or even hurt other people as they were often set off late at night or preceded with warnings. Nevertheless, once you step it up to setting off bombs, it’s a whole new ballgame. We aren’t there yet, so such activities are not acceptable at the least.

Is It OK to Punch a Trump Supporter at a Political Rally or Gathering?

Discuss.

Jason Y: No offense Robert but you seem to be sympathizing with Trump supporters when before you were praising all acts of rioting and other mayhem directed at Trump. Note, these anti-fas are just playing by your playbook and, of course, it is to be expected cause Trump is so infiltrated with WN’s that it all seems like fair game.

Riots are just fine. I do have some issues when it comes to people getting hurt, and these Trump supporters, let’s face it, they boil down to the definition of innocent civilians. I didn’t like the fire bombings of Germany or Japan either. You can’t kill civilians just for supporting a regime.

Well I have nothing against some property damage, but it does rather bother me to see even these Trumpsters getting beat up or even punched out. I have some real mixed feelings about it. I say they deserve it, but when I see it happens, it bothers me. Also if we see it’s ok to assault them at their gigs and if they show up at ours, they get to come to our demos or see us at their demos and assault us on sight too. I don’t really want to get beat up or even punched. If it’s ok for us to hit them, it’s going to be ok for them to hit us.

I am currently having an ethical dilemma about this stuff. Sure, I say I don’t care about them, but then I see them getting beat up and I want to run over there and shield them to keep them from getting hit anymore. Part of me says it’s ok for them to get clocked once or twice but I definitely do not want to see them get suffer long-term or permanent damage. A little temporary damage might be ok, but I am not sure about that either.

I don’t care if they clock Richard Spencer. If anyone is asking for it, it is him. But I also don’t care if they never hit him again. I disagree with the antifa that guys like Spencer are the problem. I mean Bannon, Pence, Price, De Vos, Sessions, those guys deserve a punch in the face 1,000 times worse than Spencer does. Or worse. They are actually doing some very serious damage and harm to lots of human beings. A lot of people are going to die and a lot more are going to get hurt, and it’s all going to be done by these people.

These supporters are just cheering on the attackers and killers, which I am unsure is such a serious offense.

Compared to those names I listed, what damage is Richard Spencer doing? Shooting off his mouth. If you are going to assault someone, hit someone who is actually doing some sort of concrete damage, not just flapping his gums.

Video of the Shooting at the Milo Protest at Washington University on January 20

Here.

Video of the Washington University shooting. Looks like a general meelee with the crowd formed into two opposing factions, antifas, etc. on one side and Trumpsters on the other. They start to converge on each other and then the antifa who got shot charges the Trumpster in the yellow hat. The antifa has a shaved head and goatee and is wearing all leather and spikes. Looks like a tough character.

The antifa runs up to the Trumpster and clocks him hard with a solid punch to the face. The antifa then grabs the Trumpster and looks like he has some sort of hold on him. They stumble through the crowd and the antifa looks like he is pummeling the Trumpster as they careen through the crowd. At one point, the Trumpster breaks free and starts to stumble away, half falling down as he does so. The antifa stumbles towards the Trumpster in hot pursuit, arm drawn ready to land another punch. The antifa converges on the Trumpster at some point and they locked into some sort of combat.  At that point, the Trumpster pulls a gun very fast and shoots the antifa, stumbling backwards as he does it.

The Trumpster said he thought the guy attacking him was a White Supremacist, but that is a lie. The only White Supremacists in the crowd were with the Trumpsters. The Trumpster had complained earlier that the antifas had stolen his Trump camp and sucker-punched him. This was about an hour before the shooting. It looks like the Trumpster went back for more after he got hit and manhandled. I am not defending the Trumpster, but it looks like he was really goading the antifas on and trying to provoke them. He knew who they were and they knew who he was. He was probably yelling things at the antifas because the antifa suddently charges enraged from 20 feet away. Something must have ticked off the antifa, no doubt something the Trumpster said.

The antifa was hospitalized in critical condition at first and for a while, people were not sure he was going to live, but he did survive and was released. He did not with to press charges against the shooter. The police detained the Trumpster but released him when they determined that he fired in self-defense. The shooter was a 29 year old Asian student at the university. The victim was a 34 year old computer security worker from the local area.

Don’t know what to say to these antifas, but if they keep running around beating up Trumpster supporters, some of these guys are going to fight back and they might just shoot you. I would be careful if I were an antifa to take care not to get shot.

Fake News: Lies Galore about the Berkeley Riots

Trash: You summed it up. Young unemployed unkempt young men rioting over obscure British journalists in a minor venue of a “Berserkley”-a college famous for its radicalism anyhow.

Most have grown up in the suburbs their Jewish or WASP parents worked hard to pay for in order to shield them from NAM’s, poor rural white trash, urban squalor or anything rougher than a scraped knee at a soccer game or a slap from their father.

They have never served in the military, spent time in jail, been mugged or even boxed or wrestled in high school.

To the financial-industrial complex they are trivial and unimportant. Some of their parents are even low-rung cogs in that machine itself who have been dedicated slaves to the system and its owner.

Sad to say but they are not taken very seriously.

Some of the protesters are children of lawyers or other cogs in the liberal elite machine.

Others are children of cogs in the financial-industrial complex.

Chaotic amateur violence among blacks is a more serious civil matter. But these folks have never fired a gun in their life, or changed a tire, or oil for a car, or served in the military or done anything but hang around student unions drinking refills of coffee.

As revolutionaries they are amateur-no IRA provisional soldier has taught them the finer points of guerrilla warfare in a Middle Eastern training camp.

1. The rioters were Berkeley students and even professors. Not true.

Students who were at the protests said that the students were protesting peacefully when they were invaded by 150 antifa Black Bloc types. These guys then took the whole demonstration in a whole new direction. He said they were a lot older than students, average age in the late 20’s. People said that no one had ever seen these people before. Some thought they came from outside of Berkeley, possibly from Oakland. There is a large anarchist presence in Oakland that riots fairly regularly.

There was also an argument that Berkeley students are very privileged and would not want to have a serious arrest on their record.

2. The demonstrations/riots were sponsored by George Soros. Not true. Soros simply gives money to some of the liberal organizations that have been organizing demonstrations, such as those at the women’s marches. Soros does not issue any marching orders telling these organizations to stage demonstrations or any of that sort. These decisions are internal to these groups and I doubt if they would need to be convinced to demonstrate under Trump anyway. Of course there is no evidence that Soros is behind the antifa Black Bloc rioters.

3. The demonstrators/rioters are being paid by George Soros. Not true. There is no evidence that Soros has ever given one of these anti-Trump protesters one nickel for going to a demo and he certainly does not pay the rioters to riot.

4. The rioters are liberals. Not true. The demonstrators are a combination of liberals and Leftists. The overwhelming majority of them seem to be engaging in peaceful protest. The rioters are all Leftists. Specifically, they are Far Left antifa Black Bloc anarchists.

5. The rioters are all Communists. Not true. So far there is no evidence whatsoever that any Communists are participating in the riots. ‘Til now it has all been an anarchist faction. I am not even aware of a large Communist presence at the demonstrations. If someone can show me evidence of a large Communist role in the demonstrations, I would like to see it.

6. The “Alt Left” is demonstrating and even rioting. Not true. Nope, the Alt Left has no presence whatsoever in the riots and I am not even aware if any of us are participating in the demos. A lot of us support the demos and a few of us even support the riots, but the Alt Left has not participated in these events in any way so far.

7. SJW’s and the “Alt Left” are the same thing. Not true. This is a lie that crazy Trump supporters made up. We bashed them for their White Supremacist Alt Right movement which is so prominent among Trump supporters, so in order to deflect from that, they made up a lie that the Left, liberals/Democrats/Hillary voters along with Bernie supporters, SJW’s and the Far Left, are all part of something called the “Alt Left.” Problem is, they’re not. They do not identify as Alt Left.

You cannot put people into some artificial made-up category that they themselves reject unless you have some evidence that it applies to them. The only people that are Alt Left are a small group of rather socially conservative Leftists and liberals who support leftwing economics while opposing the Cultural Left. So calling the Cultural Left “Alt Left” is not only untrue; it is in fact a slander. Not only is the Cultural Left not Alt Left, but the Cultural Left is the perfect example of everything the Alt Left is opposed to.