Stretch, grab a late afternoon cup of caffeine and get caught up on the most important news of the day with our Coffee Break newsletter. These are the stories that will fill you in on the world that's spinning outside of your office window - at the moment that you get a chance to take a breath.
Sign up now to save time and stay informed!

Make Mine Freedom

image @ParentRap @Pixaby.com Released under Creative Commons license.

In the wake of the events in Charlottesville, and the national mass hysteria that the media has been trying its best to promote -- to turn two groups of unpleasant people doing unpleasant things into a national emergency -- I’ve found myself in some very odd arguments.

They usually start as all such arguments start with my saying both the antifa (named according to the same rules as the Deutsche Demokratische Republik, of which the last two words were a blatant and invidious lie) and the Live Action Reich Players are not just generally unpleasant, ill-informed, and power-hungry people, but that they are, as a whole, not representative of the whole nation.

This usually leads to my being called Nazi, or white supremacist, or other epithets which remind me of nothing so much as of when we had a fight over what constituted quality science fiction and I was accused of being a Mormon white male.  One thing is as about as likely as the other, or possibly more so.

The normal way of these arguments is that I’m then told my writings to this site are full of “dog whistles.”  Since these are on the order of the “dog whistles” we’ve heard before, in which, say, brown-bag lunch suddenly became a racist nudge and wink, and in which “unemployed” is taken by the enlightened to mean “black” (which would logically lead you to believe the enlightened are racist themselves, but never mind), I tend to respond that since I’m not a dog, I neither hear dog whistles nor feel any need to employ them.  Besides, hearing “dog whistles” only your opponents can hear would seem to be daft.

If the argument goes on past this – instead of the opponents telling me they were libertarian all along, and see how evil I am to think they’re Marxists, or demanding I justify the moon ferrets and flouncing off before I tell them they don’t exist – we enter truly weird territory.

The favorite “clinching argument” of the last few days is something so bizarre, so otherworldly, that one has to wonder if one IS talking to moon ferrets.  It goes something like this: You can’t condemn them both, you have to choose.  Or, as a particularly bright boy put it: “This is just like an election, you have to choose one of them.  You might not agree a hundred percent with either, but you have to choose one.”

Uh.  What?

Why would I have to choose between racist totalitarians and Marxist totalitarians? Has the republic been toppled and the Constitution revoked?  Because, you know, the program of either of these groups is in point of fact illegal under constitutional law.