The Antisocial Socialist

Good stuff. I see you mostly went back to the 60's and the 70's. Is that because back in those days violence was in your opinion more equally distributed, so you are arguing a harder case? But then, you keep talking about the KKK, and it didn't do much in the past 20 years.

One thing here I will contend is your proposal that only direct property damage be counted. Police presence in Seattle was a reasonable security measure (though not all of its conduct may have been), and it came as a response to anarchist presence. The costs incurred by governmental structures are legitimately counted in the overall damage. So is damage to businesses. Of course, in the case that police reaction is unreasonable, one needn't blame demonstrators alone for it.

Regarding the wink and the nod during periods of violence, it's also a bit of a gray area - and I say that without having watched Eyes on the Prize, or knowing nearly anything about American history. Peace rides, from what I read, were intended as a "test". The line between test and provocation in such cases may be thin. In particular, I care more about actual routine (and undisputed) violence against Blacks in the south more than I do about the beating up of activists. Organized violence against Blacks is recently down from what I understand.

Shifting focus, leftie elites - academic ones in this case - in some cases do condone activism that involves riots, property damage and so on. Do you know of conservative or right-wing university professors calling for, or easily accepting, similar actions?

Having said all that, I accept that violence that is less loosely associated with extreme fractions of the general right than with their left counterparts has generally exercised more terror. Arguing that this implies that right-wingers are in general bigots and left-wingers are generally nice is left as an exercise for the propagandist. Incidentally, we happen to find ourselves in the journal of one.