I found a good comment by “mountaingoat” to this article regarding Trump’s latest press conference where he blamed both sides for the violence (a sensible thing to do, in my opinion).
What bothers me is that the racists on the Left who implement discriminatory "race conscious" policies are not subject to the same criticism that the white nationalists are receiving, deservedly, for their racist ideas. Where are the media commentators expressing outrage that university administrators who impose admissions policies that discriminate on the basis of race are evil people with offensive agendas who have no place in polite society, let alone in positions of power? Where is the bipartisan condemnation of the self appointed social justice warriors who impose their racist decisions, such as using race conscious policies to limit the number of Asians admitted (and during the 20th century limiting the number of students of Jewish descent admitted) to selective universities, using "diversity" as a political weapon to justify violations of equal opportunity? Do old white guys have a license to practice racism if they wear suits and have PhDs? Yes, the white nationalists have terrible ideas, as do the leftist ideologues who make "race conscious" decisions on college campuses. If one is evil, so is the other. I am 100% in favor of speaking out against all forms of racism. But I am not in favor of unilateral disarmament.
While their ideology is repugnant, white nationalists represent a fringe movement that has already been widely rejected by a bipartisan majority of American society, and thus has very little power. Meanwhile the radical Left shamelessly discriminates while laying a guilt trip on well meaning people, and unfortunately they have acquired great power to impose their agenda through coercion. Who, my friends, is the bigger threat to freedom?
I wasn’t shocked by Kevin Williamson’s vapid artice on the subject wherein he condenses it all down to: All other causes, even if noxious, have a point. The only point to that alt-right is anger.” So called "virtue-signalling" and taking the morally easy and more marketable path (but not necessarily the right one) is common on the right.
This, alas, is what National Review has become and conservatism as a movement. Isn’t there some context to this anger? Isn’t the other side usually motivated by little more than anger? The danger here is to further institutionalize anti-white, anti-Asian, and often anti-Jewish racism by the Left in their policies and actions while condemning only white people when they act like various people-of-color victim groups, such as Black Lives Matter.
I’ve heard various accounts of what went on in Charlotte. Given that there were apparently people there on the Left intent on instigating violence, Trump was right not to play the useful idiot for the Left by condemning only white people. I don’t support Nazis, but in this land of affirmative action and institutionalized racism against white people (and Asian people, particularly in academia), we would be foolish to adopt the paradigm of the Left. Sadly, most of the blabbermouths in the conservative press have done just that.
Everyone’s making a big show of condemning Nazis. Fine. I don’t like Nazis either. But where are these people when it comes to condemning the ample racists and sexists on the Left who abide by the ideology that white people (particular white males) ought to have fewer rights simply because of their sex or the color of their skin?