We Have an Authoritarian Left in the US and It is Starting to Take and Interest in Elections

 

It get that it is not exactly news that the US has an authoritarian Left as well as our authoritarian Right.

And just to be clear, I am not talking about past historical instances of an authoritarian Left, such as 19th century anarchists and radical socialists, or the Communist Party, or 1960's terrorists..

I am talking about the authoritarian Left in its current incarnation. Also to clarify, by authoritarian I roughly mean a movement that does not respect the rules of democratic fair play, that does not respect the rights of people who disagree with it, that engages in violence, that is aggressively hostile and punitive, or that dehumanizes groups of people.  And, yes, the term is relative.  Not all authoritarian are equally authoritarian.

When did the current authoritarian Left get its start? Do anti-globalization protests in the 1990's that turned into riots count?  When did Antifa originate?  My understanding is that it began in the Pacific Northwest out of the clash between liberal coastal residents and conservative interior residents, including some genuine neofascists.  Violently breaking up right wing events, smashing windows and the like is certainly authoritarian.  And yes, it goes without saying that right wingers grossly exaggerate the extent and menace of Antifa and project many of their own authoritarian tenancies onto it.  But none of that should excuse Antifa's real authoritarianism, by which I mean not just its violence, but its desire to shut down opponents.

Occupy Wall Street was clearly not authoritarian in the sense that it had no leaders and no structure and required consensus before doing anything.  It was authoritarian in the sense of having a violent fringe, and having an offensive sense of entitlement that rules did not apply to it and it did not have to respect others or care about the disruptions they were causing.  

Black Lives Matter originated in 2014 to protest police brutality.  It clearly had a violent fringe, including cop killers, from the very start. It is not clear to me the entire movement was violent.  Riots broke out in 2014 in Ferguson and Baltimore, but they were short-lived and mild riots, that movement leaders did their best to quell. The 2020 riots were a different matter altogether.  The 2020 riots were widespread and massive (though still not as bad as many right wingers claimed).  Much of the violence was just random lawlessness, best characterized as opportunistic looting by people who were eager to seize any excuse.  But there was a decidedly ideological fringe to the outbreak, and all too many people on the left who were willing to excuse it. And there were also disturbing scene in with Black Lives Matter protesters demanded that random bystanders endorse their cause.

But all these authoritarian Left-wing movements of recent vintage had one notable thing in common.  None of them were much interested in electoral politics.  Like Trump supporters, they believed in the "uniparty" and saw any disputes within it as mere attempts to distract the masses.  Their difference from Trump supporters was that they saw Donald Trump as the very embodiment of the uniparty.

Well, this latest wave of anti-Israel, pro-Hamas protesters is a different matter altogether.  These ones are definitely interested in electoral politics and determined to set the terms of orthodoxy for Democrats.

I can definitely imagine right wingers responding with an impatient snort, and saying I am willing to condone the most violent and coercive behavior so long as it is targeted at regular folks, but get all upset when people in the corridors of power are targets.

And I will concede that I do not expect these pro-Hamas protests to break out into widespread rioting and mass looting of the kind we saw in summer of 2020.  We are unlikely to walk down the streets and see every store window smashed and the contents stolen.  And I agree that is all to the good.  I would also not expect pro-Hamas protests to lead to the sort of crime wave that followed the 2020 riots, again, very much to the good.

But violent (or potentially violent)  movements that target the corridors of power create a different set of problems.  Attempts to intimidate policy makers do affect policy making, after all, and in ways that affect a lot more people than just the policy makers being threatened.  They can also drive responsible people out of office and leave power to dangerous authoritarians.  Such has been the goal of the more violent precincts of MAGA.  

And, in any event, the distinction between targeting regular folks and targeting the corridors of power is not as clear as some people might think.  MAGA members and now pro-Hamas protesters don't just target the powerful in Washington, or even in state houses.  They also threaten and harass city counsel, school boards, and other organizations much closer to regular folks.  MAGA members have harassed and threatened rank and file election workers and volunteers and pulled over an AC repairman on the belief that he was smuggling fake ballots.  Hamas supporters are harassing and threatening Jewish students, random Jews, and businesses like Starbucks and Google that have stood up to them.  

And, of course, team Hamas is threatening to throw the election to Donald Trump.

And there is another, particularly insidious danger, noted by Jonathan Chait that happens when potentially violent authoritarians target the corridors of power.  "Because Democrats perceive some of the protesters as potential Biden voters, they have soft-pedaled their criticism of their tactics. The handful of critics have focused on the political ramifications of the protest movement."

That is, of course, exactly why Republicans are so reluctant to criticize MAGA or come out strongly against Trump -- and why their main criticism of Trump is his general unpopularity and likelihood of losing the election.

Forecast:  Rough sailing ahead.