听
Richard B. Spencer is not a nice guy. He is an advocate of a number of ideas like 鈥減eaceful ethnic cleansing鈥� and has a lot of opinions of a similar racial bent that are hard to stomach. This includes a collection of recent callous, prejudiced remarks about how out of place a mosque is in Quebec City, after the recent shooting that shook the community.听
That shouldn鈥檛 be enough to compel someone to physically assault him when he takes it upon himself to speak of his beliefs in public, but alas, it did. In midst of the protests to Donald Trump鈥檚 inauguration, among crowds of people who share stridently different opinions than his own. Someone recognized him, and the inevitable happened. 听
Now, I鈥檓 sure everyone has seen either the raw footage, or one of the many videos released online depicting him getting staggered by a surprise punch to the jaw, set to every song under the sun, from one I鈥檒l refrain from naming by the Dead Kennedys, to Roundabout by Yes. The temptation was there to laugh, but then that pesky critical brain of mine kicked in and I started to unpack the trend.
A lot of people have celebrated the anonymous protester鈥檚 act of violence. I have friends on social media who talked about it who were met with a litany of laudatory cheers for the anonymous pugilist cutting Spencer off in the middle of explanation about how people of his political persuasion use a meme on the Internet to spread racist invective.听
As satisfying was to many, what it also is, is a very ugly frontier of political discourse. I鈥檓 not going to say it鈥檚 a 鈥渘ew鈥� frontier, because far worse things have been done by people who think they鈥檙e right, but the actual physical assault of someone for their beliefs is not a cause for celebration. It鈥檚 a regression.
No matter how objectionable someone鈥檚 beliefs are, punching them only proves that you鈥檙e no better than the whacko trying to build a racist utopia for his race, and spread a message of hate.
Slavoj Zizek, a philosopher and cultural critic who delights in anything political and relating to civil unrest, was quick to jump on the Spencer matter, and was also quick to state what an obtuse thing to do it is, to debase oneself with violence against one鈥檚 own political opponent.听
Zizek made my point abundantly clear when he suggested 鈥減assive violence,鈥� as a response rather than 鈥渁ggressive violence.鈥� What he was implying with the former term is that rather than running at Spencer and swinging, the best weapon against him is to ignore him and every horrible thing he says is to take the high road. Don鈥檛 give him the attention he wants, with a reaction; don鈥檛 take him seriously.
It鈥檚 not hard to prove people like Spencer wrong. It鈥檚 not hard to dismiss much of what he says as baseless. If it鈥檚 okay to punch people like him, where is the line drawn? Republicans getting cracked in the jaw by angry Democrats? Libertarians jumping statists at night and beating them up? Independent candidates running at established party favourites during interviews and cracking them in the temple? And it鈥檚 not like there aren鈥� nowt a bunch of angry racists on Spencer鈥檚 side willing to go out and start throwing down with people who don鈥檛 agree with them. Violence has this pesky tendency to be reciprocal.听
Attacking someone like Spencer will only serve as a rationale for him, and people like him, to be even worse. The political group Spencer belongs to鈥攖he infamous alt-right鈥� is known for its perpetual grievance against 鈥減olitically correct society鈥檚 censorship鈥� as a way to justify its existence. They are convinced, absurd as the notion might be, that they are a persecuted group.听
Never will they have more of an opportunity to convince people that they are persecuted, than if people keep physically attacking them. Don鈥檛 give them proof of their claims.听
And, to be fair, if you can鈥檛 disagree with someone鈥攅ven if that someone is saying horrible, bigoted things that are most certainly wrong鈥攚ithout attacking them,听 you need to go sit in a corner or something.听
