This is How Fascists Behave
Force and order.
Let me preface this post by noting that I am hardly an expert on the Guardian Angels. On the one hand, I can see something admirable in volunteers attempting to engage in “unarmed crime prevention.” On the other, it is not hard to see how such activities can spin out of control. While one would think that like a neighborhood watch program, the presence of Guardian Angels might dissuade some petty crime, the reality is that folks in uniforms who think they are on the side of justice can lead to force being deployed in that pursuit. And that force would, by definition, be extrajudicial.
As a general matter, I find this kind of vigilantism, even if well-meaning, to far too easily intersect with the American fantasy that the “bad guys” are easily identified by the “good guys” and, ergo, whatever the good guys need to do to stop the bad guys is justifiable.
Such is the core fantasy of superhero tales and copaganda (not to mention most concealed carry fantasies): that is it crystal clear who the guilty are and, therefore, they deserve whatever bullet or fist that comes their way.
I couldn’t help but think about all of that as I read (and watched clips of) the following story via CNN: An NYC vigilante group tackled what they claimed was a shoplifting ‘migrant’ live on Fox News. They were wrong.
Guardian Angels founder, Curtis Sliwa, was doing a live remote with Sean Hannity, wherein he was complaining about NYC Mayor Eric Adams and about the immigrants he claimed were taking over the streets. During the interview, several of Sliwa’s fellow Guardian Angels left their position as set decoration for the remote and proceeded to surround and assault an individual. The video can be seen here via MediaMatters.
From the CNN piece:
“He had been shoplifting first,” Sliwa replied. “The Guardian Angels spotted him, stopped him and he resisted. Let’s just say we gave him a little pain compliance. His mother back in Venezuela felt the vibrations. He is sucking concrete.”
This is how a fascist paramilitary group behaves and speaks. And by what authority are the Guardian Angels the judges who convict (he was shoplifter!) and then mete out “justice” (“pain compliance”!)? Sounds like aggravated assault, if you ask me. The fact that their motives are alleged anti-crime is irrelevant.
It also very much sounds like it was all inspired by xenophobia:
In an interview with The Associated Press, Sliwa said he had believed the man was a migrant because he was “speaking Spanish” and because other Guardian Angels had encountered him with other Spanish speakers on previous patrols.
Ditto the assumption that he was from Venezuela.
According to reporting the fellow “sucking concrete” tried to disrupt the Fox News taping and was charged with disorderly conduct.
At any rate, nonstate actors parading around in uniforms claiming they have the right to use violence against people they believe to be some dangerous “other” (especially if they look foreign and/or are speaking a language other than English) sounds pretty protofascist to me. This is especially true if the reason why such actors feel empowered is because their fellow citizens allow them to operate out of fear and the need for some vague notion of order.
Yay! They beat up some Spanish-speaker and it is justifiable because we are all afraid of crime and immigrants! Who cares about his rights or our alleged ideals, he got what was coming to him! Certainly that is the message that Sliwa is sending, and that is being amplified on FNC.
Again: apart from self-righteousness and alleged good motives, what right do these people have in deploying violence against fellow human beings?
I’m sure Gov. Abbott will deputize them by the end of the week.
Make no mistake, these are people who long for the days of strong trees and short ropes.
Well, here is a snippet from the Wikipedia article about Sliwa:
So, he’s a fraud. A vigilante LARPer, in addition to a vigilante.
If you’re wondering if he ever ran for Mayor as a Republican… of course he did. He ran against Eric Adams, and got 27% of the vote (the classic crazification factor)
In a normal world, he would never be seen again after his lies were exposed. In this world, he was Republican candidate for Mayor.
He also alleges that John Gotti’s son kidnapped him in a stolen taxi, and that he escaped by leaping out the window. The younger Gotti was never convicted, probably because you just can’t trust a guy who has lied about being kidnapped to tell the truth about being kidnapped.
There are a lot of terrible Republicans out there, but NYC Republicans are a special breed.
I’d call him and his cohort xenophobic scum and bullies, but that would be an insult to scum and bullies.
@Flat Earth Luddite: And xenophobes.
At least they weren’t wearing pointy hats.
Whataboutism Antifa punching the Nazi Richard Spencer.
They’re just trying to enable the South to rise again, and therefore in all the best evangelical Christian traditions, lying and felony assault are perfectly acceptable – nay, expected.
Not whataboutism at all – Richard Spencer bragged about being a Nazi. When the GA’s victim brags about being a shoplifter, you let us know.
@Paul L.:
Very on brand for rightwingers to equate petty theft and Nazism.
@DK:
Biden supporter Richard Spencer disagrees.
Watch Richard Spencer Try To Explain Why He’s Not A Nazi.
@Paul L.: You are correct: it is a clear example of “whataboutism” to bring up some other incident rather than addressing the topic of discussion.
It is a distraction and is not a method of argumentation, but instead is an attempt to derail the conversation.
Wait, Paul serious question: in your cosmology police are generally speaking untrustworthy if not bad because of how they are not held accountable for their actions, but vigilantes attacking people who are also not held accountable are… ok?
Complaining about vigilantism in the midst of not only rampant lawlessness but the direct refusal of the government to enforce the law marks one as a useful idiot and nothing more.
@DK:
Also on brand for right wingers to either not read or not actually understand the article they link to.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Charges of “Whataboutism”: A Pet Peeve of Mine
@mattbernius:
The Law Enforcement caste as the King’s men is defended and protected by the political and judicial systems.
Daniel Penny, George Zimmerman and Kyle Rittenhouse.
@Paul L.:
It would be super helpful if you actually articulated positions. I *think* you are trying to say that those cases of vigilantism were prosecuted. I think.
I’ll also note that the argument in at least two of those cases was *checks notes* self defense (admittedly they put themselves into the situations that led to them being forced to defend themselves). Do you think the Guardian Angel’s case here is “self defense?”
Also:
Derek Chauvin, Kim Potter, Desmond Mill!!!!
Am I doing this right? I’m pretty sure, according to your rhetorical style, my citation of 3 officers who were all convicted of murder somehow invalidates your argument. Or is it just valid not-Whataboutism (according to your link) and therefore demonstrates…. something. Are we both now hypocrits just trying to protect our position by changing the subject?
@TheRyGuy:
For the record, if we look at the facts, across the US and in most cities, including New York, crime rates are down to pre-pandemic levels (i.e. when Trump was President).
National stats: https://www.statista.com/chart/31063/violent-and-other-crime-rates-us/
NYC stats: https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/nypd-major-crime-down-december-2023/
I am sure you will point out that some crimes are currently up in a year-over-year comarison. Yes, and that’s normal fluction in these statistic (which is why you look at rates over longer periods).
Next, I am sure you will advance a “the reason crimes are down is because of underreporting” argument. It’s a favorite one because much like “rampant unreported vote fraud” it’s really challenging to quickly prove a negative claim.
However, concerns about underreporting crime are not new. Debate on the topic goes back to at least the 80’s if not before. See for example this seminal article on the topic: https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/why-are-crimes-underreported-what-crime-rate-does-it-really-matter
TL;DR: Yes some crimes go unreported. However this is nothing new, and has been with us in all the data we have seen for decades and use for year to year comparisions. In other words, to some degree the impact is already baked into the data (including the years you are using to demonstrate that crime was lower pre-pandemic).
There’s a more in-depth conversation to be had about this, but that would get into citing more egghead papers and I think there’s more than enough for you to baselessly disagree with in what I already wrote.
Even if we assume Sliwa’s group once had a purpose, they were founded when NYC’s crime rate was 4-5 times what it is now. They’ve long outlived whatever usefulness they might have had.
@Paul L.:
I did read that short article you linked to. It seems like the crux of the argument was the quote:
I’m not sure how I see this defense working in this case. Maybe you could spell it out.
Is it that you are suggesting that Steven somehow supports Richard Spencer getting punched by an activist?
Or is it that you see that punch becoming a meme in some left-wing internet circles the same as the top-viewed cable news network broadcasting this unprovoked and unwarranted attack on someone for… speaking Spanish?
@Matt Bernius:
Those “Self Defense” cases were prosecuted for political reasons. Like my favorite case.
Saint Derek Chauvin is being overly harshly punished for the sins of the Law Enforcement caste and that make him their Jesus.
Screw Chauvin. I have schadenfreude that the unfair system he was willing a part of is came after him.
Popehat
All those cases required publicity to get a conviction. The system and Blue Wall couldn’t cover them up like they tried with Jason Van Dyke.
I believe that Salt Lake city police turned over the body cam video of the Alex Wubbels arrest because they believed it would show the public that they did nothing wrong.
They didn’t expect the backlash they got.
@Paul L.:
Sure, screw him. I wasn’t posting him because I liked him. I was posting him as an example of cops being prosecuted. Here you can choose from others:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_law_enforcement_officers_convicted_for_an_on-duty_killing_in_the_United_States
Just assume I used a different name. How about:
Anthony Fox, Kim Potter, Desmond Mill!!!!
I’m just mimicing your style–why are you getting so upset? Or are you suggesting that my 3 names are somehow invalid while your three names prove we’re all hypocrites?!
But, since you’re getting picky about citations, let’s touch on:
I’ll skip Zimmerman and Rittenhouse, they are done to death. I am a bit surprised that you think Daniel Penny is being unfairly prosecuted for killing an unarmed mentally ill black man who was verbally threatening.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/17/daniel-penny-new-york-subway-chokehold-death-court-appearance/72097114007/
BTW, I’m not attempting at all to suggest police are properly regulated. More I’m just trying to use your logic–if you cite high-profile cases why can’t I do the same thing?
Wait, your thinking opens up another issue–you said they are all being prosecuted for “political reasons”–then you also state that was the case with Chauvin as well? So… doesn’t that make Chauvin a good counter example?
And more broadly what does that mean about other cases of vigilantism and their prosecutions? That only political ones get tried (just as with Chauvin)?
Paul, I don’t think you’ve thought all these positions through particularly well. Or perhaps, as with MR, your style of argumentation isn’t as clear as you seem to think it is.
@Matt Bernius:
Indeed and indeed.
@Matt Bernius: I am betting that he is referring to immigration, but it is rather hard to tell and so I am not going to try and figure it out.
@TheRyGuy: “Complaining about vigilantism in the midst of not only rampant lawlessness but the direct refusal of the government to enforce the law marks one as a useful idiot and nothing more.”
Right. While the really smart guys like you cheer on vigilantes beating up an illegal immigrant shoplifter even though he is a US citizen and didn’t shoplift anything. As long as you sound tough, who cares what brownskin gets hurt?
@Matt Bernius: “Or perhaps, as with MR, your style of argumentation isn’t as clear as you seem to think it is.”
Hey now! I know I’ve crossed words with MR frequently, and do agree that he seems not to understand how his prose is read. But Michael is a writer who understands words and how to form them into sentences to make a coherent argument. To compare him to this rambling halfwit is totally unfair!
@wr:
Punch a Nazi. You guys defend this because LGBTQIAMXYZ++
Sorry I am not as outraged at this destruction of democracy and silencing of free speech when you excuse the same behavior from your side because of good intentions.
@Paul L.:
I was really hoping your link was going to lead to some Nazi getting punched, but it was just some guy standing in the rain complaining about a Nazi getting punched in a dull monotone until I got bored.
Why are you teasing us like this? I like seeing Nazis get punched in the face, not just hearing about it.
There’s a long running philosophical debate about tolerating intolerance, but once you see Richard Spencer get punched in the face, the debate melts away and you just love it.
@wr:
You are totally right. That was me being unnecessarily snarky. Apologies to all involved.
@Paul L.: “the really smart guys like you cheer on vigilantes[brownshirts] beating up…[their political opponents]”
Well, gosh, little Paul. If you have to yank words out of my sentence in order to give it a meaning it never had when it left my keyboard, then you are either arguing in bad faith or you’re simply a moron incapable of following a simple statement.
I said nothing about “brownshirts” beating up “their political opponents.” I specifically referred to Sliwa’s Guardian Angels beating up a man they claimed was an illegal alien who had been shoplifting — when in fact he is a Bronx-living US citizen who had not shoplifted a thing, and whose only crime was making fun of the idiot “Angels.”
Now it seems to me that this is definitely a sign of the problems with vigilante mob justice. They decided who the bad guy was and why and then proceeded to use force against him. And yet they were absolutely wrong in every one of their judgments, and are simply thugs beating up citizens who speak a language they don’t like.
So basically, when you want to make an argument about how it’s really libs who urge vigilante justice against political opponents because someone once decided to punch a Nazi scumbag, really the only proper response is a jolly “fuck you.” Because you are simply lying about what I said in order to defend Nazis. Which in my book makes you at least Nazi-adjacent. And since I don’t have the proverbial large sock filled with horse manure at my disposal, I can only tell you how little I think of you.
@Hal_10000:
There is some truth in that. When the police fail to do the job people will organize and fascism isn’t the right word for it. Brings to mind the phenomena of the Oakland PD’s “Rough Riders”, which were the result of both the long history of not enforcing laws in Oakland and the effort to correct that by making the Oakland PD hire people who lived in Oakland and were determined to clean it up.
Oakland’s Black Panthers were also partially a vigilante group response to the condition of the all-white Oakland PD refusing to answer calls to some areas of Oakland, or showed up hours late and doing precisely nothing.
@dazedandconfused:
It is not automatically such, no. But it can be. And I think it is the appropriate word for the cited example in the OP.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Agree, no question. “Protofascist” seems exactly right to me. Those guys probably believe they’re installing discipline with the trappings of discipline, uniforms and such. That’s not enough, not by a damn sight.
I’m old, I know, but I still can’t quite comprehend why punching an avowed and proud Nazi has become remotely controversial. Nicer than they deserve-perhaps they would prefer a “work shall set you free and so shall Zyklon-B camp?” I mean, if you can’t punch a Nazi, who can you punch?
Some philosophies do not deserve respect, fair play, equal time, or pretty much anything other than annihilation.