Toxic Activism and shortsightedness: Feminists and Southern Senators

This tweet (generated when a Congressional candidate body slammed a reporter) got me thinking:

IN THIS CASE, I was wrong in my assumption that a reporter barged in on a private event to pester the candidate with questions. Yes, reporters should be allowed to ask tough questions at public events. But candidates, along with everyone else, have the right to have “invitation only” events at private locations.

If that sounds wrong, ask yourself this: what if a scientist was holding a question and answer period with, say, science media and scientists at some science conference, and some creationist “reporter” from, say, Newsmax barges in uninvited and starts to pester him with stupid creationist questions …under the guise of “getting at the truth”. is that ok? Or is it ok for security to professionally remove the “journalist” from that location? (humanely, of course..I am NOT defending “body slamming”).

And do activists have the “right” to barge in and interrupt? Is THIS ok? (starts at 15 seconds)

To me, it is not.

This takes me back to when some feminist “activists” did an 11 hour sit in at the Ladies Home Journal. Now the magazine is a private entity and they had every right to remove those doing the sit in, though the activists correctly predicted that they wouldn’t do that due to negative publicity. NOW the magazine probably would kick them out. But never mind that.

During this sit in, there WAS an assault (book calls it “attempted assault” but the video I saw shows her jumping on the standing man)

(from here)

Via: The Fun of It: Stories from The Talk of the Town, Nostalgia for the Bygone Days of Family Feuding, Rebecca Meade

So, some time ago, I pointed this out to some lefties and I got “good for her!” “Way to go”. Assault is fine..when “your” side does it. At least, a non-zero percentage of people think that way. And that is nothing new. Remember what happened in the United States Senate?

On May 22, 1856, the “world’s greatest deliberative body” became a combat zone. In one of the most dramatic and deeply ominous moments in the Senate’s entire history, a member of the House of Representatives entered the Senate chamber and savagely beat a senator into unconsciousness.

The inspiration for this clash came three days earlier when Senator Charles Sumner, a Massachusetts antislavery Republican, addressed the Senate on the explosive issue of whether Kansas should be admitted to the Union as a slave state or a free state. In his “Crime Against Kansas” speech, Sumner identified two Democratic senators as the principal culprits in this crime—Stephen Douglas of Illinois and Andrew Butler of South Carolina. He characterized Douglas to his face as a “noise-some, squat, and nameless animal . . . not a proper model for an American senator.” Andrew Butler, who was not present, received more elaborate treatment. Mocking the South Carolina senator’s stance as a man of chivalry, the Massachusetts senator charged him with taking “a mistress . . . who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight—I mean,” added Sumner, “the harlot, Slavery.”

Representative Preston Brooks was Butler’s South Carolina kinsman. If he had believed Sumner to be a gentleman, he might have challenged him to a duel. Instead, he chose a light cane of the type used to discipline unruly dogs. Shortly after the Senate had adjourned for the day, Brooks entered the old chamber, where he found Sumner busily attaching his postal frank to copies of his “Crime Against Kansas” speech.

Moving quickly, Brooks slammed his metal-topped cane onto the unsuspecting Sumner’s head. As Brooks struck again and again, Sumner rose and lurched blindly about the chamber, futilely attempting to protect himself. After a very long minute, it ended.

Bleeding profusely, Sumner was carried away. Brooks walked calmly out of the chamber without being detained by the stunned onlookers. Overnight, both men became heroes in their respective regions.

From Wikipedia:

Conversely, Brooks was praised by Southern newspapers. The Richmond Enquirer editorialized that Sumner should be caned “every morning”, praising the attack as “good in conception, better in execution, and best of all in consequences” and denounced “these vulgar abolitionists in the Senate” who “have been suffered to run too long without collars. They must be lashed into submission.” Southerners sent Brooks hundreds of new canes in endorsement of his assault. One was inscribed “Hit him again.”[32]

As much as I’d love to tar conservatives as being stupid, evil people…I’ll reluctantly admit that this is really more of a reflection of the dark side of humanity which exists in a variety of social and political circles.


May 27, 2017 - Posted by | politics, politics/social, social/political

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: