This is the typical strategy. Bret Weinstein, who is Jewish and who made a potentially career-risking stand for civil rights many years back was castigated as a "sellout" and even as a "white supremacist." The truth is, that Bret Weinstein is, as far as I know, a progressive.

I was a lifelong Democratic party voter. I'm non-white. I've advocated for awareness of racism and bigotry since before there was a world wide web. If you try to tell a mob that using the word "oriental" doesn't warrant a rural middle school teacher losing her job, and suggest she's a human being who should be given the benefit of the doubt and try talking to her instead, this is enough to get you called a "white supremacist." And that is just one example among many for me, personally.

The fringe Far Left has hijacked the agenda of the political left as a whole, and is using these ominous authoritarian name-calling and scare tactics to silence dissent. On campus and in the street, this has even manifested as assault and violence -- on behalf of the left. Something is very wrong there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bz0oxIZ3xIg

We people of good conscience who have seen it need to start speaking up and calling this out. For those of you for whom this is new, then just try an experiment. Ask some reasonable but hard questions. Push boundaries, but only in an intellectual sense. See what reaction you get. See if you recognize the spoor of authoritarianism.

I am simply aware of the larger context. The reason I made that leap was because Weinstein himself has said things to this effect. But also, because of the particular framing of the Evergreen Protests (which saw arguments across the political and social spectrum) as a dangerous pack of leftists wielding baseball bats stalking the campus (which is a hotly contested claim). Faculty who were there and had their offices occupied as part of the specificallu leftist protests do not consistently report

And quite frankly? It doesn't stand out in American politics at all. We've been rioting as part of political discourse since before the Constitution's ink was dry.

But presenting the event in that way leads an informed reader to wonder if there is are other inaccuracies.

Look at the poster's responses closely for a clear and logical refutation. I think the absence of anything other than "it's name calling and that's what they do" is not a very powerful way to dismiss these concerns. Someone genuinely interested in setting the record straight would probably do it differently

Am I "the far left?" I don't know. I'm a successful fintech founder postexit, so it's pretty tough for me to look credible to that crowd. If I were, would simply naming me as such actually be a valid answer to the concern I raised?

Because the mainstream press wants the public to move along and not pay too much attention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pf5fAiXYr08

But presenting the event in that way leads an informed reader to wonder if there is are other inaccuracies.

I'm sincerely hoping that people will look into different coverage of Evergreen. Really, it speaks for itself. Your description of "Antifa blocking" speaks to your bias. I know from personal experience that not all Antifa are toxic thugs who lack any philosophical basis apart from "might makes right." I also know from personal experience that many are, and it's very telling how those who wear those colors who know better don't call them out. I have no idea how an informed person could support them. The only thing they have going for them is that Nazis are worse than they are. As I mention above, many of them will even outright tell you that it's their guiding philosophy.

History has many examples of people trying to intimidate others politically. Some wear masks. Others think their special status shields them. Over time, we all know them as villains.