I have to wonder if this dangerous person lives in the US, or at least the true US, the 2/3rds of which allow concealed carry. I marvel at how the National Socialist Movement and some "White Nationalists" thought it wise to meet in New Jersey and Illinois, respectively, where and when it was illegal to carry concealed (not groups of smart people, it would seem :-). Hmmmm, for that matter, Ohio is in one way the worst state in the union for self-defense, because the burden of proof is on the person claiming it. (These incidents mentioned at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Racist_Action)

Try that shit in the state of Missouri where Strange Loop is meeting and you'll very possibly get legally shot. Counterwise the Nazis were greatly aided by prior Weimar efforts at gun control, which they of course reinforced once they started getting formal power.

In fact, all these actions by the left in the US strike me as extremely unwise, for in the many possibilities of "this will not end well", those of a very well armed population putting paid to their pretensions should be quite prominent in their minds.

It's hilarious to me that you seem to think leftists could set off an arms race.

Also, what do you think the black panthers, weather underground, etc., were?

"Do you think that white nationalists don't take guns to their protests and marches?"

I think the kind of person who talks about carrying around baseball bats isn't going to go to these marches.

What you think is hilarious is on you and your weird sense of humor. If you go to a meeting with baseball bats, eventually, the people you're disrupting are going to bring weapons stronger than baseball bats.

Anti-racist and anti-fascist organizing happens under the mantle of a thousand different groups all over the world. There are antifa in Russia that have it much harder than antifa in France or the UK or the US.

And yet we are asked to believe that an obscure blogger flirting with monarchist political thought would introduce a dangerous authoritarian element if allowed to present on a technical topic. Thanks for putting this into context.

This thinking, right here, is a problem.

Discussing an individual's technical contributions does not legitimize their political views, let alone their technical ones.

And the big threat today is not neo-reactionaryism, but zealotry in all its forms. Radicals from any group are more dangerous than moderates from a single distasteful group, and they all use exactly the same tactics to win. And if we're going to win by burying bad ideas through threats and intimidation instead of openly dismantling them through rational and ethical thought, then I'm not sure the battle is even worth winning.

This will be great news to the neoreactionaries. How do you figure?

> because it communicates a lack of concern with the threat "neo-reactionaryism" or fascism represents.

And what is the threat, if not that they will seize power?

Antifa did and do routinely disrupt fascist actions with physical force and frequently got (and get) shot for it. Sometimes the antifa are the ones doing the shooting.

But most of the time the antifa are hilariously underarmed compared to the (as you've pointed out) very well armed rightists and it's a combination of bravado and stupidity that they take the actions they do. The KKK, neo nazis, etc., have all had weapons stronger than baseball bats for a while. There's no "eventually." Do you understand what I'm saying?

Plus, if what you say was true, can you point to some incidents where your side actually, you know, got shot for their troubles? I mean your violent side, not the pre-Black Power civil rights period of this.