Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 03:23 PM Aug 2019

This was a New York Times editorial today

Not an op-ed. Not a column. The nation's newspaper of record's official stance:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/04/opinion/mass-shootings-domestic-terrorism.html

Those who sympathize with the white nationalist ideology but who deplore the violence should work closely with law enforcement to see that fellow travelers who may be prone to violence do not have access to firearms like semiautomatic assault-style weapons that are massively destructive.


I had to read that three times to make sure I wasn't pranking myself. Nope. The NYT sincerely hopes *this* is what white nationalists do, rather than burst into flames spontaneously and die.

Fuck that publication.
16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
2. How clueless do you have to be?
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 03:39 PM
Aug 2019

I'm trying to game this out:

Violent subscriber to white nationalist ideology: "I wanna kill a bunch of [insert target du jour here]"

Sympathizer to violent subscriber to white nationalist ideology but who isn't violent in the least: "That may be a bad idea."

VSWNI: Race traitor! *BLAM BLAM* [Heads out door for nearest gathering of people]

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
14. Recently the New York Times has been bending over backward to not offend Trump
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 05:32 PM
Aug 2019

and MAGATS. If the paper is going to do that, every progressive should cancel his or her subscription now.

elleng

(130,908 posts)
3. We Have a White Nationalist Terrorist Problem.
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 03:40 PM
Aug 2019

'Mass shootings like the one in El Paso should be condemned by America’s leaders as terrorism.

If one of the perpetrators of this weekend’s two mass shootings had adhered to the ideology of radical Islam, the resources of the American government and its international allies would mobilize without delay.

The awesome power of the state would work tirelessly to deny future terrorists access to weaponry, money and forums to spread their ideology. The movement would be infiltrated by spies and informants. Its financiers would face sanctions. Places of congregation would be surveilled. Those who gave aid or comfort to terrorists would be prosecuted. Programs would be established to de-radicalize former adherents.

No American would settle for “thoughts and prayers” as a counterterrorism strategy. No American would accept laying the blame for such an attack on video games, like the Texas lieutenant governor, Dan Patrick, did in an interview on Sunday when discussing the mass shooting in El Paso that took 20 lives and left 27 people wounded.

In predictable corners, moderate Muslims would be excoriated for not speaking out more forcefully against the extremists in their midst. Foreign nations would be hit with sanctions for not doing enough to help the cause. Politicians might go so far as to call for a total ban on Muslims entering the United States “until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.” . .

White supremacy, in other words, is a violent, interconnected transnational ideology. Its adherents are gathering in anonymous, online forums to spread their ideas, plotting attacks and cheering on acts of terrorism.

The result is an evolving brand of social media-fueled bloodshed. . .

Law enforcement currently offers few answers as to how to contain these communities. The anonymous nature of the forum makes it difficult to track down the validity of threats, and trolls frequently muddy the waters by attempting to dupe authorities with false threats and disinformation.

But the real world violence associated with the site has caused some agencies to pay closer attention to conspiratorial and hateful communities online — just recently an F.B.I. field office for the first time identified fringe conspiracy theories as a domestic terrorist threat. . .

While its modern roots predate the Trump administration by many decades, white nationalism has attained a new mainstream legitimacy during Mr. Trump’s time in office.

Discussions of Americans being “replaced” by immigrants, for instance, are a recurring feature on some programs on Fox News. Fox hosts Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, for example, return to these themes frequently. Democrats, Ms. Ingraham told viewers last year, “want to replace you, the American voters, with newly amnestied citizens and an ever-increasing number of chain migrants.” . .

Far more Americans have died at the hands of domestic terrorists than at the hands of Islamic extremists since 2001, according to the F.B.I. The agency’s resources, however, are still overwhelmingly weighted toward thwarting international terrorism.

The nation owed a debt to the victims of the 9/11 attacks, to take action against the vile infrastructure that allowed the terrorists to achieve their goals that horrible Tuesday. We owe no less of a debt to the victims in El Paso and to the hundreds of other victims of white nationalist terrorism around the nation. . .

Moderate members of the political right must do more to condemn white nationalists, even if the president condemns them from one side of his mouth and extols ethnonationalism from the other.

Advertisers have a duty not to sponsor television programs that flirt with white nationalism or advocate it outright.

Banks have a duty not to help finance white nationalist organizations.

Religious leaders should feel called to denounce white nationalism from the pulpit.

Technology companies have a responsibility to de-platform white nationalist propaganda and communities as they did ISIS propaganda. . .

Most importantly, American law enforcement needs to target white nationalists with the same zeal that they have targeted radical Islamic terrorists. Ensuring the security of the homeland demands it.

There can be no middle ground when it comes to white nationalism and the terrorism it inspires. You’re either for it or against it.'

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/04/opinion/mass-shootings-domestic-terrorism.html?


JDC

(10,127 posts)
4. The article has more substance than that paragraph
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 03:46 PM
Aug 2019

I don't agree with that paragraph either, but the whole article in context is about white nationalist terrorism as a real threat, which until now, seems to have not received the alarm bell it deserves in the press/ media.

The article's title: "We Have a White Nationalist Terrorist Problem"

We need more of that.

stopdiggin

(11,308 posts)
8. the article actually comes out VERY strongly in favor of real action
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 04:19 PM
Aug 2019

from all directions and all layers of society (LE, advertisers, media, social media, banking, private citizens ..) I found the article mostly on point and entirely constructive. You're entitled to your opinion.

lark

(23,099 posts)
11. Stupid things like this are the reason I cancelled my subscription last year.
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 04:24 PM
Aug 2019

I'm retired and could only afford subscriptions to 2 newspapers - my home town version and since early 2018 WaPo. They aren't perfect, but less insidious than the grey land.

Merlot

(9,696 posts)
12. Impossible to do both. They are one and the same.
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 05:24 PM
Aug 2019

"...sympathize with the white nationalist ideology but who deplore the violence..."

coti

(4,612 posts)
13. It's all part of this constant need by people to "split the difference" and second-guess reality,
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 05:27 PM
Aug 2019

engage in the "bothsides-ism" and triangulation, when facing reality means having to be brave and maybe even sacrifice things that are important to you.

ecstatic

(32,704 posts)
16. That crowd exists, believe it or not--white supremacists who claim to be
Mon Aug 5, 2019, 05:49 PM
Aug 2019

peaceful and against violence. I'm not sure if they can legitimately distinguish themselves that way, as their ideology and literature is what radicalizes and instigates the violence. Still, even if they're delusional or in denial, if there's anything they can do to stop the violence, they should. I'm glad the NYTimes included that line because it's a direct plea to a group that tends to escape scrutiny (because either they're lumped in with violent racists or lumped in with peaceful non-racists).

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This was a New York Times...