Fabricated hate speech

Political rhetoric should never be blamed for violent actions. But if we are going to deflect blame from violent protesters to the rhetoric which supposedly caused their protest, let's take a look at which side actually incites violence with their provocative rhetoric.

Right-wing "hate speech" is so non-existent that it is apparently only delivered through alleged "dog whistles." The innuendo so subtle that only liberal politicians and pundits with the keenest senses and superior intelligence can understand it. It is then the civic duty of these code-breakers to decipher and interpret the "real" message and relay it to us common folks. We know you heard the Republican candidate say he wants to lower the capital gains tax to create incentive for investment. But what he really meant was that he hates black people, right?.

Hate speech from the right is only that which is twisted, spun or completely fabricated by the left. And it is that rhetoric which has created a hostile environment around American politics today. False accusations of hate speech can be one the worst forms of hate speech itself. And Democratic politicians don't use dog whistles to articulate their hateful message. They use screeching megaphones turned up to eleven.

Radical leftist protesters do not view themselves as the violent, ignorant, hate-filled mob that they are. They see themselves as social justice warriors participating in a truly noble cause. And their actions are insufficiently condemned -  if not celebrated - by Dem politicians. In a shameful display, even some GOP candidates recently placed the blame for the protest that took place in Chicago on the rhetoric of Donald Trump rather than the unruly mob itself.

Who knew it would take Donald Trump to bring violence to Chicago? How many people were murdered on Chicago's south side while Trump's plane awaited takeoff? But that's not a major concern of Democratic politicians. Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders accused Donald Trump of inciting the anger that was on display in Chicago last week. But what about their own antagonistic rhetoric?

Bernie Sanders, gritting his teeth and clenching his fists, constantly calls for a "political revolution." While Bernie should not be blamed for the violence committed by his followers, radical left-wing lunatics and political revolutions are not a good combination. Historically, how many political revolutions have been peaceful in nature? Could Bernie's constant call for a revolution not potentially incite violence? When Hillary Clinton talks about the "constant stories of young men who have been killed by police officers" and "systemic racism in our criminal justice system," is she not giving credence and legitimacy to radical groups like "Black Lives Matter"?

Politically-motivated violence and hate speech are almost exclusively reserved for the left. There are virtually no instances of violence or destruction at conservative events unless left-wing protesters are in attendance. Contrast that with the complete chaos and destructive nature of nearly every major left-wing protest that has taken place in recent history. As the last attendees of a Tea Party rally walk the grounds to make sure every last gum wrapper has been discarded, "Occupy", "Black Lives Matter" and nearly all radical left-wing activists leave a destructive path of shattered glass, bloodied bodies, overturned cars and burning buildings.

Even the most hate filled rhetoric should not incite normal people to commit acts of violence. But radical left-wing activists are not normal people. And there is no doubt that the rhetoric by those on the left have stoked the anger that is already present in these mindless, violent agitators.

But rather than condemn the rhetoric, we must start to condemn the actions and only the actions. After all, even hate speech is free speech.

SOURCE