In an insincere stunt of nominal objection, President Trump responded to these events by saying, “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides.” Since he didn’t want to alienate members of his base, much less his administration, the president refused to describe the situation with accurate terms like “white supremacy” and “terrorism.”

Right-wing terrorism is clearly a threat to American society, just as it has been throughout our history, and we must confront it. We need to call it terrorism, call the perpetrators what they are — Nazis and white supremacists — and we need to stop using euphemistic language and double-standards when describing the problem. Ignoring white supremacy is like ignoring cancer; it will only continue to grow. We also need to organize, unite, and those of us who feel comfortable (especially if we’re privileged) should become trained and armed for community defense. People of color, immigrants, religious minorities, and the LGBTQIA community especially need support now.

The Paradox of Tolerance

A significant portion of the mainstream discourse on the “alt-right” revolves around the First Amendment. Racist right-wing groups often organize hate-filled rallies behind the veil of “free speech”, and many centrist liberals drink their kkkool-aid.

While I believe it is important to support free speech, I don’t think hate-speech should be a shoe-in. After all, hate-speech (including racist and xenophobic talking points) is a tactic fascists and right-wing activists use to fear-monger and pander to ignorant folks who may be on the fence. It also serves to threaten and terrorize people of color, minorities, immigrants, and other already marginalized groups. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, there are currently 917 active hate groups in the U.S. The goal of these violent, authoritarian movements, if history is any indictation, is actually to inhibit free speech, diversity, and ultimately democracy itself.

Shutting down fascists in the streets is essential to preventing the rise of their movements. If possible, we should drown out their free speech with our free speech (although this seems less practical due to recent events). Black bloc is another prominent tactic used by anti-fascists on the ground to deny a platform to neo-Nazis and other fascists. I witnessed the success of the black bloc first-hand at a counter-protest I attended shortly after Trump took power. Austin Red Guards, a Maoist collective that sent an armed partisan unit, chronicled the event in detail.

Austin Red Guards making racists afraid again at a neo-Nazi “White Lives Matter” rally

In short, I’d contend that it’s up to The People to confront hate-speech, xenophobia, homophobia, racism, nationalism, and other manifestations of fascism. When individuals or groups exhibit ideologies that have elements in common with fascism, it is cause for concern. White Nationalist guru Richard Spencer, for instance, calls for the ethnic cleansing of the U.S. to make way for a homogeneous white nation. History is clear that these types of movements have end goals of genocide, or, at best, a hyper-nationalistic, authoritarian society with a brutal apartheid system.

While I don’t necessarily advocate censorship, I also don’t think advocating “free speech” for these monsters is tenable, especially if they are actively inciting violence against already marginalized group and empowering terrorists. But it’s true; I am intolerant of intolerance. I believe it is the most practical position to hold when attempting to preserve a free, pluralistic society. Suffice it to say that it is easier to fight fascism when it has not yet seized power.

The following excerpt from Karl Popper’s 1945 book The Open Society and Its Enemies brilliantly articulates this conundrum:

“Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.”

If there existed a brief moment when America was great, it was when we helped defeat the Nazis. Since then, the entrenched racism and nationalism that were lurking just below the surface have gradually reached a boiling point. Trump’s Brownshirts are on the loose, and they can no longer be ignored or met with calm, rational discourse. Being a nihilistic liberal isn’t going to cut it anymore. Discussing facts you heard on NPR isn’t going to convert a hardened white supremacist. The redhats are coming and it’s time to choose sides. To those who stand idly by, remaining neutral and using their white privilege to advocate “free speech” for Nazis: History will choose your side for you.