Is The Modern Left Really Prepared For The “Days of Rage”

Note: This article first appeared in Thermidor Magazine here.

With the inauguration of our hero, Donald J. Trump, taking place in a mere few days, it isn’t unsurprising that our modern Leftists have found themselves confused and adrift, looking for catharsis. No doubt it is this desire that has, in no small part, led to the supposedly massive protests which are planned for Friday’s inauguration in Washington.

It is possible that these protests will be, at least to some extent, violent, as has been the case in other locales over the past year or so (Ferguson, Baltimore, Portland, etc. ). These spasms of low-level Leftist street violence has led to much consternation and hand-wringing from people on, or at least sympathetic to, the Right. With certain voices, in particular, believing that this may herald the beginning of something like a low-level civil war.

One piece, in particular, has been making the rounds, David Hines’ Days of Rage “Tweetstorm”. In which he makes the case that the political chaos which has gripped the U.S. over the past year and a half signifies the beginnings of a low-level civil war.

This thread has a lot of moving parts to it, and it would be unwieldy to attempt to analyze the entire thing here. However, one thing, in particular, stood out to me about this analysis. Namely that, he seems to completely misunderstand the nature of the Modern Left. From his Twitter rant:

Now obviously, in a sense, Hines is correct here, but his analysis obscures more than it illuminates.
Although Hines makes clear, to his credit, that any political violence that will potentially occur in America in the near future will be different than the kind the political violence of the 1970’s (which had inspired his outburst in the first place) it still seems that he leans a bit too hard on the analogy.

This is a classic, and sadly popular, mistake of historical analysis. We are bombarded by think pieces and pop-history books telling us how X historical event is exactly Y present day event. That the “Fall of Rome” illustrates how America itself will one day collapse, or how the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq was exactly like the American War in Vietnam, etc.

Almost all such analysis is, at best, unserious. The parallels between particular historical events are almost always shallow and gloss over important details almost entirely.

The serious student of history should never go hunting for ways in which two separate historical events are similar. But rather, seek to illustrate how two historical events which to the casual observer seem similar, actually aren’t that similar at all.

This is perhaps the reason why I find some of his reasoning to be a bit specious, particularly his analysis of the Modern Left. Which he seems to mistakenly believe is the same “Left” that existed in the 1970s.

There are of course, certainly elements of the Left which are directly descended from the radicals of the 1960’s and 1970’s (much of American Academia in particular). Again, though, pointing this out obscures more than it illuminates.

The truth about the Modern American Left is that, despite superficial signs to the contrary, it is, at this point in time, little more than an Ideological corpse.

This was of course, not quite the case in the 60’s and 70’s. After all, back then it seemed very plausible that the Left might have at least a shot at winning the future. The Soviet Union was doing extremely well; the sexual revolution had liberated Americans from the repressions of Victorian morality (thus ruining countless lives through divorce and illegitimacy) and “intellectuals” like Noam Chomsky were vigorously defending the Khmer Rogue from the predations of American Imperialism. It seemed the world might be going their way after all.

Fast forward to today and little remains of “the artist formerly known as the Left,” as all of its real world experiments have almost entirely collapsed. There are precious few communist nations in the world, and the largest and most powerful, China, remains Communist in name only.

With the commodification of Leftist bohemian culture in the 80’s and 90’s giving rise to the Bobo and the SWPL. The Left, at least in most of the Western World, has almost entirely been subsumed into the ideological Borg of Neoliberalism.

Today, to be a “Communist” or “Anarchist” is about as meaningful as being a “Goth” (are those still around?) or a Packers Fan. It’s almost entirely a fashion statement; an intellectual thrift store were hip kids can rummage through an assortment of vintage Leftist ideology to add to their own unique, personal brand.

Not exactly the makings of a movement that’s prepared to win a civil war.

If one is not convinced by this analysis, I will invite them to simply survey the results of the political upheavals of the past ten years. Where and when did the Left meaningful change the course of world events over this period of time? The Answer, with the possible exception of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, is precisely nowhere.

The closest they came was with Syriza’s victory in the Greek elections. And it is this “close call” which is the most telling. Syriza had a chance to, essentially, tear up Greece’s debt notes to the EU and start over fresh outside the EU. They also would have had the support of much of the populace if they had chosen to do so. And yet they choose to submit themselves, in what was a truly humiliating spectacle, to the dictates of the Eurocrats in Brussels. In the Leftist-Liberal relationship, it was quite clear who, to borrow some Hegelian terminology, was the master and who was the slave.

Now compare this performance to the Right’s. Which has essentially pushed Global Neoliberalism to the edge of the abyss. Brexit challenged the very foundations of the EU, while Trump’s upset victory may undo the very unipolar world order which is a prerequisite for Neoliberalism’s continued survival as a viable Ideology. This is, of course, without even mentioning the rise of Right Wing governments throughout Easter Europe.

But what, one may ask, do these events have to do with U.S. political violence?

The Answer is: everything of course.

Once one understands that what passes for “The Left” in the United States is little more than the Bohemian mask worn by the Neoliberal establishment’s academic wing, things start to become a bit clearer for us.

While it certainly is true that “The Left” (which we can now merely refer to as the “Liberal Left”) has much more institutional support for its violent methods than the Right does at present. It’s important to note just how limited and, in context, relatively tame much of these methods actually are.

Of the notable riots of the past year, a few stand out in one’s memory as being particularly notable: Ferguson, Baltimore, Charlotte and Portland with many minor episodes in between.

Now, it is telling the first 3 in this series were carried out almost entirely by inner city Dindus who were reacting to the various imagined injustices that had supposedly been perpetrated against them. But who were in really merely exploiting current events as convenient excuses to burn some stuff and make off with a few flat screens. The perpetrators of these particular crimes, it should be noted, were almost entirely members of the Black lumpenproletariat, most of whom are not politically motivated in any meaningful way. Thus, it would be misleading to include these events under the banner of genuine “Leftist violence.”

We are left then with the events in Portland which occurred immediately after the American Presidential election. This event saw a group of mostly white protesters descend into downtown Portland, apparently to protest Trump’s election and then proceeded to vandalize much of Downtown Portland (which it should be noted, is an extremely Liberal City). This event (and those like it, such as the Occupy Wall Street Protests) is a much better representation of what actual Leftist violence looks like in practice and what it portends for the future political violence in the U.S.

What it looks like, basically, is large groups of adjunct professors, crust punk heroin addicts and overweight feminists descending into particular metro areas to “protest” some manifestation of supposed “fascism” through civil disobedience and “direct action”.

I highlight this, not to insinuate that these protest movements don’t pose a problem for the American Right. But rather to indicate just what the nature of this threat is. And it is not one that is particularly existential.

For at the end of the day, these various “Antifa” protesters are more of a menace than a genuine threat. Problematic for those immediately impacted by them, but not a true danger for the Right as a whole.

There’s a big difference between pulling a bandana over your face and throwing some rocks through some coffee shop windows or roughing up a teenage Trump supporter you outnumber ten to one and engaging in real violence. Especially against opponents that are willing to employ real violence in response (a scenario they have yet to face.)

“The Left” as it is currently comprised is a zombie, an ideology which long ago passed its sell-by date. Those who still self-identify with its antiquated political notions are no more sincere or believable than the redneck who proudly sports a stars and bars bumper sticker. The former is no more likely to be willing to die for his “convictions” than the latter is.

The next four years will surely see its fair share of Leftist “violence.” But this, with the possible exception of some Dallas style lone wolves, will look more like Zuccotti Park in 2011 than it will Chicago in 1968, no less Spain in 1936.

Of course, I could be wrong about this. Friday may see the beginning of a new red terror with Communist Transexual death squads mercilessly gunning down anyone wearing a red Trump hat.This is a legitimate possibility. But at the risk of having to eat crow in the future, I’m not overly concerned with it. The 70’s are ancient history and so is “The Left,” which is no longer a meaningful force in global geopolitics.

The Right’s real enemies are writing think pieces for The Atlantic and sitting on the boards of major corporations, not throwing rocks through coffee shop windows and having drum circles in public parks.


  • burntgoodies

    Great article, with important information and a very healthy mindset.
    Anything right now concentrating on action, strategy and the NEXT STEP is simply essential.

    The general point of view is spot-on, and everyone believing in the general strength of the Left is just eating television crap.

    But we need to start organizing a resistance to Antifa, urgently.
    The article’s mention of how they respond when faced physically is correct, and can be researched online where there are many videos showing violent conflicts between them and European skinheads in the streets. They usually cower.

    In the internet, though, they’re still managing to do us harm, as has been shown in the past few weeks. We need to organize against them, everyone in the movement that is new (lots, by what I can see) needs to research them and be aware of what they are and how they act.
    So that we can have an online operation able to stand up to theirs.

    And, even more importantly, we need to expose their actions to normies, as a lot of people would be very alarmed and disgusted by their modus operandi, regardless of political position. This would, in the least, wedge the public idea that we are the violent, irrational monsters.

  • Captain John Charity Spring MA

    national guard spotted in mraps in many cities

  • Rascal

    “The serious student of history should never go hunting for ways in which two separate historical events are similar.”

    I usually look for lessons from history. That would include looking for ways in which events are similar and different. That is the only way to extract any meaningful data.

    “it should be noted, were almost entirely members of the Black lumpenproletariat, most of whom are not politically motivated in any meaningful way. Thus, it would be misleading to include these events under the banner of genuine “Leftist violence.”

    Blacks are part of left. They are essentially biological weapons of the left. Mass immigration and violent street crime are the results. In my opinion this is a bit like trying to make the distinction between a White communist and the bullet he uses to kill you with. Quite tedious.

    Other than those two things, good article.

  • Riopel

    Brazil today is what America will look like in ten years. Mongrel populace, trash everywhere, military and police acting as one. Trump will just make sure that America remains loyal to Israel til we get there.

    • Captain John Charity Spring MA

      If that’s true, various colleagues I deal with have not got that memo. Or they are hiding their glee.

  • Anonymous

    were hip kids can > where
    While it certainly is true … at present. It’s important > While it certainly is true … at present, it’s important
    But who were in really merely > in reality (also this probably should not be the place to start a new sentence)
    a red Trump hat.This is > hat. This is

    There may be more, but I have not seen them.

    • astrofrog

      Yeah, the quality of this piece from a grammatical perspective is really lacking. It could do with some serious editorial attention.

  • MisatoKatsuragi
  • astrofrog

    I found this a bit disappointing. Given the author’s statement that we should look for what is different, rather than what is similar, between past and present events, in order to estimate what they portend for the future, he seems to rely overly much on the more recent past (e.g. Zuccotti Park). The article could be summarized: “the Left are a bunch of faggots, so not a real threat.” Which I wouldn’t totally disagree with, but I was hoping for a more detailed analysis. If the Cultural Cold War goes hot, as it well might, then how does the Right neutralize the considerable institutional advantages enjoyed by the Left? Or, even better, how does it turn those ‘advantages’ into liabilities? We need to be thinking about this.

    • ronno

      he did say. the left’s control of institutions is meaningless, since those institutions are just humanities departments and feminist rags.

    • Adam Hunter Taylor

      It neutralises them with AR-15’s and Bradleys

      • gokart-mozart

        They did not become antifa to die for their beliefs. They are LARPing war confident that their battle ends in a courtroom.

        That will change. Thalmann’s Red Fighting Front owned the streets – until there were Stormtroopers. It will come to that if this keeps up.

  • Sieg oder Tod

    Please don’t give Matt Forney any position here. The guy is a fat rapist slob, terrible face to be associated with the Alt-Right.

    • MisatoKatsuragi

      While i disagree with some of what he’s said, he goes out into the swamp and gets info.
      We need eyes on the ground when SHTF.

    • Bantz Henriksen


      Forney is an embarrassment and a joke. Even after RooshGate, Fat Matt shilled the mud’s book about fucking white chicks on his Twitter.

    • ChurchillCapo

      Who’s Matt Forney, could someone please explain?

      • data_file_7

        Fat, weird looking PUA turned pseudo-AltRight (AltLite). Sort of a slobbier, gentile version of Mike Cernovich.

        • Bantz Henriksen


        • Charles Laurence

          And what is PUA? And help me understand what he meant by “Bobo.” For that matter, did SWPL mean Stuff White People Like?-Because that meaning did not fit the context of the article very well.

          • Bantz Henriksen

            Pick Up Artists are pussy nerds. Guys that can’t naturally get laid but have to read data-packed blog articles and build “approach indices” to successfully bed women.

          • data_file_7

            PUA = pickup artist. In some ways sympathetic, in that they are alienated by the meat-market character of modern courtship, but respond to it in a rather autistic way, by viewing women as essentially logic puzzles to be solved in order to wet their wicks. Bobo is a reference to “Bobos in Paradise” by David Brooks. Basically the Bourgeoisification of the radical Marxist left into “late-capitalist” academics and corportarists. SWPL is also shorthand for bourgeoisie pseudo-left liberal upper-middle-class (or middle-class if you’re British). If you’re interested in that area, you should really check out “The Conquest of Cool” by Thomas Frank, a legitimate leftist.

          • Scouticus

            Yeah, I’ve known Tom since the punk rock days. He’s actually gradually coming round.

      • Rocky Gibraltar

        Somebody who manages to be more boring than cernovich, which is quite a feat.

      • Jarno Alander

        A guy who tries and fails to make money writing e-books on how to get laid in Cambodia for cheap.

    • TransPride

      Funny how you guys can realize that one guy who claims to represent your group is an asshole and is not representative of you. SO you get to pick and choose who does and doesn’t represent you as a movement. But as soon as one person from the left has a radical insane view, even when the other more moderate left leaning people say that person does not represent them, you go, “OH NO THEY DO. ALL OF YOU ARE LIKE THIS. LOOK AT THIS PERFECT EXAMPLE OFALL OF HE LEFT”
      I’m not saying there aren’t radical leftists, because there absolutely are. But you can’t be so blind as to say someone who is a right leaning individual or even someone from the far right, can’t be just as radical, just in a different way, on a different subject. It is just extremely hypocritical. Both sides are when it comes to extremes.

      • Sieg oder Tod

        More often than not that “radical” on the left IS representative of what liberalism is. The right cucks harder about their radicals–on average–much more than the left. Most of us aren’t rapists or go on extended sex tourist trips to an Asian country like this Forney tool.

        I consider “trans rights” to be radical. It’s degenerate and degrades a traditional high culture. So when I see the left advocating for trans rights, I’ll point and say “look, they’re all like that with their slope of degeneracy”.

        Also, what triggered you to come here and rage about month old comments, lol?

        • TransPride

          No, radical liberalism is NOT an example of anyone in the moderate left. Just as Milo (many would say) is not the representation of anyone in the moderate right.
          Also, there is nothing radical about acceptance and equality. Oh and I’m not triggered at all dear, I just saw something I disagreed with and found it interesting so I wanted to start a conversation about it. That’s all

  • Interesting commentary about the Left and riots. About the only serious “left” violence in the past decade has been the Dindus, which were not primarily p[politically motivated. I think the inauguration will likely go off with no serious issues, and probably no riot worthy of the name. That being said, I will be nowhere near D.C. or any major urban area!

  • Zazz

    Yolocaust Gallery Mocks Disrespectful Selfie Pics at Holocaust Memorial Site
    With a twist…

  • Czech Mate

  • Ghetto Tarzan

    A lot depends on how Trump reacts. If he reacts with force a lot them will back down.

    • ereimenoym

      yup, they’ve grown used to the Obama admin’s lax justice dept. Bring the hammer down on them and they’ll fall in line.

    • Captain John Charity Spring MA

      He should push them into the sea.

      • gokart-mozart

        Tear gas in November 1969 made the anti war movement grow. Bullets in May 1970 ended it (at a price of only 4 dead). There are many who will kill for socialism. When they start dying for it, then we will see what’s what.

    • data_file_7

      I think the point of the article was that it doesn’t matter. All these fools are doing is destroying their own neighborhoods. You think Trump voters in say Nebraska or Wisconsin care that some college kids dressed in black are smashing the windows of a Starbucks in Portland?

  • internetjw

    Interesting piece, but riddled with typos and grammatical errors.

  • __neworder__

    I totally agree about the forced & phony-like rebellious facade of the Liberal Left, it’s like they are fighting against some type of made-up fascism…so fake….real threat does seem to be the head of corporations (people like Gates, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, etc., which all seem to be *very* Liberal), NGO’s and to some extent the media, though websites like this really does help to fight the MSM.

    • jeff412

      The main threat is those corporate honchos bringing about mass 3rd World immigration to lower wages and Race Replace White workers with H1b mud races. The end result is demographic change.

      Trump is going to build a wall though so he is buying us some time to fix the Death of the West.

  • Ted Jones

    Everything will depend on how Trump does.

  • The “radical left” as Jews and some Whites imagine it does not exist.

    They promote a fantasy image of a multi-racial coalition of tough “street activists” or even some professional military types that are “liberal” that will somehow coalesce to fight the Racist Nazi KKKs (a group that also exists primarily in their imagination.)

    The fact is that the White “radical left” is a tiny fringe group of part-time LARPing “anarchists” that can barely organize anything more than a loose group of protestors holding up signs. The few “tough Jews” that know how to use a firearm are far more interested in helping the Zionist entity in Palestine than worrying about flyover country redneck Trump supporters.

    And of course the Blacks and Browns are not really “left” at all and certainly not “liberal.” The Blacks and Browns have nothing but contempt for the Jewish and White leftists that pretend to be their leaders. As we have seen over and over again, the most likely victims of violence at a Black and Brown riot are their Jewish and White “allies” foolish enough to be near by.

    Virtually all talk of organized violence in America is the aforementioned LARPing – whether it comes from the right or the left. We may or may not see a continuation of Black and Brown rioting with plenty of Jewish and White “leftists” posing as leaders and sympathizers.

    But it’s going to be mostly business as usual under Trump and anyone serious should put away fantasies of “revolution” and get down to the hard, slow – and boring – slog of organizing in White interests.

    People always made fun of Obama for being a “community organizer” but that is exactly the kind of activism Whites need right now.

    • Captain John Charity Spring MA

      It punched Spencer in the face. 200 arrested in DC yesterday.

      Facts, facts, facts.

      • 200 antifa does not a revolution make. When the antifa went after AmRen in Tennessee, they were able to bring out five people.

        Outside of the big cities, antifa has virtually no presence. When Blacks and Browns riot, the White and Jewish supporters are thin on the ground.

        Even in the big cities, the number of antifa who are willing to actually throw a sucker punch are a few dozen, at most. The vast majority of them will only make some noise and maybe set a trash can on fire.

        There is far more street violence in Chicago every day than all the White and Jewish “leftist” violence for the last decade.

        They are a paper tiger.

  • ereimenoym

    Leftists are just jews and spoiled white kids, but they’re not our only enemies. Blacks, muslims, hispanics all oppose us and their numbers are growing in our own countries.

    If they ever figure out a way to unite against us then we need to worry.

  • Apart from has already been said above, leftists who make the claim that “the Left” is stronger than “the Right” are only correct when talking about the already-violent factions of each group. That is to say, Antifa is probably stronger – of only by virtue of numbers – than the Hammerskins.

    In an actual civil war scenario, the Right would not just be the Uncle Adolf Brigade, but also military veterans. militiamen, etc. For the Left, on the other hand, the unarmed liberal bourgeoisie probably wouldn’t be of much help. So apart from Antifa and similar organizations, their only hope would be attempting to mobilize inner city minorities. And given that those have a track record of burning down their own neighborhoods because they can’t be bothered to go on a bus to get to where White people are, that’s probably not gonna work out either.

    • Quest

      Agreed. The main thing protecting the Left currently are the right-leaning police. When that thin blue line snaps, or gets the ‘blue flu’ the power shift will be breath taking

      • Troubadour

        Yeah dude. Judging from the great reception illegals, dindus and white leftists give police, they’d be on our side in no time

        • ThomasER916

          The boys in blue better be on our side because after Dindus destroyed Baltimore and Philly I stopped caring about police being murdered. Giving blacks a “place to destroy”? Fuck you! Let them die.

    • jeff412

      As a militia man I learned from the Yugoslav Civil War what to do. When things go hot head to the closest National Guard Armory and gear up!

      That is what Serbs and Croats did at the out-set.

      Most lattte liberals probably don’t even know what the National Guard is… Much less where the closest Armory to ‘liberate’ is!

  • Quest

    Good article in response to a good tweet storm.

    I think you don’t emphasize the biggest argument in your favor though. You reference the fact that most Lefty violence actually targets Lefty areas, w/o drawing the obvious conclusion. The Left knows they would get ventilated if they tried that shit w/ the Right. Note the gun-owners who protected shops in Ferguson.

    When the Left directs its violence to a white suburb or rural area, I’ll start to worry about their ability to wage war. And of course, when the White Right decides to go hot, we won’t be burning down our own towns, we’ll be going door to door at the nearest faculty building.

  • Formally

    the redneck who proudly sports a stars and bars bumper sticker.-That’s where you lost me….asshole

    • Insomnant

      Agreed. This sort of faux-intellectual disdain for the working class is the domain of Jews, and should be disavowed by any sincere white nationalist.

    • H.D. Wayne

      Many CBF sporting rednecks are…in the national guard, at least in the South. He didn’t quite lose me but, yea, asshole.

  • The Dude
  • Zazz

    Trump’s pastor Paul White. New one on me.

  • joe smith 323

    the right’s (((real enemies)))….

  • Captain John Charity Spring MA

    Two things.

    1. Encourage the leftist radicals to go overboard. Get the chimpouts done n dusted by end of August.

    2. Seduce the sensible center leftists to disown the lunatics in real time. Trump offers a rather nice wife to soften the blow, he’s got a young son too…the easily suggestible lefties will go along.


  • A hymn to Hermes

    The Leftist radicalism of the 60s was mostly political theater and that which was not was totally impotent. The same is true today, but what has changed is the media’s inability to frame isolated events as having some civilizational relevance. If you talk to people who were alive in the 60s and 70s the vast majority of them will tell you they were unaware that it had happened until it had been reported as some Official Important Event in the following decades.

    For most of the world the Days of Rage and the Civil Rights Movement just didn’t happen, and perhaps even less so for Americans. For all intents and purposes all of the riots and marches and sit ins were photo ops. Something to have as visual record to support a future history already planned by those who would pretend to capitulate to demands of a cohort whose claim to power was entirely fictitious.

    In a sense the real radicals with the real power were the ones behind the cameras, not in front of them. The only thing that has changed is now almost everyone has a platform from which to spin a narrative. Paying bums to beat up people outside of a political rally speaks to some level of organizational capability but I’m not impressed and I don’t see much possibility for the media to spin it as some faux civil war this time without censoring the Internet.

  • Kaber

    The notion of the United States breaking out in a full blown civil war within the next few decades or so is LARPer twaddle.

    The “Right” has the manpower and infrastructure but doesn’t have the political will to initiate a civil war. Contrary to the prog projection of the Red States as filled with overly inbred hillbillies itching at the shot to lynch hordes of innocent minorities the they have a habit of being noticeably insular.

    The “Left” doesn’t have the manpower or infrastructure to fight. And chances are that Big Daddy Government knows that.

    • Quest

      It won’t be a “civil” civil war like the 1st one in the USA with 2 governments in comm w/ each other, but an uncivil one like Yugoslavia. Or like some parts of our CW: Bleeding Kansas, Missouri Border war.
      Google “Civil War 2” by Thomas Chittum, free pdf’s available, if you want to know more

  • Gubbler Chechenova

    I think it’s time we call immigration ‘demographic imperialism’. It is really a globalist flood.

    I mean a little immigration can be handled. But the globalist volume is clearly on a scale that will displace native peoples and cultures. It can even qualify as ‘genocide’ by UN mandate.

    UN is seriously schizo. On the one hand, it opposes genocide that is defined as destruction of a people or culture in whole or in part.
    But then, it urges all nation to adopt open borders and allow endless influx of foreigners who will upset and destroy the native demographics and culture.

    So, UN urges genocide(by its own definition) in action while denouncing it in words.

  • ereimenoym

    A victory for the right in any kind of serious right-vs-left conflict would simply consist of laying siege to the big cities where they’re all clustered to choke off their supply lines. They’d be eating themselves within days.

  • S_

    You left out the part about George Soros’ funding the anti-Trump protesters. It goes to show what an empty-shell ideology The Left has become if it is open to being whored-out to cynical and wealthy Globalists in that way or any other. It’s all about poses, slogans, and uniformity of thought and appearance. It’s about being narcisssistic. It’s about submitting to totalitarianism and encouraging prohibition of personal liberty and true diversity of opinion, as well as destroying democracy. It’s about “demonstrating” how politically powerless and inept one really is.

  • Jose Noway

    > Where and when did the Left meaningful change the course of world events over this period of time?

    European refugee crisis. Pretty yuge if you ask me.