The interesting thing about street-level politics -- from the most civil of electoral contests to scuffles on the asphalt, from sign-waving to brick-throwing, is that it's not a ball game or a Western: you are not obliged to pick sides, and even if one side is less worse than the other, that doesn't mean they can't both be in the wrong.
Which brings us to lovely Portland, Oregon. All I know is what I read in the papers -- and half of that is wrong. For sure they have civil unrest, violence, rioting. It looks like the rioters are the usual mix of sincere activists, would-be Marxists, and people who just showed up to set fires and break things. For sure there is a Federal response, using officers who appear to have missing or obscured nametags. The Mayor doesn't want them there and neither does the state's Governor; DHS showed up, and refused to speak to local reporters.
Even well-connected local media can't come up with answers.
Many of my Facebook acquaintances are cheering on the Federal actions in Portland, despite the Constitutional reservation of general police powers to the States. How is it jackbooted thuggery when the Feds take on a bunch of well-armed, frustrated ranchers and yet not jackbooted thuggery when the targets are Left-of-center and dreadlocked instead of Stetsoned?
I don't know. I'm not at all in favor of violent protest or setting fire to Federal offices, but I'm not real keen on the kind of arrest-tag-charge or release of persons not on Federal property we're seeing from the Feds, either.
BUILDING A 1:1 BALUN
4 months ago