Rise Of White Nationalism And Anti-Jewish Attacks

There is much to learn from the pages of history.  It often speaks to our times.

More than a decade before the Nazis seized power in Germany, Albert Einstein was on the run and already fearful for his country’s future, according to a newly revealed handwritten letter.

His longtime friend and fellow Jew, German Foreign Minister Walther Rathenau, had just been assassinated by right-wing extremists and police had warned the noted physicist that his life could be in danger too.

So Einstein fled Berlin and went into hiding in northern Germany. It was during this hiatus that he penned a handwritten letter to his beloved younger sister, Maja, warning of the dangers of growing nationalism and anti-Semitism years before the Nazis ultimately rose to power, forcing Einstein to flee his native Germany for good.

A truly unremarkable and unsettling account of how our federal government, law enforcement, and national intelligence agencies failed to recognize the alarming threat of white nationalism was pushing this month in The New York Times Magazine.

White supremacists and other far-right extremists have killed far more people since Sept. 11, 2001, than any other category of domestic extremist. The Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism has reported that 71 percent of the extremist-related fatalities in the United States between 2008 and 2017 were committed by members of the far right or white-supremacist movements. Islamic extremists were responsible for just 26 percent. Data compiled by the University of Maryland’s Global Terrorism Database shows that the number of terror-related incidents has more than tripled in the United States since 2013, and the number of those killed has quadrupled. In 2017, there were 65 incidents totaling 95 deaths. In a recent analysis of the data by the news site Quartz, roughly 60 percent of those incidents were driven by racist, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, antigovernment or other right-wing ideologies. Left-wing ideologies, like radical environmentalism, were responsible for 11 attacks. Muslim extremists committed just seven attacks.

One of those coming to Gainesville was William Fears, a 31-year-old from Houston. Fears, who online went by variations of the handle Antagonizer, was one of the most dedicated foot soldiers of the alt-right. Countless YouTube videos had captured his progress over the past year as he made his way from protest to protest across several states, flinging Nazi salutes, setting off smoke bombs and, from time to time, attacking people. Fears was also a felon. He had spent six years in prison for aggravated kidnapping in a case involving his ex-girlfriend, and now he had an active warrant for his arrest, after his new girlfriend accused him of assault less than two weeks earlier. On Oct. 18, the night before the event, Fears and a few others from Houston’s white-nationalist scene got in Fears’s silver Jeep Patriot for the 14-hour drive. Fears’s friend Tyler TenBrink, who pleaded guilty to assault in 2014, posted video from their trip on his Facebook page. There were four men, two of them felons, and two nine-millimeter handguns. “Texans always carry,” Fears said later.

 

Ranked-Choice Voting Needs To Explored

Ranked voting has received much attention this year–and for good reason.  While I have not yet attached my cart to this team of horses, I can say I am reading and learning more and more about it.  I am slowly warming to the idea.

Today the Boston Globe has a must read editorial for those who are pondering such a way to cast ballots.

One of the reasons to seriously consider it is due to the need of all candidates not to go nuclear on their opponents as that may backfire when voters make a second selection—and so on.  Ranked voting is one idea where civility might be enforced–to some degree–into the electoral process.  That would be a good thing.  Who knows, candidates might talk more about issues than throwing mud which might land right back on the one with the extended arm.  That latter sentiment is one I have long argued for on this blog.

Ranked-choice voting may sound complicated, but it’s really not. It’s basically an instant runoff in contests where no candidate has secured a majority of the vote. In ranked-choice elections, citizens don’t just vote for one candidate on Election Day. If they want, they can rank them all, in order of preference. If no candidate wins a majority, the hopeful who received the least first-choice votes is dropped, and those votes are redistributed to the next choice of his or her voters. That process continues until enough candidates have been eliminated, and enough votes reallocated, to deliver one candidate a majority.

Maine, a state where elections frequently feature one or more independent candidates, has had unfortunate experiences with plurality winners. Combative, divisive Paul LePage first won the governorship in a multi-candidate race with a slender plurality of 37.6 percent, giving him a victory he almost certainly wouldn’t have secured in a head-to-head contest. Because of a Maine constitutional issue, ranked-choice voting governs primaries, but doesn’t apply in general elections for governor or for legislative seats. It is used in all primaries, however, and in general elections for federal offices.

Conservatives will of course grouse because, in this instance, ranked-choice resulted in a loss for Poliquin, the last Republican House member in New England. But the Second District will end up with a member of Congress more in sync with its wants. And ranked-choice voting could just as easily work in the GOP’s favor in a contest where right-leaning independents split conservative votes that otherwise would have consolidated around the Republican nominee.