California white nationalists arrested on incitement charges

Post Reply New Topic

Authorities arrested three white nationalists on charges of intent to incite violence at political rallies throughout California and are still looking for a fourth.

Members of the white nationalist group Rise Above Movement, which has been designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, allegedly traveled to three different cities in California with the intention to incite violence at 2017 political rallies, according to a federal indictment unsealed on Wednesday. Robert Boman, Tyler Laube, and Robert Paul Rundo were arrested over the last week by the FBI. Authorities are still searching for Aaron Eason, 38.

The men used the internet to coordinate "combat training," travel and attendance at political rallies in Berkeley, Huntington Beach and San Bernardino last year, according to the indictment. They also allegedly planned to celebrate their violence in an effort to recruit more members.

Every American has a right to peacefully organize, march and protest in support of their beliefs — but no one has the right to violently assault their political opponents,” U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna said in a press release.

Several members of the Rise Above Movement, or RAM, attended a "Make America Great Again" rally in Huntington Beach in March last year holding signs that read “Da Goyim Know," a Semitic phrase. Rally attendees attacked journalists and began fights with counter protesters. Laube, 22, was captured on camera attacking a journalist, according to a criminal complaint.

Rundo then turned to the second counterprotestor punched him in the back of the head, grabbed the back of his neck, and threw him to the ground, landing on top of him," the criminal complaint reads. "Rundo then held the counter-protestor down with his left hand and threw several punches at the counter-protestor’s head while other RAM members looked on, cheered, and prevented others from intervening, as depicted in the screenshot below."

The men then celebrated the coverage of their violent acts online and planned their next trip to a rally in Berkeley, where they encouraged participating members to attend "hand to hand and formation fighting training," according to the complaint. Boman, 25, then allegedly posted to his social media pages a photo of him punching counter protesters in Berkeley.

Rundo, 28, and other RAM members attended an “Anti-Islamic Law” rally in San Bernardino in June and again committed violent acts. Authorities believe Rundo, 28, created a video of RAM members training to serve as a promotional effort for the group.

Four other RAM members were arrested earlier in October in connection to violence that broke out at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last year. The men allegedly flew from California to Virginia and "assaulted an African-American man, two females and a minister wearing a clerical collar" at the event. Those members were each charged with one count of conspiracy to violate the federal riots statute and one count of violating the statue

Right wingers believe in capitalism, free trade, free markets, pro-immigration ...

... white supremacy, slavery, conquest by genocide, and the treatment of women as sex objects and second-class citizens.

The article discusses a left wing socialist group called "Rise Above Movement".

White Nationalists, NAZI , Worker's Party are mostly left wingers who want free stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_w ... ted_States

That's why they join those groups.

Right wingers believe in capitalism, free trade, free markets, pro-immigration ....

Your citation is a complete non sequitur; please provide a verbatim quote directly from your reference which supports your assertion that "White Nationalists, NAZI , Worker's Party are mostly left wingers who want free stuff.'
You can't, because it doesn't.

To save themselves from public humiliation and embarassment, people who cannot differentiate 'Socialism' from 'National Socialism' really should refrain from commenting upon posts such as these until they have educated themselves on the topics at hand.

You can't even explain yourself, and you're trying to intimidate me.

I shouldn't have to explain Socialism to you. You should know that Socialists want stuff. That's self-evident. That's why they're Socialists. They have laundry list of things they want.

Right wingers want capitalism, free markets, freedom from government, freedom from taxes, free trade ...the opposite of Socialism.

Yes, there's lots of varieties of Socialism: Democratic Socialism, National Socialism ... blah blah Socialism ...

However, the assumption that because the word “socialist” appeared in the party’s name and socialist words and ideas popped up in the writings and speeches of top Nazis then the Nazis must have been actual socialists is naive and ahistorical. What the evidence shows, on the contrary, is that Nazi Party leaders paid mere lip service to socialist ideals on the way to achieving their one true goal: raw, totalitarian power.

Richard J. Evans: ‘It Would Be Wrong to See Nazism as a Form of, or an Outgrowth From, Socialism’

Despite having declared, at various times, “I am a socialist,” “We are socialists,” and similar avowals, on a personal level Hitler displayed little regard for the actual tenets of socialism, or, for that matter, socialists themselves. This excerpt from a speech Hitler gave in 1922 (quoted in William L. Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, published in 1960) is indicative:

Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem, “Deutschland ueber Alles,” to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land — that man is a Socialist.

And this is what came out of Adolf Hitler’s mouth on another occasion when a comrade riled him by harping on socialism (as reported by Henry A. Turner, author of German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler, published in 1985):

Socialism! What does socialism really mean? If people have something to eat and their pleasures, then they have their socialism.
In his 2010 book Hitler: A Biography, British historian Ian Kershaw wrote that despite putting the interests of the state above those of capitalism, he did so for reasons of nationalism and was never a true socialist by any common definition of the term:

[Hitler] was wholly ignorant of any formal understanding of the principles of economics. For him, as he stated to the industrialists, economics was of secondary importance, entirely subordinated to politics. His crude social-Darwinism dictated his approach to the economy, as it did his entire political “world-view.” Since struggle among nations would be decisive for future survival, Germany’s economy had to be subordinated to the preparation, then carrying out, of this struggle. This meant that liberal ideas of economic competition had to be replaced by the subjection of the economy to the dictates of the national interest. Similarly, any “socialist” ideas in the Nazi programme had to follow the same dictates. Hitler was never a socialist. But although he upheld private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers’ interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns, the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. But in operation it was turned into an adjunct of the state.
For members of the Nazi Party, in fact, defending socialism on its own terms was a risky activity which could result in ejection from the party, or worse. Of party leader and dissenter Otto Strasser (whose similarly-minded brother, Gregor, would ultimately be assassinated by the Nazis), William Shirer writes:

Unfortunately for him, he had taken seriously not only the word “socialist” but the word “workers” in the party’s official name of National Socialist German Workers’ Party. He had supported certain strikes of the socialist trade unions and demanded that the party come out for nationalization of industry. This of course was heresy to Hitler, who accused Otto Strasser of professing the cardinal sins of “democracy and liberalism.” On May 21 and 22, 1930, the Fuehrer had a showdown with his rebellious subordinate and demanded complete submission. When Otto refused, he was booted out of the party.
The plain truth, writes Historian Richard J. Evans in The Coming of the Third Reich, was that Hitler and his party saw socialism, communism, and leftism generally as inimical to everything they hoped to achieve:

In the climate of postwar counter-revolution, national brooding on the “stab-in-the-back,” and obsession with war profiteers and merchants of the rapidly mushrooming hyperinflation, Hitler concentrated especially on rabble-rousing attacks on “Jewish” merchants who were supposedly pushing up the price of goods: they should all, he said, to shouts of approval from his audiences, be strung up. Perhaps to emphasize this anti-capitalist focus, and to align itself with similar groups in Austria and Czechoslovakia, the party changed its name in February 1920 to the National Socialist German Workers’ Party…. Despite the change of name, however, it would be wrong to see Nazism as a form of, or an outgrowth from, socialism. True, as some have pointed out, its rhetoric was frequently egalitarian, it stressed the need to put common needs above the needs of the individual, and it often declared itself opposed to big business and international finance capital. Famously, too, anti-Semitism was once declared to be “the socialism of fools.” But from the very beginning, Hitler declared himself implacably opposed to Social Democracy and, initially to a much smaller extent, Communism: after all, the “November traitors” who had signed the Armistice and later the Treaty of Versailles were not Communists at all, but the Social Democrats.
What Nazism Stood For

The National Socialists completely ignored socialism’s primary aim (replacing the existing class-based society with an egalitarian one in which workers owned the means of production) and substituted their own topsy-turvy agenda, Evans writes, “replacing class with race, and the dictatorship of the proletariat with the dictatorship of the leader”:

The “National Socialists” wanted to unite the two political camps of left and right into which, they argued, the Jews had manipulated the German nation. The basis for this was to be the idea of race. This was light years removed from the class-based ideology of socialism. Nazism was in some ways an extreme counter-ideology to socialism, borrowing much of its rhetoric in the process, from its self-image as a movement rather than a party, to its much-vaunted contempt for bourgeois convention and conservative timidity.
German historian and National Socialism expert Joachim Fest characterizes this repurposing of socialist rhetoric as an act of “prestidigitation”:

This ideology took a leftist label chiefly for tactical reasons. It demanded, within the party and within the state, a powerful system of rule that would exercise unchallenged leadership over the “great mass of the anonymous.” And whatever premises the party may have started with, by 1930 Hitler’s party was “socialist” only to take advantage of the emotional value of the word, and a “workers’ party” in order to lure the most energetic social force. As with Hitler’s protestations of belief in tradition, in conservative values, or in Christianity, the socialist slogans were merely movable ideological props to serve as camouflage and confuse the enemy.
The proof was in the pudding. Not long after acquiring the reins of power, the Nazis banned the Social Democratic Party and sent its leaders and other leftists identified as threats to the National Socialist program to concentration camps. According to the Holocaust Encyclopedia:

In the months after Hitler took power, SA and Gestapo agents went from door to door looking for Hitler’s enemies. They arrested Socialists, Communists, trade union leaders, and others who had spoken out against the Nazi party; some were murdered. By the summer of 1933, the Nazi party was the only legal political party in Germany. Nearly all organized opposition to the regime had been eliminated. Democracy was dead in Germany.
Despite continuing certain Weimar-era social welfare programs, the Nazis proceeded to restrict their availability to “racially worthy” (non-Jewish) beneficiaries. In terms of labor, worker strikes were outlawed. Trade unions were replaced by the party-controlled German Labor Front, primarily tasked with increasing productivity, not protecting workers. In lieu of the socialist ideal of an egalitarian, worker-run state, the National Socialists erected a party-run police state whose governing structure was anti-democratic, rigidly hierarchical, and militaristic in nature. As to the redistribution of wealth, the socialist ideal “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” was rejected in favor of a credo more on the order of “Take everything that belongs to non-Aryans and keep it for the master race.”

Above all, the Nazis were German white nationalists. What they stood for was the ascendancy of the “Aryan” race and the German nation, by any means necessary. Despite co-opting the name, some of the rhetoric, and even some of the precepts of socialism, Hitler and party did so with utter cynicism, and with vastly different goals. The claim that the Nazis actually were leftists or socialists in any generally accepted sense of those terms flies in the face of historical reality.

Yes, there's lots of varieties of Socialism: Democratic Socialism, National Socialism ... blah blah Socialism ...