I guess these many "acts of violence" referred to in this document are the stuff we never hear of. Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right | Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right Jan 15, 2013 Author: Arie Perliger In the last few years, and especially since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self-identify with the far-right of American politics. These incidents cause many to wonder whether these are isolated attacks, an increasing trend, part of increasing societal violence, or attributable to some other condition. To date, however, there has been limited systematic documentation and analysis of incidents of American domestic violence. This study provides a conceptual foundation for understanding different far-right groups and then presents the empirical analysis of violent incidents to identify those perpetrating attacks and their associated trends. Through a comprehensive look at the data, this study addresses three core questions: (1) What are the main current characteristics of the violence produced by the far right? (2) What type of far-right groups are more prone than others to engage in violence? How are characteristics of particular far-right groups correlated with their tendency to engage in violence? (3) What are the social and political factors associated with the level of far-right violence? Are there political or social conditions that foster or discourage violence? It is important to note that this study concentrates on those individuals and groups who have actually perpetuated violence and is not a comprehensive analysis of the political causes with which some far-right extremists identify. While the ability to hold and appropriately articulate diverse political views is an American strength, extremists committing acts of violence in the name of those causes undermine the freedoms that they purport to espouse
Actually, we do. They are just so infrequent that statistically they are insignificant in comparison to the nightly news stories. Pretty clear case of studying something in sufficient detail as to fulfill the prophesy that knowing more and more about less and less leads to knowing everything about nothing. It looks on first read like an academic exercise to continue the publish or perish requirements of ranking sociologists. Slightly off topic perhaps, but I have to question the need for a complete sociology department at West Point. Remembering that the point of the Point was to train (specifically) civil engineers originally and has morphed into a near university to create the well rounded Army officer, one still must wonder how study of such arcane subjects as sociology contributes to tactics and strategies.
Note that their "statistical analysis" lumps "anti federalist" patriots with racist groups such as KKK, Aryan Nations and Christian Identity...
I actually read 59 pages of his ancient history ramblings before my head exploded. I am now trying to superglue the pieces back in the correct locations. It's difficult with only one eye back in place and a hand held mirror. He would have been better off to explore the illegal infilltration of the US from the Southern border as well as the increases in drugs and gangs and gang gun violence.
This is my first post on this site. I've been reading threads here for quite a while, but this topic set me off. When I first learned about this "study", my gut suddenly got a little queasy. But, I typically don't go around screaming the sky is falling without first verifying the sources if I can, and I don't subscribe to tin-foil hat theories. So I downloaded the study and read it for myself. The first thing I noticed was that the study made numerous accusations and suppositions without any supporting info. Nowhere did it ever list any kind of statistics to back up their claims that the "far-right" is "extreme", "racist", "terroristic", etc. But, there have been almost countless references about the rise of domestic terrorism and the far-right. So I thought that maybe there's something to it. After all, stupidity knows no boundaries. There are nut-jobs associated with just about any facet of society. So I went out to find some info on the subject. The FBI's website has a treasure trove of crime and terrorism data. (On a side note, if anyone wants crime stats, including violent gun crimes, check them out.) What I found was that the "violent-right" is NOT on the rise. There may be a slight increase, but the data points are so minor that 1.) any increase is reflected dramatically in percentages due to the small nature of occurrences, and 2.) the number of left-wing terrorist activities far out-numbers anything from the right. This study made this administrations picture very clear. First, the DHS published their paper generally naming conservatives as potential domestic terrorist recruits based on things such as prior military service, being pro-choice, being pro-gun, being advocates of the Constitution, etc. I went straight to the source on this as well, and what I found was that it was drastically different than what any other administration had released. I was able to find reports from the DHS & the FBI from both the Bush- and Clinton-administrations concerning domestic terrorism. What the previous reports relayed were very clear, honest (not biased by political affiliation), and were based on specifics--i.e., they listed named groups that had stated goals and had acted on those goals. Those reports listed everything from the KKK and Aryan Brotherhood to the New Black Panthers and the Liberate Earth Front. Obama's DHS report was very lopsided and subjective, and essentially stated that America's conservative population was the "bad guy". Conservatives are "extremists". Second, the DHS/FBI released guides on how to tell on your neighbor. Again, I went straight to the source. The purpose of these flyers was to point out "tells"--behavior that may be flags of terrorist planning. The majority of these flyers were fairly tame, and even accurate, when you look at them from the point of OPSEC flags that usually stand out in previous terrorist activities and planning/funding/etc. They were given to a variety of industries and gov't offices--everything from your local LE to tattoo parlors to logistic shipping facilities. The problem with these flyers is that some of the "tells" described in the flyers that required people to "tattle" were the exact same behavior that the DHS & FEMA were telling people to do to prepare for disasters. The message sent from these flyers was essentially that "preppers" are "extremists" and they need to be ratted out, as if they were going to do harm to the society at large. Third, DHS & the FBI started including this rhetoric in training state and local LE. Don't forget that the main stated purpose of the DHS was to integrate local, state, & federal LE together with various intelligence agencies for the sole purpose of identifying and stopping terrorism--and who are the terrorists? America's right-wing. You know, they're all extremists, racists, terrorists, etc. And now, that same rhetoric is being taught at the world's greatest military school--even though it's obviously a complete lie. So, when the federal government and the news outlets are all stating, publicly and repeatedly, that the right-wing is violent and extreme; when the same rhetoric is taught to the general public; when the same rhetoric is taught and institutionalized at all levels of LE, and now even our military leaders, it begs the question: Why? To what end? Obama has stated that he wants to fundamentally transform this country. That can not be accomplished with existing opposition. How to remove that? Demonize, discredit, isolate, and polarize the threat. I'm not saying that Obama is planning to stage a disaster, as some conspiracy hats might conclude. But I am saying that they are poising themselves to take full advantage of any opportunity that may arise. The dangers of such manipulation is readily available. Our government is full of examples of responding with overwhelming and oppressive force against its own citizens. It would be foolish to think that it wouldn't happen again. "The people" see it happen and generally think it's tragic but necessary, and sometimes are even relieved that the gov't "saved" them. LE at many levels are pressured from the public and the political bureaucracy and hear nothing but "Don't even let that happen again! Do whatever it takes to keep us safe! Do something!" So they do. And they do it well. And more is better, right? Overwhelming and oppressive force. Case in point: Shortly after the Sandy Hook shooting, a Maryland man tattled on his neighbor to the local police about his neighbor having an arsenal and that he was some kind of "doomsday prepper." What did the police do? Did they realize that owning guns is not a crime, and do nothing? Did they realize that being a "doomsday prepper" is not a crime, and do nothing? Nope. They sent in an undercover cop. The man in question had a small business. The undercover cop went to that business, and during their conversation, the suspect made some statements against the size/scope of the federal gov't and against this administration. Had he broken any laws? Nope. Did he indicate that he was planning any violent actions? Nope. So, how did the LE react? With overwhelming and oppressive force. Local police, county SWAT, state police, and FBI SWAT (I think....I know there were four different levels of LE, up to and including the FBI; and two levels of SWAT.) The raid included helicopters and 150 armed and amped up LEOs. Luckily, the suspect was not at home at the time of the raid. Did this "right-wing extremist" hide in the woods like some kind of Rambo? Nope. Was his house rigged up w/booby traps like the latest Occupy caught in plans to blow up a bridge? Nope. Did he go on a rampage, killing as many people as possible? Nope. He turned himself in the next morning when he learned of the raid. And what did the police find on the raid? Four guns. A shotgun, two .22LRs, and either a handgun or an AR. Oh, yeah. He also had a storm shelter in the back yard. The people in the neighborhood were very upset with the response and spoke out against it fairly loudly. Everyone in the neighborhood, except the guy who tattled, had nothing but good things to say about the suspect. Pleasant, helpful, a good neighbor, etc. Yet, based on the word of one rat with just the right terminology and in the right environment of public fear and political pressure, this guy was vilified to the point that his civil rights were completely thrown out the window. The most important right of all was almost extinguished. The right to life. Had the suspect been at home during the raid, there's a good chance that he wouldn't have lived.
You are preaching to the choir. The general public does not understand that their own grandparents were "preppers" Everyone was.
