blood in the streets

“If there’s a prosecution of Donald Trump for mishandling classified information…there’ll be riots in the street.”

That was Senator Lindsey Olin Graham of South Carolina. But I’ve been seeing and hearing that sort of idiotic bullshit a lot lately–on the news and in real life. There was a guy at the gym last week–a living caricature of a Trump supporter; overweight and angry, loud and obnoxious–saying much the same thing. He said he was so angry he was “about ready to take up arms.” About ready. Not actually ready to take up arms, but just about ready.

Putting aside the fact that this guy would have probably collapsed in a puddle of his own urine if he’d had to run across the street, there’s the question of whom he’d take up arms against. In his rant, he mentioned Uncle Joe Biden, Antifa, the DeepStateFBI (yes, it was all one word) and communists. Maybe he meant to take up arms against all of them? Or maybe he thinks they’re all the same group? I don’t know. It was an unhinged, unfocused, unorganized rant.

Is this blood-in-the-streets scenario something we really need to fret about? Well, yes and no. I mean, the 1/6 insurrection is evidence that there are a lot of angry Trumpistas who are willing to use violence to get their way. So yeah, that’s a real concern.

But that anger had focus. Misdirected focus built on lies, true–but there was a focal point. The Capitol Building. Comrade Trump pointed them at the Capitol. It’s entirely possible (assuming Trump gets indicted–and I think he will–and goes to trial–and I’m not so sure about that) that a Trumpista mob would assault the courthouse.

He could riot for maybe half a street.

But as for widespread rioting in the streets? Naw, probably not. Sure, there’ll be pro-Trump protests and some of those will likely turn violent. But the problem with the sort of conspiratorial free-floating rage we see from so many Trumpistas is that it’s undirected. Like the fuckwit at the gym, they’re intensely angry at some vague, nebulous Biden/Antifa/DeepState/commie Bogeyman that doesn’t exist. It’s easy to sustain that sort of anger, but hard to sustain any sort of direct action against vapor. You can’t punch smoke.

But you can punch fascists. If holding Trump accountable for his crimes leads to violence in the streets, then so be it. I’d much rather it didn’t happen, but if it does then it does. It’s a price we may have to pay to resist fascism.

EDITORIAL NOTES: 1) I don’t advocate punching anybody, even if they’re fascists. But if you find yourself on the street and there’s a fascist in front of you doing or saying fascist stuff, DO NOT punch him (it’ll almost certainly be a guy) in the head; heads are mostly bone and you could hurt your hand. Punch him someplace soft. 2) When I described the Trumpista at the gym as being “overweight and angry” and said he’d likely collapse “in a puddle of his own urine if he’d had to run across the street,” it wasn’t to denigrate fat people. There are fat people who are in really good shape. I’m just describing those armchair warriors who sit around drinking cheap-ass beer and eating bags of Doritos and fantasize about being tough. I probably am denigrating cheap-ass beer, though. Sue me.

10 thoughts on “blood in the streets

  1. Ah, I can see him now, the fat, old, sweaty, angry MAGA hat wearing, cheap-ass beer drinking (that’s a crime) white bloke. They have no focus so it won’t happen, unless as you say some form of event happens in one spot at a published time when something might kick off. Although I’d love to see a few of them taking on the FBI in it’s entirety. Fun for a couple of seconds then blissful quiet.

    I love the photo of some other fat, less old, sweaty, angry MAGA hat wearing, cheap-ass bear drinking white bloke with “Proudboy” tattooed on his arm. He really, really, REALLY has nothing to be proud of. And he’s no boy. Also, that symbol they love so much with their finger and thumb = big fat dickhead. They actually permanently label themselves as despicable pieces of shit. It’s quite amusing really.


    • I don’t want to dismiss the idea that a Trump trial/conviction/incarceration would spark violence. It will. But I really doubt it’ll be blood-in-the-streets rioting. I suspect we’ll see an increase in incidents of stochastic terrorism. Like that mook who attacked the Cincinnati FBI office. Maybe even something as horrific as McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing.

      But we can deal with that. It’s better than allowing a criminal POTUS to escape justice.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. The idiotic Russel Brand advocates the same kind of brainless ‘revolution’ against ‘them’ (although he directs his energy to the Left). As I said in a post of my own, _everyone_ knows there are problems; taking up torches and pitchforks and storming the castle gates is all very well, but what are you going to do _then_?

    Liked by 1 person

      • Brand has good intentions – he understands that the system is fucked and needs to be changed. But any thinking person knows that. The problem is that a lot of relatively smart and well-meaning people mistake his voluble raving for insight, of which he has none. He reminds me of a teenager raising his fist and shouting “Fuck tha man!!”

        Liked by 1 person

    • I remember Russel Brand from about a decade ago. He was not spouting anti-progressive stuff then, unless I misunderstood him – always a possibility.
      What happened? Did he get hooked on watching Fox or something? Go back on drugs, maybe?


      • Well, as I said, Brand speaks to the Left. But it’s the same kind of stupid ‘pitchfork and torches’ rhetoric. For example, he tells people not to vote – which is brainless and childish. He still pretends to be progressive. I’m sure he thinks he is.


      • I haven’t seen his stuff for seven years or so, so I don’t even know if he devolved into what you describe or if my memory is flawed. I seem to remember he was a bit over the top but he seemed to make mostly good points. Not seeking him out to see what he’s like now, I don’t have the time to spare for it. So I’ll just take your word for it.
        (update) Okay – it was eleven years ago. I stopped looking at Russel’s videos after Amy Winehouse died.


      • Oh, he does make good points. But they’re the kinds of good points that you or I could make, and they’re hardly insightful. His problem is twofold: he’s shouty and annoying, and his vision for changing things is basically “let’s burn this shit to the ground!”, without even the faintest idea of what to do next. So, in sum, he has a soapbox because of his celebrity profile, but he uses it only to foment unproductive discontent. I’d be much more impressed with him if he was actually doing something other than being shouty.

        I’ve written about him a couple of times in the past if you care:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.