Charlottesville: Instant desire to kill the pig!


Also, what Edie Doyle said:
Peter Cvjetanovic, who's 20 years old, took part in last weekend's ridiculous, pitiful and ridiculous Charlottesville march. Apparently, he's a college student at Nevada-Reno.

As Cvetanovic marched around chanting his ridiculous chants, he was photographed; later, he was identified. As he achieved local notoriety, he explained his thinking to a Nevada TV station:
CVETANOVIC: I did not expect the photo to be shared as much as it was. I understand the photo has a very negative connotation. But I hope that the people sharing the photo are willing to listen that I’m not the angry racist they see in that photo.


I came to this march for the message that white European culture has a right to be here just like every other culture. It is not perfect; there are flaws to it, of course. However I do believe that the replacement of the statue will be the slow replacement of white heritage within the United States and the people who fought and defended and built their homeland. Robert E Lee is a great example of that. He wasn’t a perfect man, but I want to honor and respect what he stood for during his time.
We got these quotes from this post by Josh Marshall.

Those comments by Cvetanovic strike us as rather dumb. Then again, did we mention the fact that he's only 20?

Beyond that, we can't speak for what this young person actually does and doesn't believe. That said:

On Monday, in that same post, Marshall recommended a twitter thread in which a bunch of our brightest liberals were aggressively egging each other on, seeking ways to kill this particular pig. We're surprised that Marshall would recommend this approach.

When we read that twitter thread,
we thought of The Mortal Storm, a fascinating 1940 fictional film about the rise of Nazi Youth. We thought of the many deaths which occurred during China's "cultural revolution."

We thought of Lord of the Flies, and of course of killing the pig. We also thought of Edie Doyle.

Edie Doyle is the main female character is the great, somewhat testosterone-laden film, On the Waterfront. The part was played by Eva Marie Saint in Saint's first film role.

Edie Doyle's working-class parents have saved their nickles and dimes to send her off to be taught by the nuns, far away from the corruption of the waterfront. On Christmas vacation, her brother is killed. She insists on learning how he died before she returns to the nuns.

With this, a note about this unusual film:

On the Waterfront's major theme involves the exciting world of street-fighting real men. The more significant undercard involves the values of Edie Doyle, and the discovery of same by Terry Molloy, the Marlon Brando character.

Early in the film, Saint and Brando walk through a park, recalling the fact that they attended parochial school together. Brando recalls the way the nuns abused him. In reply, Saint expresses the time-honored views of the bleeding-heart liberal:
TERRY: You know, I've seen you a lot of times before. Do you remember parochial school out on Puluski Street? Seven, eight years ago?


You don't remember me, do you?

EDIE: I remembered you the first moment I saw you.

TERRY: By the nose, huh? Some people just got faces that stick in your mind.

EDIE: I remember you were in trouble all the time.

TERRY: Now you got me. The way those sisters used to whack me, I don't know what. They thought they was going to beat an education into me, but I foxed them.

EDIE: Maybe they just didn't know how to handle you.

TERRY: How would you have done it?

EDIE: With a little more patience and kindness. That's what makes people mean and difficult. People don't care enough about them.

TERRY: Are you kidding me? I'd better get you home. There’s too many guys around here with only one thing on their mind.

Am I gonna see you again?
Cinematically, you have to be there. Saint's performance is angelic. Beyond that, she's plainly lit to glow.

At any rate, how would Edie have "handled" Terry? "With a little more patience and kindness," she says.

For our money, the greatness of this film begins in that scene. Rather plainly, Terry sees that Edie is a better person than he is. An unusual desire is also signaled: as he absent-mindedly slips the glove she has dropped onto his own hand, we can see that he wants to be more like her, more like this better person.

In very, very few major films do you see the major male character observe and accept the moral superiority of the major female character. But that's the (secondary) theme which plays out all through the rest of this film, as the Brando character turns his back on the values of the waterfront where he's been raised.

In this famous film, the Brando character has played an unknowing role in the killing of Edie's brother. Last weekend, in Charlottesville, a lost soul named James Field killed an admirable young woman named Heidi Heyer. A few hundred other people paraded around on Friday and Saturday, exhibiting tremendously unfortunate behavior and saying ridiculous stupid things.

As it turned out, Field was already badly disturbed by the time he was 13 years old. "There but for fortune"—or so we liberals used to say in the face of such a miserable, profoundly unfortunate story.

Edie would have handled him with a little more patience and kindness. Josh encouraged our liberal teammates to go out and start killing the pig.

Why was Cvjetanovic at that pitiful rally? We can't tell you that. But we're going to guess that the best results don't come from aping the hatred.

Susan Bro was Heidi Heyer's mother. She says that hate will breed more hate. That's what Dr. King also said! As a general matter, we the humans aren't wired to see things that way.

Susan Bro said she felt sorry for the lost soul who killed her daughter. "Jesus Christ is here on the waterfront." That's what the local priest, played by Karl Malden, says in Elia Kazan's great film.

We thought that twitter thread was deeply unwise. In fairness, we humans have always been wired that way. People are dead all over the world because of this inbred reaction.

A few more words of advice: Should we call the marchers dumb? Or should we call them evil?

When we call people evil, we tend to invest them with substantial power. When we say they're pitiful, lost and remarkably dumb, we create them a different way.

When we call a lost soul a terrorist, we encourage the next lost soul to achieve notoriety that same way. What makes us build these people up? It seems to us that Edie Doyle, like Susan Bro, would have looked for a better way.


  1. "We're surprised that Marshall would recommend this approach."

    What's the surprise, the guy is a political operative, mud-slinger. The lowest form of life there is. To his credit, I don't think he's ever pretended to be anything else...

  2. "The lowest form of life there is."
    You certainly are.

    1. You sound like a pre-teen, dear.

    2. Just using your own words, Chairman.
      Guess that makes you the pre-teen.

  3. The white supremacists, erstwhile Nazis and racists are not evil, they are dumb. They may kill you but you will die with the satisfaction that you were killed by a dumb asshole not an evil son-of-a bitch. You will still be dead and if your family says they don't hate your killer Bob will be pleased.
    But you will still be dead.
    Got you Bob.

    1. Hello and a good times to you and friend.

      I have it here warning post about punjab cricket.

      Do not eat it punjab cricket. If eat it punjab cricket you have it bad smell gas.

      One time lady friend name Smupa eat it a punjab cricket.

      She then have it bad smell gas for 3.5 days.

      For this time we not have good time bed time. Not good. Thank you

  4. While I bow to know man in my love of "On The Waterfront," it's overall plea for decency only takes us so far here. There are some things old liberals like me and Bob should be saying, and we aren't saying them.

    Liberals and Democrats are, on balance, the correct party on racial issues. They also demagogue race, sometimes shamelessly, in a way that may have something to do with creating those young bozos on the march in North Carolina.
    For a young man to constantly hear from the political left that he is
    "privileged" as he watches he and his family struggle the same way everybody else does, is insulting and demeaning. The great thinkers of the academic left take it a few notches further, insisting he owes a debt to society by the racial corruption of his very birth. Even if this were not morally dubious, it is hopelessly reckless political suicide. And that, for starters, is how you get a degenerate like Donald Trump elected President, and that is what Steve Bannon was talking about in those interviews ( basically saying "bring it on!") to the utterly perplexed MSNBC hosts. That is what an overdose of moral superiority can do to you. Thanks for listening.

    1. Interesting how even during a plea for tolerance and humility, a liberal can't restrain himself from calling the opposing politician, politician elected by the working class, 'degenerate'.

      Clearly, there's something in modern American liberalism - it can't exist, can't express itself without spewing hatred. I suspect it's the anticipation of the inevitable collapse. Panic... Fascinating...

    2. Yes, conservatives are indeed panicking. They see the ineffective empty suit in the White House that they have enabled, and are in agony.
      They even send Chairman Mao to troll this website. Sad that the Chairman has nothing better to do with his time.
      Perhaps he admires his namesake, Mao Tse Tung, a Communist, and murderer of millions of his own people?
      Liberals would love to help you with your anger issues.

    3. Proportionality, Mao. Hard for anyone to be a hundred percent correct on racial matters, all the time anyway.

      Hating Nazi cunts like you? That's a no brainer. Easy, if you will.

    4. Sorry - what? What the hell are you talking about?

      Are you the 12-year-old girl from 6:03 PM who's screaming hysterically 'NO - YOU ARE!' to whatever I say?

    5. Hey Greg. Thanks for confirming my point; appreciate it.

    6. Mao, you are the last person to complain that someone is calling another person a degenerate. You had much less kind words for Marshall. You're basically accusing him of not being a saint. As others strive to be better, you seem to gleefully embrace your worst instincts and call others hypocrites. It's easy to avoid hypocrisy of you don't endeavor to live up to a higher ideal. Congratulations for finding that low-risk position. You just come here to get into fights. What a weird emotional high you must get from this. Clearly you're not trying to accomplish anything valuable for any point of view, so your only goal is to wallow in unpleasantness. Surely you can find better ways to spend your time. Why not try to have a respectful disagreement? If there's no point, then why are you here? It's not healthy for you or anyone else.

    7. Thank you for telling me what my goals are, and what I'm trying to accomplish.

      Could you try to be a bit more patronizing please? Y'know, to make this thread that started with admission of 'overdose of moral superiority' even funnier...

    8. Wipe the teas away, Mao. You're looking like a bigger crybaby than you usually do when people write the truth about you.

  5. Someone drove a van into a crowd in Barcelona killing many people and almost everyone in the world (including Trump) correctly called the attackers terrorists.
    Someone drove a vehicle into a crowd in Virginia killing one person. Almost everyone in the world called the attacker and his cohorts terrorists. Trump called them "good people". Somerby calls them "dumb".

  6. Bob, this comment section amply demonstrates why inspiring leadership is required to get people to resist evil with wisdom and compassion. We have no MLK these days, so perhaps this cannot be achieved. I basically agree with you (not 100% but mostly) but it requires a huge effort for people to free themselves from the toxic logic of hate. People forget that we will need to find a way to come together to effect change. They cannot perceive the opposition as human. I struggle myself, as I am often sickened by this president and his base. It's good to be reminded of a higher road, though it's a very hard one to walk. And very lonely these days if you make it there.

    1. And when I say "evil," I mean not so much the cause as the effect, and the disease of hatred itself.

  7. Her name is not Heidi Heyer. It's Heather Heyer.

    1. Journalistic accuracy is a standard Bob Somerby demands of others, not himself.

  8. No point in reading Somerby when he is like this.

  9. So Cvjetanovic is one of Trumps good ones?

    Are you vouching for him?

  10. “Those comments by Cvetanovic strike us as rather dumb. Then again, did we mention the fact that he's only 20?”

    Dumbness, combined with advocacy of racism, led to a little something known as genocide, Bob. Let’s hope your attempt here to soft-peddle racism is merely the result of temporary dumbness on your part, and not something worse.

    1. Bob Somerby cannot bear to see or hear Trump even called a “liar” without peddling a specious and quibbling NGRI defense; this has been only as temporary as Trump’s term in office to date. You’ll note he never responds to comments here pointing out his errors, fallacies, and even outright hypocrisies — but continues to repeat the same offenses as though they had never been detailed on his own site.

    2. "Dumbness, combined with advocacy of racism, led to a little something known as genocide"

      This doesn't sound like a particularly bright analysis. Also, entirely incompatible with the concept known as "freedom of speech".

      If you want to find meaningful, systemic causes, you might want to dig a bit deeper than dumbness and advocacy.

    3. Māo “What?” Chéng “What?” 猫城记: Historical ignorance is once again your failing. Read why Julius Streicher was convicted of crimes against humanity and executed, after years of dumbly advocating racism.

      As for the concept of “freedom of speech”, like the freedom to swing your fist, it has its limits, namely where it starts (or risks) hurting other people, as in inciting to riot, shouting “fire” without cause in a crowded theater, committing fraud, sending a bomb threat, or a threat to kill the President of the United States — all “words, mere words” — for which you can do prison time.

    4. Need I point out, Streicher is not a randomly chosen example? His periodical, Der Stürmer, was the namesake for the current alt-right website Daily Stormer which recently lost its GoDaddy domain, couldn’t find one via Google, and at last proudly announced (quoting the headline): “A Tale of True Friendship: Trump Called Putin to Get Us a New Domain!” (.ru)

      Yeah, even that couldn’t last too long, and didn’t. Pooooor Nazis....

    5. So, you're for freedom of government sanctioned speech, then? Just curious. Or are you for freedom of speech that you personally find unobjectionable?

    6. Incitement to riot, murder, violent revolution (=overthrowing the government by force), and in this case genocide, are over the legal line, as are calling/mailing in bomb and other death threats; threatening in person to harm someone can be charged as the crime of “assault” (whether or not you physically touch them; actually hitting them would be “battery”) — such imminently violent speech is unprotected by the First Amendment, always has been — what is protected is peaceful speech.

      That’s from ConLaw you can look up, not my personal opinion.

    7. If you believe that someone's committed the crime of uttering forbidden words, then call the cops. If not, I don't see what the problem is.

    8. Streicher was already tried and convicted decades ago, remember? You’re the only one griping about the state of settled law.

    9. What is your point? It's very hard to follow.

    10. Only for you, Māo “What?” Chéng “What?” 猫城记, but then, as Upton Sinclair used to say, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

    11. So, you don't have a point, then? Because spending all this bandwidth to claim that banning speech doesn's contradict the concept of 'freedom of speech' would be really stupid, right?

    12. Evidently you have reading comprehension problems, because that point was directly addressed before: speech is protected only when it does not harm or threaten others — crossing that line it can be a crime — as, on balance, their rights not to be harmed or threatened are also protected.*

      You may, for instance, have heard the saying about there being no freedom to shout “fire” [when there is no fire] in a crowded theater, creating a potentially deadly panic. Now that we have mechanical fire alarms, it’s an offense to set one off falsely.

      * Otherwise the speaker’s “freedom of speech” would be the only right, and all other persons would be deprived of all other rights — which would create something like a tyranny, with “free speakers” privileged to abuse others through fraud, libel, threats, incitement to lynching, et al, but no-one allowed to seek legal recourse through the courts. (Nowadays the Net’s anonymity too often has the same result.)

      But as a troll, that’s what you’d like.

    13. Who said anything about anything being 'protected' or not 'protected', dear Raven? Are you completely unable to concentrate?

    14. Protected or not under the First Amendment as the “freedom of speech” you keep invoking — did you lose track again?

      See: “Which types of speech are not protected by the First Amendment?”

      Incitement to imminent lawless action, true threats, and defamation (including libel and slander) are among the answers given there.

    15. Do you know what the word 'concept' means? Since you like quotes so much, why don't you check Voltaire.

  11. Bob, fyi, the average age of a Nazi Waffen SS recruit was exactly 20 years of age.

    1. Were they recruited for their intelligence?

  12. I want to let the world know about Doctor abel the Great spell caster that brought back my husband to me when i thought all hope was lost. Doctor abel used his powerful spell to put a smile on my face by bringing back my man with his spell, at first i thought i was dreaming when my husband came back to me on his knees begging me to forgive him and accept him back and even since then he loves me more than i ever expected so i made a vow to my self the i will let the World know about Doctor abel because he is a God on earth. Do you have problems in your relationship ? have your partner broke up with you and you still love and want him back ? Do you have problem with your finance ? or do you need help of any kind then contact Doctor abel today for i give you 100% guarantee that he will help you just as he helped me. Doctor abel email is: or whatsApp him +2347059073543

  13. Are you interested to purchase the fabrics and crafts? Then go to the famous store Joann Fabrics and Crafts and purchase your favorite products and decorate your house in your way.

    Joann’s Customer Satisfaction Survey online