Intro
The initial campaign and subsequent election of Donald Trump came hand-in-hand with a reinvigoration and emboldening of white supremacy and nationalism within the US. This came to a notable height in August 2017 within the relatively small city of Charlottesville, VA when a self-ascribed neo-Nazi drove his car through a crowd, striking and killing Heather Heyer. After an unsurprisingly large spike in tension between groups, “punch a Nazi” became a particularly popular piece of rhetoric among the left.
Punching Nazis
Vindictiveness and vengeance are emotions I’ve had a particularly easy time falling into. I grew up watching films like The Boondock Saints and idolizing superheroes like Batman. However, I only found myself viscerally enjoying the notion of punching a Nazi for a few moments before snapping back to reality. It may be satisfying to picture yourself doing such a thing, enacting your own personal brand of justice, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s wrong – and no, I don’t mean morally or ethically wrong.
You could spend a good amount of time debating the ethics of punching a self-avowed Nazi, but it would be a waste of breath and time. The main goal of any response to extremists and their rhetoric should be to stop it. Stop it from inspiring great acts of violence against other groups. Stop it from infecting easily impressionable minds. Stop it from gaining a foothold within the realms of legitimate political discourse. Stop it from tearing apart friends and families. And punching a Nazi? That just creates a hardened and more resolved extremist.
A Case Study
If the name Daryl Davis means nothing to you, then you should stop right here and go read this interview on his story. The short version of it is that he, an African-American, has spent the better part of his life deconverting Klansmen. In this 30 years of this pursuit, he’s successful disrobed over 200 KKK members. He is one of the greatest testaments to the power of compassion, understanding, and engaging those you disagree with in a good faith conversation.
Daryl Davis would not have achieved anywhere near these numbers if he instead chose a path of violence – raiding the houses of Klansmen under the cover of night, enacting due justice on a movement that has terrorized a marginalized group for over a century. Direct impact aside, there’s is an even greater benefit to the route he chose: those 200 ex-Klansmen now act as an intellectual bulwark against the poor arguments of white supremacists for those in their circle of influence.
Motivation
So now I ask this of those who have adopted the rhetoric of punching Nazis: what is your goal? If it’s to gain a sense of self-righteous justice and glory, then go about your day. The heroic archetype of fighting and triumphing over evil is exceptionally common for a reason. But if your goal is instead to stop Nazism in its tracks, to truly fight back against extremist ideologies, then I can’t possibly see how you rationalize that with a desire for violence.
If you’re looking to change the mind of the extremist, there is no greater power than humanization. Davis touches on this by asking: “how can you hate me when you don’t even know me?”
Strategy
Step one: educate yourself. Learn everything you can about the ideology that you so vehemently disagree with. If you sat down at the table with deeply entrenched Nazi who begins quoting studies indicating racial superiority, do you have the tools to adequately respond? There is no question as to whether or not white supremacy is flawed – but can you explain how? Pleas of morality and fairness will fall on deaf ears.
Step two: embrace Stoicism. Any discussion with an extremist will revolve around truly heinous and insidious claims and conclusions. Are you capable of hearing them and continuing forward in a discussion? Can you listen to a person completely dehumanize an entire sect of humanity? Be honest with yourself, as I don’t think most people are. Falling into anger and letting that spiral into a tirade of personal attacks is tantamount to admitting defeat. Worse yet, impressionable ears who happen to be listening will find your display child-like (rightfully so) and conclude that “You know, they actually made some good points and you had no answer for them.”
Step three: humanization. This step will be the hardest. You must remember that the vast majority of people you talk to, regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum, have nothing but the good of their nation at heart. Most people aren’t beyond reach, they are lost souls who can be made to see the light if someone is able and willing to show it to them. True evil does exist, and there is no doubt in mind that sociopaths and unabashedly malicious people inhabit the ranks of extremists. But do not let that jade you.
Final Thoughts
The far left has lost the ability to have reasoned politcal debates. Instead of engaging those they don’t agree with in good faith arguments, they’ve begun falling back to name-calling, labeling those that disagree with them as Nazis and fascists. While I’m a staunch believer in personal responsibility, and every extremist should be made to bear the burden of their terror, one has to wonder how much blame could be laid at the feet of those who have turned disenfranchisement into a political weapon.
So the question remains: who are you? A corrupt and misguided zealot for justice, hungry for nothing more than violence towards those you disagree with? Or an agent for positive change?
If you’re interested in hearing more on this topic, a recent episode of Sam Harris’ podcast (Waking Up) was an interview with Christian Picciolini. Christian is a reformed neo-Nazi, an ex-member of the first skinhead gang within America. He has now devoted his life towards adopting compassion as a weapon to bring back those who have fallen into the ranks of extremism. He’s also written a fairly recent book titled White American Youth: My Descent into America’s Most Violent Hate Movement – and How I Got Out.