I feel like there's something people aren't really talking about, and I'm not really sure how to articulate it properly? It's easy to just go "well, this is racism," but I also think there's a particular element that people aren't really talking about?
So, the base assumption about the apologist types is that they're okay with supporting bigotry. It's why people are like "they're really just racists," or whatever, but I think that's inaccurate.
I live in Kansas. No shortage of homophobia here. But the Westboro Baptist Church wasn't really tolerated, despite having views that are, to some degree, shared by other people. All things being equal, you'd expect that not to be the case. You'd expect them to have loads of apologists. But they didn't.
And I think that's because there's... a different factor at play here, that isn't examined for a whole host of reasons?
I grew up in a conservative community. Most of the communities I have lived in over the years lean conservative. Many of them are heavily populated by people with ancestry in England or Scandinavia. And there's a degree of "keep to yourself-ism" that goes on in these communities and families (I'm not saying they reflect those locations as they are now; a lot of this is descended from people who left those countries in the 1800s). I can see it reflected every Thanksgiving when the ~100+ members of my family get together to celebrate.
But there's this big... sense of not rocking the boat? Not disrupting things As They Are? And it kind of overrides a lot of rational response to things. Family not talking about That One Thing That Happened, refusing to seek psychiatric help and just trying to tough it out instead, stuff like that.
In these communities, there are just certain things you just don't do, things that disrupt life, even when there's seedy shit going on underneath it all. Hell, something weird happened in my house before we bought it, and my parents refuse to find out what it was because they're worried that might change things somehow. There are certain topics that get people to change the subject fast. There's a big thread of "that has nothing to do with us," of minding one's own business (and then, of course, lots of gossip about it at potluck on Sundays). Stuff like that.
So when you have people smashing windows or confronting police, or challenging the status quo in some way, or blocking roads, there's a push back. There's a desire to pretend nothing bad is happening.
I think it's something you see reflected somewhat in shows like Twin Peaks, which is all about a seemingly idyllic town actually having some seedy underbelly. Sometimes, like with Hot Fuzz, it's played for laughs. It's an exaggerated take on this whole "let's pretend nothing bad happened, and anyone who rocks the boat is a bad person" psychology.
I think it's about
tangibility. When someone does something concrete, like breaking windows, that's a tangible, negative effect. It's perceived as being a lot more impactful than, say, racists doing their dog whistle shit.
Obviously that's not true. The racists are doing something far worse than breaking windows. Disrupting traffic is tangible. It's perceived as disrespectful/rude/rocking the boat. Saying the fourteen words, to that same kind of uncritical mind, is just someone having an opinion. It's not seen as disruptive, even though it leads to things which are far, far worse.
If it was as simple as racism, we'd see people like the Westboro Church members have the same kind of defense. We don't. So I don't think we can chalk it up to being
exclusively based in racism. What we see, time and time again, is that a lot of white communities really just don't like people rockin the boat.
I'm not trying to say "you're all wrong, I'm right," just that I think this is a factor people don't consider in these discussions, and even if we somehow managed to get everyone agreeing, 100%, that racism is wrong, people would still respond negatively towards the tactics employed because it violates cultural norms.
#1
A bunch of ultra right is parading around, chanting preposterous shit, but not formally breaking any law. (that being legal is a US thing, you can't do that in most western countries)
It is legal, but it is shit, it isn't right.
#2
They are countered with violence by ordinary citizens. That is not legal in US, Police (and sometimes Army) has exclusive rights on legal violence. (it sounds cynical, I know, but that's the way it is)
It is not right, it is illegal.
#3
BLM shuts down a freeway, which is in conflict with laws.
It is not right. it is illegal.
What you'll find is a lot of people saying "everyone's entitled to their opinion/i wouldn't complain about BLM if they didn't get into fights all the time." There's a perception that violence and destruction is the bad thing. Therefore, nazis marching around saying that other people should die is seen as "it's reprehensible but it's okay," while antifa showing up and punching people in the face or anarchists smashing cars in portland or what have you is "they're awful people, causing so much destruction."
I personally don't have any kind of statistics about meetings from any of these groups, so I don't know if nazis are inherently more or less violent than BLM. It'd be interesting data to see, but my gut instinct is that BLM is nowhere near as violent, and the media's just a bunch of assholes, distorting truth for clicks.
The actual
effect of what the nazis want is worse, but there's a deeply-rooted belief that people can believe whatever they want, and interfering with expression is what's the moral wrong. So violently interfering with someone's expression or ability to get to work on time is perceived as wrong, while protecting someone's thoughts, no matter how offensive (look at the left's defense of the cross covered in piss or the dude who got a government grant for doing horrifying artwork with knives and dicks), is seen as protecting liberty, and therefore an inherent moral good.
The biggest problem with American psychology, I think, is that it remembered the liberty part of the "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" clause, but forgot the other two. People have a right to life and the pursuit of happiness. People using their liberty to negatively impact other lives and the pursuit of happiness? That shit shouldn't fly. Fuck the nazis.