The New York Times continues its recent war on the First Amendment with an op-ed defending Antifa and violent protests. The title is, "Waiting for a Perfect Protest?"
That's already a leftist strawman. Its target is liberals who don't think that punching people in the face is what a protest should be. The op-ed leans heavily on invoking Martin Luther King. Because if there was anything he was known for, it was putting on a mask and punching people in the face.
"Well-intended moderates have used unrealistic standards to judge anti-racism activism. But this is nothing new — just ask Martin Luther King Jr."
Unrealistic standards like... non-violence.
Media outlets and commentators representing a range of political persuasions have called attention to recent outbreaks of violence in Berkeley, Calif., Boston and other locations where anti-racist and anti-fascist demonstrators have gathered. Intentionally or not, they have often promoted a false equivalency between groups that advocate white supremacy and those that seek to eliminate it.
Even mainstream media outlets that typically fact-check the president seem to have subtly bought into Mr. Trump’s “both sides” narrative regarding right- and left-wing extremism.
It's the controversial idea that both Communists and Nazis are bad. Or that Black Supremacism and White Supremacism are both bad. Or that racism is bad. Period.
The op-ed is heavy on references to the civil rights movement, but painfully short on just what sort of "violent" and "direct action" tactics it's defending. Because it's making an argument too scary for it to be able to quite utter out loud even in the pages of the New York Times.
For now.