Don’t Bash the Fash; objections to punching Nazis

Alice More: Arrest him!
Sir Thomas More: Why, what has he done?
Margaret More: He’s bad!
Sir Thomas More: There is no law against that.
Will Roper: There is! God’s law!
Sir Thomas More: Then God can arrest him.
Alice: While you talk, he’s gone!
Sir Thomas More: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law!
Will Roper: So now you’d give the Devil benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Will Roper: I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you — where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast — man’s laws, not God’s — and if you cut them down — and you’re just the man to do it — d’you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake.
Robert O. Bolt, A Man for All Seasons, 1960

I have to admit, when I saw Richard Spencer get punched while explaining his Pepe the Frog badge to a reporter, I smirked; inside me there is a kid who giggles at that sort of thing. I’m pretty sure part of me never stopped laughing at the Road Runner’s antics.

Then I scrolled further on my Twitter feed, and was disturbed by the sheer amount of glee people were displaying. Yes, it’s Richard Spencer, a carbuncle on the backside of humanity, and yes, he’s got what Reddit calls a punchable face, but come on guys; aren’t we just a little disturbed at that act of political violence in the full glare of the cameras?

Apparently not; since then I’ve seen a lot of tweets and blog posts and opinion pieces that are condoning, celebrating, or even encouraging such acts. Disturbing, to put it mildly.

Before we begin:

  • No, I’m not a Nazi, or a fascist;
  • No, I’m not a sympathiser with either;
  • Yes, I think they have the right to free speech;
  • Yes, this includes speech I find repugnant and awful;
  • Yes, I know there are other issues in the world, but I’m not talking about them right now;
  • Yes, I am aware of those cases where violent protest did have a fortuitous outcome – such as the Stonewall Riots – that will be dealt with below;
  • Yes, I know that sometimes “say shit, get hit” applies – that doesn’t mean we should be celebrating or encouraging it;
  • No, this isn’t a complete list of my objections, but it is pretty thorough; and
  • As always, all the sources used here are listed at the very bottom under the heading “Sources”, including hyperlinks where available.


This is a brief summation of what’s been going on in case you’ve been asleep:

  • During the inauguration day protests in D.C., Richard Spencer, the guy who coined the term “alt-right”, and is one of their leading luminaries, got punched in the head while giving an interview to the ABC, twice (ABC News 2017);
  • A lot of people, particularly on the Left, have declared this to be a Good Thing as Spencer is (depending on who you ask) a fascist, a Nazi, a white supremacist, etc. (Guardian Staff 2017);
  • Many of the same have contended that this is how we stopped the Nazis and fascists back in the 1940s (e.g., Feinberg 2017), and that we kept doing this to keep fending them off (Steel 2017) and
  • A lot of people have gone on to say that punching (and inflicting other forms of violence on) Nazis and fascists is a Good Thing and that opposing this is a Bad Thing done by Bad People (see Abouesh 2017; Cross 2017; Zhang 2017; Bloody♥Honey 2017, and numerous tweets on the subject).

Note that Spencer himself is not a member of the American Nazi Party and does not claim to be one – you can hear, right at the start of the ABC footage, Spencer saying that “Neo-Nazis don’t love me; they kind of hate me actually” (ABC News 2017).

Since then:

  • We have seen people who aren’t Nazis or fascists by any stretch of the imagination, such as Laurie Penny and Professor Richard Dawkins, be accused of being collaborators or sympathisers or fascists (Monroe 2017; @wokieleaks1 2017) – I even got to watch Cathy Young be accused of being a Nazi sympathiser on Twitter (Ms Young is Jewish, for the record);
  • We have also seen political violence, one of the most visible examples being the riot on the University of California Berkeley Campus against Milo Yiannopoulos – in which at least two people were pepper-sprayed by rioters and someone else beaten with metal rods (janey 2017; Ramaiyer 2017; Cheong 2017); and
  • There are people, again on the Left, who are welcoming and celebrating this political violence, including UC-Berkeley students – there is a collection of articles welcoming the disturbance (Senju 2017; refer also from there to Lawrence 2017; Meagley 2017; Hardman 2017; Prieto 2017; Dang 2017).


Stopping Them Then

Let me deal with the thing that first got my nose out of joint; the claim that “punching Nazis” is how we stopped them. If you honestly think this, it tells me two things: first, that you never actually studied that part of history beyond reading a Captain America comic; second, you can’t tell the difference between an interstate war and criminal assault (or are choosing to ignore it).

If you had studied the lead-up to the Second World War, and the War itself, you would know that street violence – punching “Nazis” in the side of the head, setting on people with pepper spray, rioting, and so on – did not stop them. In the second episode of The Road to War, Charles Wheeler notes that “[i]n Germany in the early 1930’s there was civil war on the streets; Nazis fought Communists in all the big towns” – you can see in the context of the documentary that this street violence contributed towards the breakdown of the democratic order (“Germany” 1989).

We find support for this in one of the most comprehensive accounts of the whole affair; William Shirer’s Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.  Shirer notes that in the summer of 1932 the Nazis wanted people to engage in street violence against them, and the Communists gave them exactly what they wanted:

“The storm troopers swarmed the streets seeking battle and blood and their challenge was often met, especially by the Communists. In Prussia alone between June 1 and 20 there were 461 pitched battles in the streets which cost eighty-two lives and seriously wounded four hundred men. In July, thirty-eight Nazis and thirty Communists were listed among the eighty-six persons killed in riots. On Sunday, July 10, eighteen persons were done to death in the streets, and on the following Sunday, when the Nazis, under police escort, staged a march through Altona, a working-class suburb of Hamburg, nineteen persons were shot dead and 285 wounded.

[Chancellor] Papen responded by doing two things. He banned all political parades for the fortnight prior to the July 31 elections. And he took a step which was aimed not only at placating the Nazis but at destroying one of the few remaining pillars of the democratic Republic. On July 20 he deposed the Prussian government and appointed himself Reich Commissioner for Prussia. This was a daring move toward the kind of authoritarian government he was seeking for the whole of Germany. Papen’s excuse was that the Altona riots had shown the Prussian government could not maintain law and order. He also charged, on “evidence” hastily produced by [Reich Minister of Defence] Schleicher, that the Prussian authorities were in cahoots with the Communists. When the Socialist ministers refused to be deposed except by force, Papen obligingly supplied it.” (Shirer 1960)

In short; a massive outbreak of street violence between Communists and Nazis gave the pre-Nazi government an excuse to hammer away at the already-weakened foundations of the Wiemar Republic by bringing the state of Prussia – including its formidable police force –  under direct control of the central government. The unintended consequence was that the ground was more than fertile for Hitler’s enduring state of emergency, declared after the Reichstag Fire. The Communists met the Nazis with street violence intending to stop them; instead, the casualties were a democratic government, the rule of law, and civil liberties:

“Thus by deposing the constitutional Prussian government Papen had driven another nail into the coffin of the Weimar Republic. It had taken, as he boasted, only a squad of soldiers to do it.” (Shirer 1960)

The Communists of Germany in the late 1920s and early 1930s used a great deal of street violence to try to stop the Nazis, and the only thing they accomplished with it was to give Chancellor Papen a golden opportunity to do away with the pesky checks on the unbridled use of his power. He used the civil disorder they helped create when they fought the Nazis on the streets to lay the foundations of an incredibly authoritarian state. When Hitler took the office, he made good use of the path Papen had prepared for him; Hermann Goering was put in control of the police of Prussia – a position he could only take because of what Papen had done – and abused the position like there was no tomorrow to help put the dictatorship in place (“Germany” 1989; Shirer 1960). The Communists who had fought the Nazis got a little red triangle on their concentration camp uniforms for their troubles, when they weren’t just shot.

The claim that street violence stopped the Nazis is not true. It is not true at all. It is the opposite of true.

Stopping Them Now

It failed then and it will fail to stop authoritarians and fascists and, yes, Nazis now. There is an increasing body of research that shows that non-violent protest movements have a far greater success rate than violent movements – the latter fail more often than not (Chenoweth and Stephan 2011; Fisher 2013). Remember that when Nixon was warned about violence on campus, his response was “Good!” – it is a fact that the violent protests are playing directly into the hands of President Trump, giving him the pretext to crack down on dissent (Soave 2017a).

I have, at this point, nothing but bad news; first, the civil disorder and street violence are actively driving up Trump’s support and weakening those who oppose him (M. Feinberg, Willer, and Kovacheff 2017). Heed the warning from Cathy Young:

“Worse, violence may well lead to an escalation of violence. What happens when more Trump fans start bringing guns? (At another recent Yiannopoulos appearance, one of his fans non-fatally shot a protester and claimed self-defense; the Berkeley fiasco will boost such claims.) And if progressives believe the Trump White House wants to squash civil liberties, why provide the perfect pretext?” (Young 2017)

Recall; Nixon already set the precedent.

In 2009 Ryan Holiday helped Tucker Max launch a massive publicity campaign. In Holiday’s own words, this was “was several months of chaos and controversy that ultimately drove Tucker’s book to #1 on the New York Times Bestseller list, sold out a multi-college bus tour and ultimately sold millions of dollars worth of tickets, dvds and books.” (Holiday 2017); and Holiday himself has noted that this makes the bad news above worse. Events such as the assault on Spencer, or the riot against Yiannopoulos, are actively helping them in particular:

“When protesters try to revoke someone’s right to speak or when someone like Richard Spencer is physically assaulted on camera, you’re not intimidating anyone—you’re emboldening them. You’re giving them a wonderful recruiting tool. They’re laughing all the way to the bank.


…As much as you might dislike what he’s saying—and I personally dislike it a lot—I promise, you are not setting a good precedent by preventing him from saying it. Worse, you’re giving him more people to say it to when the ensuing media coverage explodes.” (Holiday 2017)

The Holiday article is linked below; and vital to read in full. He points out, in excruciating detail from the position of someone who would know – he pioneered playing to the internet outrage machine for free publicity – exactly how this whole affair is backfiring horribly:

“If a CNN story reaches 100,000 people, that’s 90,000 people all patting themselves on the back for how smart and decent they are. They’re just missing the fact that the 10,000 new people that just heard about Milo for the first time. The same goes for when you angrily share on Facebook some godawful thing one of these people has said. The vast majority of your friends rush to agree, but your younger cousin has a dark switch in his brain go on for the first time.” (Holiday 2017)

Not just free publicity; but free publicity with the allure of the forbidden; people demanding  Yiannopoulos be banned from campus or that Simon & Schuster drop his book deal over how offensive he is (and it is likely to be) is only drawing yet more attention to him and to it. This is profiting him directly; the rioters drove him from UC-Berkeley, and drove his yet-to-be-published book up to #1 on Amazon (Young 2017).

At this point, people who engage in political street violence, and those who encourage or excuse it, are creating an excuse for a President already inclined towards authoritarian crackdowns on civil rights (think not just of President Nixon, but also Chancellor Papen), free publicity for their opponents, and monetary gain for those same opponents. A metaphor about bullets and feet is coming to mind.

Street violence failed to stop fascists and Nazis before, and it is failing now.

But Stonewall…

There are those who may respond by pointing out (for example) the success of the Stonewall Riots as an example of violent protest that had a positive outcome.

Yes, the Stonewall Riots were the violent birth of the modern gay rights movement. Yes, the endpoint of this has been a massive expansion of civil liberties and the realisation of civil rights for millions. But the Stonewall Riots (and like incidents) aren’t relevant to this discussion. Stonewall was the reaction of an already-oppressed community to ongoing repression, with a few specific proximate factors, and it did not result in attacks on heterosexuals as a group, nor did it lead to people calling for others to be sucker-punched for their political views (Carter 2010). The two are completely different, and any comparison is simply not appropriate.

Furthermore, history teaches that Stonewall is an exception, not the rule; it is the nonviolent resistance campaigns that engage broad swathes of the community from all walks of life tend to succeed far more often than violent ones. Of course there are the old stand-by examples of Dr Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Ghandi, but they are far from alone. The repressive regimes of the Shah of Iran, President Marcos of the Philippines, and President Ben Ali of Tunisia, incidences where fascism had arguably won, were all brought down by non-violent resistance:

“The most striking finding is that between 1900 and 2006, nonviolent resistance campaigns were nearly twice as likely to achieve full or partial success as their violent counterparts.” (Chenoweth and Stephan 2011)

And then there’s Daryl Davis, a black musician who has befriended members of the Ku Klux Klan. Davis, through simple conversation and persuasion, convinced the then-Imperial Wizard (the national leader) of the KKK, Roger Kelly, to leave the organisation. Kelly handed his hood and robe – the vestments of the Imperial Wizard of the KKK – over to Davis. A dozen others, including leaders of the KKK in Maryland, did the same; and the Klan in Maryland is now extinct (Friedersdorf 2015).

“Not everyone has the personality or reasoning skills to pull off the Daryl Davis approach to persuasion. But to his critics, I find the question, “How many people have you persuaded to leave the Ku Klux Klan?” a powerful retort.” (Friedersdorf 2017)

For those of you who think violence is the answer, I ask you; how many robes and hoods have you collected from Klansmen who have left the KKK thanks to you? The tally of Daryl Davis stands at over a dozen – all thanks to talking, no violence.

As demonstrated above, street violence failed before, it is failing now, nonviolent resistance is far more likely to succeed, and yet by encouraging it people are playing into the miniature orange hands of an authoritarian President.

Target Error

And yet, it still gets worse. Those who condone it must be assuming that the street violence is being righteously directed against the (alleged) correct targets – Nazis and fascists.

It’s not.

The violence at UC-Berkeley – the same violence that students now are claiming ensured their safety (Prieto 2017) – has already hit an innocent:

“…I saw someone wearing all black walk up to a student wearing a suit and say, “You look like a Nazi.” The student was confused, but before he could reply, the black-clad person pepper-sprayed him and hit him on the back with a rod.

I ran after the student who was attacked to get his name and more information. He told me that he is a Syrian Muslim. Before I could find out more, he fled, fearing another attack.” (Ramaiyer 2017)

This is where condoning and encouraging street violence against Nazis and fascists has led us; to a Syrian Muslim being hit with a rod and pepper-sprayed, fleeing for his life from the very people who claim to be defending him, because he looked “like a Nazi”.

I don’t know if this is the same man who was later filmed unmoving on the ground while he was beaten with metal poles by the rioters (Cheong 2017); I don’t think so, which means we have at least two people to suffer this aggravated assault.

When you take this into account along with, for example, accusations of “collaborating” levelled against Laurie Penny (her crime was simply talking to Yiannopoulos’s supporters) (Monroe 2017), a worrying pattern emerges, summed up by Ed Krayweski here:

“First they came for the Nazis and, well, fuck them. Then they started expanding the definition of Nazi…” (Krayewski 2017)

This is not new. It was first catalogued by George Orwell in March of 1944; in his “As I Please” column in Tribune, he noted that the all manner of people were being accused of being fascist sympathisers, having fascist tendencies, or being outright fascists. He notes that the term and its derivatives were being thrown at Catholics, Communists, Socialists, Conservatives, even at people who supported the War – in print. In every day conversation the list was far greater (Orwell 1944).

An insidious broadening of the term “fascist” (and its analogues) is nearly three-quarters of a century old. Now we are seeing the term “Nazi” also thrown around with careless abandon – and people being attacked simply for looking “like” one.

Combine this with the people who are advocating that it is right and proper and good – in fact that there is an obligation – to assault Nazis and fascists. The problem is readily apparent:

“When everybody calls everybody else a fascist at the drop of a hat and violence against fascists is justified, how are you not inviting violence by all against all?” (Heier 2017)

Street violence failed before, is failing now, and is moving to claim the innocent; once unleashed, it will not be contained to actual Nazis and fascists.

And the Devil Turned on You

Do not forget for a moment that those who punch “Nazis” and “fascists”, are breaking the law; although I can find defences on the grounds of proportional self-defence, I can find no part of the criminal codes of Australia or America that says “but if the person you assault is a Nazi or a fascist then it’s totally OK.” And that’s assuming the person who gets attacked is actually a Nazi or a fascist, as opposed to, say, a Syrian Muslim bystander wearing a suit.

The historian Jung Chang has written a horrifying account of the Cultural Revolution. In this period, the law was cut down to crush “class enemies”; a group that ballooned over the period to encompass not just former landlords and capitalists, or people with Kuomintang connections, but high officials of the Communist Party itself (including the President of the People’s Republic Liu Shao-chi), catching along the way teachers, doctors, writers, artists, and millions of innocents. All driven by political violence – initially street violence – which escalated into vicious persecutions, beatings, rape, work camps, torture, and claimed the lives of untold thousands (Chang and Halliday 2012).

Chang recalls first-hand the terror and uncertainty her parents – devoted Communists who had faithfully served the People’s Republic – experienced at the hands of the Red Guards after they were labelled “class enemies”. She recounts seeing the Red Guards used to settle personal scores, of seeing people beaten simply because they earned the envy of a peer. She shares with us her terror and fear, the torture of her parents, and of childhood innocence destroyed. She notes how the very character of a nation was turned mean and hostile, and how hatred and fear permeated every aspect of life. She tells us of how this claimed the lives of so many around her – including her father – and most damningly of all, she reveals to us how universal the experience was, how few were spared (Chang 2011).

Chang’s accounts of this period depict a nightmare – a land and a time where righteous violence was done to the enemies of the people, and where the regime encouraged it, and used it to maintain itself.

Between them, Shirer and Chang show us where the path of widespread political violence ultimately leads; and when it’s backed by the awesome power of the state, “nightmare” becomes an inadequate term.

Consider, then, an incident over at New York University, Gavin McInnes (a shock jock with “offensive opinions and … a sizable list of highly objectionable past statements”) was forced to end a talk early when protestors gathered – and where we have the charming footage of a person identifying herself as a professor calling on the police to attack “the Nazi”. (Soave 2017b; Hicks 2017). As far as I know, this is the first time since Spencer was punched at Trump’s inauguration that the police have been called upon to attack “Nazis” and “fascists”.

One last thing; if you want to castigate me as a sympathiser or a collaborator, you would do well to remember that the American Civil Liberties Union fought a court case to allow the Nazi Party of America to hold a rally (ACLU Staff n.d.). Yes, this is the same ACLU that you have to thank for suing to halt Trump’s “Muslim Ban” order (Calfas 2017). If I am a sympathiser or collaborator, so are they. So is Cathy Young. And so is Keshia Thomas – the black woman who, at age 18, threw herself bodily between an angry mob and a white supremacist: “nobody deserves to be hurt, especially not for an idea.” (Wynne 2013).

For the record, Thomas still holds that peace is better, and knows that her actions accomplished far more than a dose of pepper-spray would have:

“Protecting the man, Albert McKeel Jr., set into motion a relationship with his son, who later thanked Thomas for her bravery after encountering her in a coffee shop.

Thomas, who now resides in Houston, learned McKeel Jr. died a couple of months ago when McKeel’s son called to inform her, putting his 12-year-old sister on the line to tell her she might not be alive if it hadn’t been for Thomas’ actions that day.

“When I heard that, I thought this was the future and the past of what peace has created,” Thomas said. “The real accomplishment of all this to me is to know that his son and daughter don’t share the same views. History didn’t repeat itself. That’s what gives me hope that the world can get better from generation to generation.”” (Slagter 2016)

And yet, at least one person, with a following of over forty thousand people on Twitter, holds that Thomas, the ACLU, and yours truly should all be punched for what we have done:

“We are done discussing if Richard Spencer should get punched. We already decided people who oppose punching him should get punched.” (Alexander 2017)

With this kind of thing being thrown around, what could possibly go wrong?


Political violence, street violence, done in an attempt to halt fascism, inflicted on “fascists” and “Nazis”, and cheered on by a surprising number of people, often on the so-called progressive Left, who declare it morally right; that is how we are ringing in 2017.

These people are fools, and they are wrong. It will not accomplish what they want it to; on the contrary, it is helping the people they claim to be fighting. It did not stop the Nazis in the 1930s, and today it will not stop Spencer. It can’t even stop Yiannopoulos. And it is playing right into Trump’s hands.

I am far from the first to see all this; the first post I read pointing out the issues here was posted to the PopeHat site on January 21 2017 (White 2017) (for the record, I agree with all of White’s points in that post).

Yes, I object to Nazis and fascists being punched on the street, unless self-defence is in play. Spencer is a bad man with repulsive views and a repugnant philosophy – there’s no law against that. There is a law against sucker-punching him in the side of the head when he’s just standing there chatting to a reporter. And yet we have people calling for the police to beat those who are “bad” men in their eyes.

You see, I have my history degree. I’ve seen where we’re headed if we keep condoning and encouraging political street violence – especially in breach of the law. I know it ultimately only helps fascists and authoritarians. I know the losers are will be the people who currently think they’re being protected by it. I know that people like Daryl Davis have shown us a better way – a more successful way (if you cannot be guided by principle, be guided by pragmatism).

And I know what know what happens when the law is treated with such flagrant disregard and civil society comes apart; the people who are condoning political street violence now will not stand in the winds that will blow then.

“How telling that those who are advocating violence wouldn’t last a single round in an #MMA cage.”
Peter Boghossian, 2017

No, I don’t condone punching Nazis or fascists; they have the protection of the law – both in terms of their speech and in terms of not being assaulted – and they deserve to keep it. The law stands and protects them, just as it protects me.

I will give the Devil benefit of the law – for my own safety’s sake.


ABC News. 2017. “Far-Right Activist Punched during ABC Interview in Washington.” Text. ABC News. January 21.

Abouesh, Ali. 2017. “Is It Okay to Punch a Nazi?” The Daily Nexus. January 28.

ACLU Staff. n.d. “ACLU History: Taking a Stand for Free Speech in Skokie.” American Civil Liberties Union.

Alexander, Lexi. 2017. “We Are Done Discussing If Richard Spencer Should Get Punched. We Already Decided People Who Oppose Punching Him Should Get Punched.” Microblog. @Lexialex. February 10.

Bloody♥Honey. 2017. “Be The Hands You Wish a Bigot To Catch In The World.” Medium. January 23.

Boghossian, Peter. 2017. “How Telling That Those Who Are Advocating Violence Wouldn’t Last a Single Round in an #MMA Cage.” Microblog. @peterboghossian. January 7.

Calfas, Jennifer. 2017. “ACLU gets $24M in donations after suing over Trump order.” Text. TheHill. January 30.

Carter, David. 2010. Stonewall; the Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution. Kindle ed. United States of America: St. Martin’s Press.

Chang, Jung. 2011. Wild Swans; Three Daughters of China. 2003 Kindle ed. United Kingdom: Harper Collins Inc.

Chang, Jung, and Jon Halliday. 2012. Mao; the Unknown Story. Kindle ed. United Kingdom: Random House.

Chenoweth, Erica, and Maria Stephan. 2011. Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict (Columbia Studies in Terrorism and Irregular Warfare). Kindle Edition. United States of America: Columbia University Press.

Cheong, Ian Miles. 2017. “This Is Not a Protest. This Is a Riot. Here Are a Few of Those Peaceful ‘anti-Fascists’ beating an Unconscious Person with Metal” Microblog. @stillgray. February 2.

Cross, Katherine. 2017. “Why Punching Nazis Is Not Only Ethical, But Imperative.” The Establishment. January 31.

Dang, Nisa. 2017. “Check Your Privilege When Speaking of Protests.” The Daily Californian. February 7.

Feinberg, Ashley. 2017. “If You’ll Recall, It Was Not Punches That Brought down the Nazis in WWII but Respectful Discourse and Scathing Witticisms.” Microblog. @ashleyfeinberg. January 9.

Feinberg, Matthew, Robb Willer, and Chloe Kovacheff. 2017. “Extreme Protest Tactics Reduce Popular Support for Social Movements.” SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2911177. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.

Fisher, Max. 2013. “Peaceful Protest Is Much More Effective than Violence for Toppling Dictators.” Washington Post, November 5.

Friedersdorf, Conor. 2015. “The Audacity of Talking About Race With the Ku Klux Klan.” The Atlantic, March 27.

———. 2017. “‘Every Racist I Know Voted for Donald Trump.’” The Atlantic, February 13.

“Germany.” 1989. The Road to War. United Kingdom: BBC.

Guardian Staff. 2017. “Is Punching Richard Spencer Inciting Violence or ‘American as Apple Pie’?” The Guardian, January 24, sec. World news.

Hardman, Josh. 2017. “Plurality of Tactics Contributed to Cancellation of Milo Yiannopoulos Event.” The Daily Californian. February 7.

Heier, Liam. 2017. “No, It’s Not OK to Punch Fascists – Even If They Deserve the Term.” Stuff. February 7.–even-if-they-deserve-the-term.

Hicks, William. 2017. “NYU Professor Has Meltdown, Asks Cops to Beat Up Gavin McInnes.” Heat Street. February 3.

Holiday, Ryan. 2017. “I Helped Create the Milo Trolling Playbook. You Should Stop Playing Right Into It.” Observer. February 7.

janey. 2017. “My Friend Was Giving an Interview When Some Coward Peppersprayed Her” Microblog. @janeygak. February 7.

Krayewski, Ed. 2017. “First They Came for the Nazis And, Well, Fuck Them. Then They Started Expanding the Definition of Nazi…” Microblog. @edkrayewski. February 3.

Lawrence, Neil. 2017. “Black Bloc Did What Campus Should Have.” The Daily Californian. February 7.

Meagley, Desmond. 2017. “Condemning Protesters Same as Condoning Hate Speech.” The Daily Californian. February 7.

Monroe, Nick. 2017. “Journalist Laurie Penny Accused of Being a Nazi Sympathizer and Collaborator for Writing a Story about” Microblog. @nickmon1112. February 3.

Orwell, George. 1944. “What Is Fascism?” Tribune, March 24.

Prieto, Juan. 2017. “Violence Helped Ensure Safety of Students.” The Daily Californian. February 7.

Ramaiyer, Malini. 2017. “How Violence Undermined the Berkeley Protest.” The New York Times, February 2.

Senju, Haruka. 2017. “Violence as Self-Defense.” The Daily Californian. February 7.

Shirer, William L. 1960. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. United Kingdom: Pan Books.

Slagter, Martin. 2016. “Former Ann Arbor Resident Reflects on Saving Man from Beating at KKK Rally.” June 24.

Soave, Robby. 2017a. “Milo Yiannopoulos Feeds on Your Violent Protests. So Does Donald Trump.” The Daily Beast. February 3.

———. 2017b. “Prof Screams at the NYPD Because They Didn’t Beat Up ‘Nazi’ Gavin McInnes.” February 3.

Steel, Scott. 2017. “The Extreme Right Didn’t Stop Existing in the West after WW2. They Cowered in the Dark for a Reason, and They’re Best Kept There.” Microblog. @Pollytics. January 4.

White, Ken. 2017. “On Punching Nazis.” Popehat. January 21.

@wokieleaks1. 2017. “Updated List of Nazis Who Need Punching: 1. Richard Spencer.  2. Every Human Who Disagrees with Me 3. Richard” Microblog. @wokieleaks1. February 6.

Wynne, Catherine. 2013. “The Teenager Who Saved a Man with an SS Tattoo.” BBC News, October 29, sec. Magazine.

Young, Cathy. 2017. “Protesters Wrong to Target Speech.” Newsday. February 7.

Zhang, Jay. 2017. “On The Propriety Of Punching Nazis, An FAQ.” Thoughts on the Dead. January 21.