Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
About Tomi, That Lawyer, and Mob Justice
The other day at the playground I overheard a few fathers chatting about the legalization of sports gambling. One asked, “What kind of impact do you think this Supreme Court decision will have on our society?” The other replied, “Our society is already crumbling, what’s the difference?” Everyone around laughed and took a big sigh. Because he was right.
Having never been alive during another time in human history, perhaps it’s difficult to judge, but it certainly feels as though basic decency and kindness are a thing of the past. One striking event in the last day reminded us of this:
https://twitter.com/aVeryRichBish/status/998688070017929216
The post, just one of many about the incident, which saw patrons at a brunch spot yelling at and throwing drinks on Fox News commentator Tomi Lahren, has over 14,000 likes on Twitter of this writing. Not all liberals are cheering, but a lot certainly are. One notable defender of Lahren is comedian Kathy Griffin, who wrote,
I couldn’t disagree more with @TomiLahren, but I don’t think it’s cool to resort to physical actions to make your point.
The first amendment is a beautiful thing – use it. https://t.co/Yx8obh0aH0
— Kathy Griffin (@kathygriffin) May 23, 2018
Griffin herself has been the victim of a frightening social media mob after she posed for a graphic photo shoot holding a lifelike image of President Trump’s head. Justifiably, the outrage was swift, but she later said she feared for her physical safety in the aftermath.
The incident reminded me of another frightening mob, this time taking aim at a racist New York lawyer, Aaron Schlossberg, who was filmed ranting about Spanish-speaking waiters at a restaurant. The online furor followed him into the real world. With a Mariachi band being hired to play outside of his apartment, he was hounded by the press, and his law firm was pummeled with one-star reviews online.
Why is this news? Someone says something despicable every minute of the day; the difference here is that cameras turned Lahren’s brunch and Schlossberg’s rant into a news story for people to rally around. Of course, nobody actually rallied in defense of Schlossberg, barring one notable exception, but this story is one of the incidents where pushback is most necessary.
The Atlantic’s Julia Ioffe was the one public figure who was apprehensive about how Schlossberg’s statements were being treated:
Aaron Schlossberg doesn’t seem like a very nice person, but does that merit harassing him in the street, kicking him out of his work space, having people trying to revoke his legal license? Imagine this happening to someone you agree with and see how you feel.
— Julia Ioffe (@juliaioffe) May 18, 2018
Ioffe has been the target of several mobs herself, found herself in the middle of another for her Schlossberg comments. She later felt pressured to reiterate her comments weren’t a defense of Schlossberg, but instead a correction against online mob justice:
Hi Twitter world, I hear you. I even agree with you and always have on this: racism is indefensible. I’m sorry that I came across as defending Aaron Schlossberg. That wasn’t my intent, because I do not and never have defended his actions. I apologize.
— Julia Ioffe (@juliaioffe) May 18, 2018
But Ioffe was right the first time: we cannot rely on a mob, whose activities online translate into offline ruin for its victims, to mete out justice. We should stand up to the mob because it has a way of indiscriminately choosing its next victims, and sometimes even gets the names and identities of its targets wrong in the frenzy.
In the case of Lahren, the President weighed in on defending her from those who assaulted her at brunch, and who are now cheering her treatment:
Everybody is with Tomi Lahren, a truly outstanding and respected young woman! @foxandfriends
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 23, 2018
This isn’t true. Lahren is a divisive and unkind individual, disliked both for her public persona as well as her behavior in private (I’ve heard from several of her former colleagues at The Blaze). She doesn’t have to be a good person, and neither does Schlossberg, in order to be deserving of defense from the online and offline mob.
It’s disturbing that from the President on down, our society has determined an individual’s worthiness in order to decide if they are deserving of being physically assaulted and harassed for things they’ve merely said. You don’t have to like Lahren or Schlossberg to decry the mob or its destructive power.
Published in Journalism
Hello and welcome to the past 5 years (at least) where have you been?
You have an interesting definition of “victim.” Let’s rewrite that graph:
”Griffin found out that inciting mobs with violent images and language has consequences. If you’re not prepared to accept those consequences perhaps it would be best to cease creating the situations that encourage it.”
I know nothing of Lahren. I know nothing of her TV work. I have no idea whether she has, like Griffin, encouraged political violence on others and then cowardly hid behind the “it’s only art” defense. But please, don’t paint Griffin as a “victim.”
I know people who never go online, at least not social media. Their perspective on humanity is determined almost solely by real life interaction. They seem a lot happier. Not too much longer and I think I’ll rejoin them.
The online mob is the really ugly part of this. It’s not surprising that in a city of millions of people, at least one person would be a big enough jerk that they would assault a famous stranger. What is truly repulsive is the online mob that cheers for this behavior. It is also repulsive when the mob tries to run a company out of business because they have an employee who has been discovered to be a probable jerk. We no longer have literal lynch mobs, so I suppose something has to fill that void for some people.
I don’t like Tomi Lahren. She’s put zero effort into learning anything. She’s a prima donna.
The Minnesota Democrats are basically endorsing this assault so far. This is very, very bad. Idiots.
I wouldn’t say she incited it, but there had been 2-3 years of political violence that it fed into. I think that in a different time, it wouldn’t have been an eye roll joke. I am tepidly sympathetic to Miss Griffin.
I would prefer to avoid Twitter at all costs and be blissfully unaware of this stuff. But, to the point, much of what is being decried in the O/P is social media addicts performing for other social media addicts because of the existence of social media. As with most distasteful things in society, the way to go is to avoid participating in it and to avoid publicizing it.
And there it is. Performance. Indicating you believe all the good things so you can be cheered on by the rest of your cohort. And by “cheered on” I mean a thumb brushing the “like” button.
It would make me deliriously happy if the next several dozen comments in this thread were nothing more than repetitions of the above sentiment. Bravo.
Then exactly how would you describe the cause and effect of her actions? She wasn’t tricked into the photo shoot. She didn’t stop and say, “Wait, we’re crossing a line here, I won’t do it.” She did it willfully and enthusiastically. And then, after encouraging violence against the president hid behind her “victim” status. Sorry. No sale.
This! All of it, well stated. KG is a vile woman, devoid of humor and talent, and her act was nothing but a desperate attempt at attention. And I have to admit, it worked. But I nearly did a spit-take when our Trump bashing editor labeled Kathy Griffin a victim. And anyone who thinks it’s “uncivil” or “icky” to point out her Trump bashing, go back and look at the OP, she brought him into it, not me.
The post could have omitted his name entirely, funny how he continues to live rent-free in some minds.
FYI the person that threw water on Lahren was an intern for the Minnesota Democrat party.
I have to take issue with this because I think there’s an important distinction to be made. Now, as always, most people at most times are decent and kind. Furthermore, now, as always, most of us have the potential to be cruel and obscene under certain conditions. What I think has changed are the social consequences of being cruel and obscene.
This change is directly attributable to the “moral equivalent of war” mentality that has become increasingly common in our political disputes over the last few decades. In war, we tend to assume our goals are just and, by extension, immoral things (killing, mass destruction of property, and mass displacement of people) are justifiable in pursuit of those goals. Similarly, when we elevate political and cultural disputes to the moral equivalent of war, we’re saying that almost anything we do in pursuit of our goals is justifiable as a means to a moral end.
I believe this is an important distinction because if this trend is the result of a gradual shift in morality I doubt there’s anything we can do to stop it. If, however, it’s a consequence of viewing people with different opinions from us as our enemies, then it’s probably soluble, and it suggests how we might do it. I think it’s commendable that Kathy Griffin spoke out against an injustice, but tweets saying, “I agree with you, but you’ve gone too far.” don’t address the correct problem. The message we need to send is something like, “I disagree with almost everything Tomi Lahren stands for, but she’s a law-abiding citizen and not our enemy.”, or “Do battle with the ideas, not the person.”
Kathy Griffin’s photo was stupid and tasteless. I don’t believe it was an actual call to violence anymore than are the stupid and tasteless shooting targets that people have printed up with Barack Obama’s or Hillary Clinton’s faces in them. If Kathy Griffin had some shows cancelled because of the photo shoot, fine, but she reportedly received numerous death threats. Do you not think the death threats are way over the line?
I do not think that throwing water on people is a healthy way to disagree about politics. But it is also not comparable to weaponizing a mariachi band. To compare the two is problematic. Social disapproval (protesting, mocking, shaming) is a legitimate tool we should be using, but have abandoned to the Left.
I don’t know how many people are aware of the tarring & feathering, property destruction, and other uncivil acts that preceded the Revolutionary War. Loyalist officials had their homes literally torn down, by mobs. We might even say it was a form of terrorism. Today, such violent behavior seems to come mostly from the Left. It is a signal they have declared war on us (those of us who are not on the Left, those of us that are pro-American). As we learned a few years ago, on Wall Street, they consider themselves an occupying force in our country. They may be born here, and seem American, but they are a foreign occupation.
I don’t know what you mean by “moral equivalent of war,” nor do I agree that war justifies immorality. What seems clear, though, is that we are in a war with our fellow citizens, whether we like it or not.
Don’t go to people’s homes. Don’t yell at them in a restaurant. Don’t make intentional contact with them.
The problem is we don’t necessarily get a choice in the matter.
Do yell at them in a restaurant. That is a form of peaceful protest.
“But TheSockMonkey, would you want it to happen to you?”
Of course not. That’s the point.
I do not follow this.
So, should I assume you’ve done your duty and started killing the enemy? If not, why not?
Five years? The act of assaulting people with pie as retaliation for their political beliefs has been around since at least 1970. There were about a dozen such incidents in the 1970s. The practice fell out of favour in the 1980s, and then was revived in the 1990s. There have been many dozens of incidents since 1991.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pieing#Political_acts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_have_been_pied
And that’s just pie. There’s also the practice of throwing eggs as a form of political protest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egging#As_protest
And then, there’s also glitter-bombing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glitter_bombing
The idea that assaulting public figures in retaliation for their political beliefs is a new phenomenon kinda makes me shake my head.
One could argue that Lahren got off light with a mere glass of water.
If there’s no evidence that Kathy Griffin’s action was an “actual” call to violence, then you can not call death threats on the internet an “actual” intent to harm her. You can’t have it both ways. Either words and images are “actual” threats of violence or they’re not. She does NOT get a pass because of her D-list celebrity status.
Yup, and if this was a war that would matter. At a societal level, a couple hundred thousand ANTIFA types causing trouble is like the jerk at the bar trying to pick a fight. It’s possible to justify responding in kind, and that may even be the smart thing to do, but most of the time it’s not. If you think the best way to solve the problem is to fight back, you might be right. Sometimes a jerk needs his butt kicked. My comment was intended to point out what’s going on so we can make a conscious decision about the best course of action. If we think the problem is a gradual evolution of social norms toward rudeness, then we can’t make a good decision. We have to recognize the problem for what it is.
Rufus,
Just how many left-wing prima donnas are there with platforms larger than Lahren’s. When was the last time anybody assaulted one in a restaurant? The hatred expressed by the left for conservatives seems to be multiplied for female conservatives. That hatred usually includes explicit rape threats.
When was the last time a conservative physically attacked a Democratic Senator who was minding his own business on his own property? When was the last time a conservative gunned down Democratic Congressmen at a softball game?
Sorry but I see a pattern.
Regards,
Jim
My whole comment made it clear I’m against assaulting her and I don’t think she adds much to conservatism or libertarianism. What else do you want from me?
No, that would be a rash assumption, and a quite unreasonable interpretation of what I’ve said. That is not how the war is being fought by the anti-Americans, except in rare cases.
If the word war puts you off, then choose another term. The point is, this isn’t politics as usual (in case 2016 wasn’t enough of a clue). We’re not living in a time when our political debates are about one party against the other party, deciding how best to implement American ideals. The Left has rejected American ideals, in favor of speech codes, unlimited, centralized political power, a racial caste system, a disarmed populace, and so on. We’re not debating what kind of America to have. We’re debating about whether America should continue to exist.
I also see a pattern. Tomi Lahren’s gonna get a big bump in exposure and she gonna enjoy a corresponding spike in income opportunities. Thanks mindless lefties! You just gave Lahren’s flagging career precisely the boost of oxygen it needed.
Let’s be honest: How many of the Ricochetoisie had forgotten that Lahren even existed until she had a glass of water dumped on her at brunch? Raise your hands.
Ruf,
Not a thing pardner. I agree with you that Lahren is not exactly our greatest asset. However, the pattern of left-wing abusive behavior is very consistent. They appear to talk themselves into really bizarre states of mind. It is interesting that Kathy Griffen finally has had a healthy thing to say in defense of Lahren. Griffen reacted as if she was the one attacked when Melania simply expressed concern for her ten-year-old son. Griffen had worked herself into such a lefty obsession it never occurred to her that her crazy stunt could be seen as inciting violence and be terrifying to the target’s family.
There is hope yet.
Regards,
Jim
Fox News and the online conservative commentariat does plenty of mocking and shaming of the Left.
One big difference between the Left and the Right is that more people on the Right have jobs, families, mortgages, and taxes to pay, and therefore don’t have a lot of time to march around on a week-day holding signs and throwing eggs. That’s why the Right depends on Fox News and the online conservative commentariat.