Both the right and left are discussing the shooting incident that saw Rittenhouse kill two others, as well as three other people. The overwhelming evidence suggests that Rittenhouse, 17, was attacked and would be in greater danger if he hadn’t acted. However the hard left wants to portray this incident as a case of white supremacy who came to Kenosha to shed blood.
As new details about the encounter surface, it seems that this narrative is nearly over. But this doesn’t mean the left isn’t still trying to demonize the young man for defending himself. Since the news broke, one of the most important points has been that Rittenhouse shouldn’t have brought a firearm to Kenosha. According to Wisconsin law, Rittenhouse was only 17 and not permitted to possess a firearm.
People on both sides – including myself – have pointed out that showing up while the riots were in full swing wasn’t exactly the best idea one could have had. In fact, if I’d done something similar at his age, my Mom would have beaten me so badly I’d have come out of it speaking Chinese with a Scottish accent.
However, those on the left taking issue with Rittenhouse’s armed presence at the riots don’t have a leg to stand on. What’s the problem? Well, Breitbart News’ Alana Mastrangelo made an excellent point on Twitter when she wrote:
Leftists wonder why Kyle Rittenhouse believed he could have any business in Kenosha.
Meanwhile, I’m wondering why people felt they had any business rioting, looting, assaulting, threatening, and setting things on fire in Kenosha.
Leftists wonder why Kyle Rittenhouse believed he could have any business in Kenosha.
Meanwhile, I’m wondering why people felt they had any business rioting, looting, assaulting, threatening, and setting things on fire in Kenosha.
— Alana Mastrangelo (@ARmastrangelo) November 10, 2021
Mastrangelo is correct. The same people questioning Rittenhouse’s presence at the riot were the ones who either remained silent, defended, or cheered on the riots in Kenosha and all across the country. These individuals interfered in the activities of violent criminals.
Even though at least 20 people died in the George Floyd riots, Democrats and their close friends and allies in the activist media didn’t dare to condemn the violence. To be fair, some left-leaning people did criticize those who destroyed and looted buildings. But for the most part, the left-wing chattering class did not have much to say about businesses – including black-owned businesses – being destroyed by rioters.
The left’s stance on these matters is nakedly political; they condemn Rittenhouse’s actions and are even still milking the Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol building. They didn’t have the same enthusiasm for people who demolished parts of cities.
The bottom line is that the hard left has no problem with riots as long as it’s their people doing it. This situation, however, is only political to them.
They would have been singing the praises of Kyle Rittenhouse if he had been an Antifa agent fleeing from MAGA-hat-wearing protestors. They would claim that prosecutors want him to be tried for racism. They would not be willing to stand by the victims he might have killed.
Conservatives still denounce the riots when they question Rittenhouse for his travels to Kenosha. Both of these things cannot be said simultaneously. Rittenhouse should have been at home, and the riots must not have taken place.
Unfortunately, when you’re dealing with people motivated purely by partisan politics, they are unable – or unwilling – to look at an issue objectively. The problem we are facing might not be solved. Some miracle might bring some calm into the political conversation. I don’t think anyone wants to see what will happen if it doesn’t.
About Post Author
