Well, assemblies, protests and counter-protests are all part of politics. I agree the WWII metaphor is misleading, that’s why I pointed to historic domestic conflicts between anti-fascists and white supremacists.

Looking at Boston, the mass turnout probably prevented political violence and increased police presence. Some anti-fascist organizers actually say that’s the point of their work — to get more people to stand with them in solidarity and vastly outnumber white supremacists. I’m not sure what I think about that, but I’m grappling with it.

I’m also not belittling debate. I’m saying that demonstrations and provocations are not “debate” in the sense that we usually use the term. Activists certainly don’t think about them that way. Put another way, I don’t think anything being said on the Senate floor or the NYT oped page affects the thinking of a white supremacist OR an anti-fascist. Similarly, our concepts of what constitutes a public sphere in which we have debate is changing. What’s the point of having to talk about why immigrants are bad at UC Berkeley if you can simply talk about why immigrants are bad on your Youtube channel?

Thanks for giving my “screed” such a close read!