Charlottesville and the Truth

I am not quite sure what to make of what happened in Charlottesville VA over the weekend.  Since I was not there I have to depend on the news media.  The problem with the media is the facts are not quite clear even though many insist there are clear facts.  More than getting to facts, however, I would prefer the Truth.  What was (is) at the heart of the conflict?

Some say it boils down to race.  White Nationalists were there to protest a city decision to dismantle a statue of Robert E. Lee, the statue presumably being city property.  Since Dylann Roof mercilessly gunned down those nine innocent black persons in Charleston SC in 2015, there has been a movement to remove any and all monuments to the long-dead Confederacy.  Sadly, it was Roof’s stated desire to start a race war.  Sadder still, he apparently succeeded.

The truth goes much deeper than race, however.  Various Antifa groups converged on the protest – some armed (there are photos) – to counter-protest in an effort to prevent a “normalization” of a white supremacy narrative.  In other words, it was the stated intent of Antifa to deny the White Nationalists their 1^st Amendment right to protest a government action.

President Trump condemned the violence wrought by all; but because he did not single out the White Nationalists, many condemned his response as “tepid”, even “racist”.  Two days later the president condemned the actions of all white supremacy groups, but the condemnation was rejected and judged as insincere.  Because President Trump is blamed for the rise in white nationalism, there would be no words he could have possibly spoken that would have been accepted by any.

Aside from facts, however, the Truth may be more disturbing.  According to the New York Times, a Charlottesville-based network of activists and clergy members called ‘Solidarity Cville’ called attention to the “Unite the Right” rally and urged people to show their opposition. The group includes ministers from local churches. 

Violence was expected.  Brittany Caine-Conley, a minister at Sojourners United Church of Christ in Charlottesville who is part of Solidarity Cville, sent a warning message in advance of the rally. “There is an extremely high potential for physical violence and brutality directed at our community,” she wrote. “We need your help — we don’t have the numbers to stand up to this on our own.”  Note she did not discourage attendance nor encourage peaceful persons to avoid the area; she invited and encouraged a bigger crowd.

Could the Truth be that the only threat of violence was the determined presence of counter-protesters?  Would the White Nationalists have had anyone toward which violence could be directed?  They were not, to my knowledge, threatening to blow up government buildings or shoot anyone; they were protesting the planned destruction of government property.  When they were confronted with angry counter-protesters, however, the threat of violence escalated with words.

It may seem as though I am defending the White Nationalists.  In a manner of speaking, I suppose I am only in that I am not ok with tearing down historical markers of any kind.  At the same time, I am not ok with idealizing and sanitizing the Confederacy on any level.  It is undeniable history, but idealizing it does bring legitimate offense to some.  Yet angry confrontation with that offense – in an offensive manner – does not justify violence, though it will inevitably invite and incite violence.  It’s the “mob mentality”, an angry mob always being perhaps the most dangerous and irrational animal on the face of the planet.

It is said the White Nationalists had a permit to be there, and it must be said the Solidarity Cville group had every right to be there.  Having a right to do something, however, does not mean it is always prudent to do so.  Walking into a volatile situation with a confrontational attitude is a lot like walking into a hay barn with an open flame – damage is imminent.  Confronting any kind of protest with a counter-protest will always be counter-productive.  Trying to shout down a voice with which we may disagree only makes us look foolish and afraid.

That is what happened in Charlottesville.  “The prayers of both could not be answered.  That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. ‘Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh’." (Abraham Lincoln, 4 March 1865).

Both sides were asking for trouble, yet both sides were demanding to be heard at the expense of the other side.  And a young woman is dead.  I cannot help but to wonder if her family believes her counter-protest was worth the cost.  I wonder if the clergy person who put out a call to action for help – knowing there was the “potential for violence” – may rethink her chosen language in encouraging someone to bring matches and gasoline to a powder-keg situation. 

I do not know the mind of the White Nationalist movement though I can probably guess.  Whether I disagree with them, however, does not necessitate my presence and protest each time they make headlines.  The Gospel of The Lord requires wisdom and prudence; and “If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that … town” (Matthew 10:14).  Note that Jesus did not say, “Press harder and call in reinforcements”.

There is a moral issue at the heart of it all, to be sure, but I don’t think it can be boiled down to race.  It seems to go much deeper.  I pray we figure it out before someone else gets hurt.