Might want to look at those church burnings with a critical eye. I recall that particular (im)moral panic.
And I doubt the Klan, stripped of its federale contingent, could fill a small pizza joint.
I do agree quite a few of those church burnings were questionable. A handful were not.
I also agree quite a few 'right wing extremist' groups would not exist without the continued support and membership of the federal government's informants.
So statistically significant (especially if you count instances where people occupy western wilderness areas, w/o hurting anyone), but lost among the constant barrage of leftist/Democrat violence.
There were a number of fires set at churches (most of them predominantly black) in or near Ferguson, recently. After a black suspect was charged, the press (so far as I can tell) has never reported on it.
I also question McVay's right-wing credentials. Being a racist doesn't make one a right-winger in the United States, any more than being "anti-government" does. Wasn't Code Pink "anti-government"?
Then again, I don't know a lot about McVay. I could be wrong.
*shrug*
The left wing does the same thing. Uses No True Scotsman to say that there is no left wing extremism. Admittedly they have a harder time using even the enormous power of No True Scotsman to explain away Islamic extremism, but they do their very best. I highly recommend it. You don't say "I question Mr McVay's right wing credentials", you say "Well, sure, he might have
claimed to have been right wing, but No True Right Wing person of valid credentials does anything bad. If they do bad things, they're inherently not right wing."
Violence from left or right wing violence surges and wanes depending on the decade. It's hardly new or unique to refuse to acknowledge extremists in one's own ideological ranks, or even distant splinter groups.
