Skip to content

How the Left Politicized the Rittenhouse Case to Push a Radical, Woke Agenda

izquierda- Kyle Rittenhouse

Leer en Español

[Leer en español]

The Kyle Rittenhouse case opened a Pandora’s Box of harsh realities affecting the United States today: media bias, the inability of authorities to maintain public control, and how the left is gaining strength every day.

Rittenhouse shot three demonstrators who were causing disturbances in the city while he was guarding businesses that were being vandalized. He claimed that they started attacking him and so he fired the gun in self-defense. The jury affirmed his testimony and determined that he is innocent.

“This trial was nothing more than a witch hunt from the Radical Left. They want to punish law-abiding citizens, including a child, like Kyle Rittenhouse, for doing nothing more than following the LAW.,” former President Trump said after learning of the verdict.

As a result of the court’s decision, various opinions emerged that now set the political tone in such a polarized environment: some applaud Rittenhouse’s freedom and declare him a “hero,” while others say that from now on all young people will supposedly be able to go out and shoot and if they do, they will be acquitted.

Beyond such statements, which are both unconscionable and opposing, the Rittenhouse case made evident how the left in the United States is gaining strength in different areas of daily life, leaving serious consequences along the way.

Rittenhouse is no hero. He took on the role of protector of private property when he shouldn’t have because that’s what law enforcement should be there for. But that does not mean that young people can shoot without consequences.

Wisconsin’s self-defense law allows the use of deadly force only if “necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.” The facts showed that Rittenhouse was in danger and was able to defend himself.

The left offended as justice is done

However, the —left-wing— media played an extremely relevant role and tried, as hard as it could, to claim that the tragedy was racially tinged.

For example, The Independent falsely claimed that Rittenhouse was acquitted of shooting “three black men”. Likewise, Democrat Megan Hunt of the Nebraska Senate called Rittenhouse a “white supremacist murderer” on Twitter.

“I am not a racist person,” stated Kyle Rittenhouse in his first public interview for Fox News following his release. The young man, who was found not guilty in a murder trial, clarified that his case had nothing to do with racism. “This case has nothing to do with race. It never had anything to do with race. It had to do with the right to self-defense,” Rittenhouse told Tucker Carlson while adding that he supports the Black Lives Matter movement and peaceful demonstrations.

But at its core, Rittenhouse’s tragedy is a consequence of the advancement of progressive policies, his call for defunding the police and criminalizing law enforcement. If the population had trusted the authorities that night, they would not have come out to defend private property; if the left did not criminalize the police, the authorities would have been able to control public order and prevent what happened.

Dominic Green described it perfectly in his article for Spectator World: “If you allow riots, you get militias and vigilantism”.

For the left in America, Rittenhouse is a terrorist who, for racist reasons, took up arms and sought confrontation. According to them, the heroes are the three men he shot to defend himself, men who were creating a disturbance and who also had criminal records.

Missouri Democratic Representative Cori Bush called the verdict “white supremacy in action.” Protesters from the left-wing Black Lives Matter organization said it is “white privilege” that has allowed the teenager to even get a fair trial.

Likewise California Governor Gavin Newsom warned that the jury had sent a message to “armed vigilantes” that “can break the law, carry around weapons built for the military, kill people, and get away with it.”

But the question we really need to ask is: at what point did it become legal for violent groups to riot and attack private property without consequences? It seems that for the left, fundamental rights such as self-defense and private property simply do not exist.

Sabrina Martín Rondon is a Venezuelan journalist. Her source is politics and economics. She is a specialist in corporate communications and is committed to the task of dismantling the supposed benefits of socialism // Sabrina Martín Rondon es periodista venezolana. Su fuente es la política y economía. Es especialista en comunicaciones corporativas y se ha comprometido con la tarea de desmontar las supuestas bondades del socialismo

Leave a Reply