A well regulated Militia ... shall not be infringed

September 6, 2024 12:20 AM

But despite the riot and its fallout, militias are far from extinct. AP3 has expanded at a dramatic pace since Jan. 6, while keeping much of its activity out of view. This rise is documented in more than 100,000 internal messages obtained by ProPublica, spanning the run-up to Jan. 6 through early 2024. Along with extensive interviews with 22 current and former members of AP3, the records provide a uniquely detailed inside view of the militia movement at a crucial moment. from Armed and Underground: Inside the Turbulent, Secret World of an American Militia [ProPublica] [CW: "This story discusses threats of violence and contains a racial slur."]
posted by chavenet (23 comments total)

Fascinating article and excellent research into a topic that I genuinely believe is one of the greatest threats in many countries: homegrown far-right terrorism.

Seddon sounds like a wannabe cult leader. Aimless and unable to hold a regular job, no specific or real convictions but rather a collection of generic populist talking points with a strong desire for a position of (unearned) leadership. And, like all good cult leaders, ultimately reveals that the whole thing is about getting rich. Which is probably a blessing; a true believer in charge would be much more dangerous.

I recognise that it's a particular hobby horse of mine, but AP3 and their ilk must absolutely be loving Musk's Twitter. The article mentions Facebook's waxing and waning moderation policies, but Twitter is basically positioning itself as THE place for far-right rhetoric and organisation.

From a historical context McVeigh was the moment where the US government could have put a stake in the heart of the far right/white supremacist movement rather than let it temporarily disband. From my reading on the topic, while massively complex, there was a desire to label McVeigh as a (primarily) solo operator from both sides: it allows the far-right to distance themselves from the act and it gives the government agencies a closed case without having to start untangling the deep web of various militia groups and far-right organisations (and open up the potential for another Waco with every cell they try to close).

Also, amidst all the explicit reporting on how the police are complicit or directly involved, I have to highlight a little ACAB aside about what motivates cops away from right-wing militias:
That did not save AP3 from the fallout. Membership plummeted. AP3ers lost friends and business. Active-duty police officers quit out of fear of losing their jobs.
posted by slimepuppy at 1:58 AM on September 6 [25 favorites]

> From a historical context McVeigh was the moment where the US government could have put a stake in the heart of the far right/white supremacist movement rather than let it temporarily disband.


That never works. That just drives more recruitment.
posted by constraint at 2:56 AM on September 6 [2 favorites]

That never works. That just drives more recruitment.

Ok, but neither did reconstruction or appeasement or whatever the alternative looks like. There are no universal strategies, but it seems that forward maneuvers pay dividends. If nothing else, it increases the cost for political opponents and broadens the perimeter in need of defense (if done correctly).

I'm using military metaphors, but I'm picturing media. The reason why 'weird' is so compelling is it's such a opaque but compelling characterization to dig out from. It's a great rhetorical attack.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 3:45 AM on September 6 [11 favorites]

I think it's a little wishful to imagine "putting a stake" in Far-Right terror groups. You can purge them fairly thoroughly, you can have events that turn the general public against them, you can take away their energy and money and recruitment streams to some extent, but that's either a continuous process (more money) or it's a generational thing (more effort). All it takes to make a terror cell is a couple of disgruntled guys and some munitions, neither of which are that hard to come by in almost any country. To make a terror network, you need the previous, plus means of communication. Social media has given us a lot of the latter, so these groups can metastasize faster and have a far wider reach.
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:07 AM on September 6 [11 favorites]

Maybe put a stake is an exaggeration, but, had the government gone after the web of behind the scenes groups then, we wouldn't be where we are now. These groups have had time to organize and gather resources despite many reports that the greater terrorist threat was right-wing, not left-wing groups, which have received plenty of surveillance and suppression. It'd be great if Democrats played more offense in this area (which it looks like they're finally learning) instead of being reactive and defensive, fearing the spectre of Waco or whatever nonsense would be screamed from the fascists.
posted by kokaku at 4:27 AM on September 6 [12 favorites]

an American Militia

I know it's not OP's phrase, but I want to nitpick this: a militia is a legally-defined military organization under the control of a government.

These are not militias.

These are domestic terrorist organizations.

We need to stop giving them legitimacy by calling them militias.
posted by NotMyselfRightNow at 4:45 AM on September 6 [47 favorites]

They are militias in the same way that the Third Reich was "Socialist" and that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is any of those words before "of".
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 4:56 AM on September 6 [15 favorites]

"Putting a stake through the heart" of the RW terrorist movement is a silly exaggeration.

OTOH I remember hearing that the first meeting called to attempt to change #blacklivesmatter from a hashtag to an organization had more undercover cops in attendance than actual activists, and that story never seems to come up around these actual security threats. If law-enforcement were to spend as much effort going after these guys as they do spying on people who are just exercising their right to peaceably assemble to exercise their right of free speech to discuss protecting their other rights, maybe RW terror would be a smaller problem.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 5:58 AM on September 6 [9 favorites]

It's still good to deny them that word. Also related, sticking to the very narrow definition of 'militia' as well as 'well regulated' is the only reasonable way to keep 2A without the continual bloodbath of schoolchildren that we suffer. Not sure if that's off topic from discussing these terrorist groups or not…
posted by SaltySalticid at 5:58 AM on September 6 [5 favorites]

You can borrow a page from Canada;

Unlawful Drilling

70 (1) The Governor in Council may, by proclamation, make orders

(a) to prohibit assemblies, without lawful authority, of persons for the purpose

(i) of training or drilling themselves,
(ii) of being trained or drilled to the use of arms, or
(iii) of practising military exercises; or
(b) to prohibit persons when assembled for any purpose from training or drilling themselves or from being trained or drilled.

Punishment
3) Every person who contravenes an order made under this section is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years;
posted by yyz at 5:58 AM on September 6 [6 favorites]

Fair enough, "put a stake in" was perhaps optimistic (and I won't torture the metaphor further to say that Dracula often finds a way to come back even after being staked), but there was an opportunity to set the movement back more than the few decades it took to recover on its own.

At the very least the ideology should have been branded so toxic that no politician would ever think about courting that base, but instead groups like AP3 are now explicitly pro-Trump and the ideology is far less in the fringes.

I appreciate it's a complex issue with no simple solutions but the Simpsons quote "We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" tends to come to mind in regards to what's being done about homegrown right-wing terrorism.
posted by slimepuppy at 6:04 AM on September 6 [3 favorites]

I know it's not OP's phrase, but I want to nitpick this: a militia is a legally-defined military organization under the control of a government.

That's one definition, and certainly an older one, but the OED also offers the following as a legitimate definition:

"A paramilitary force motivated by religious or political ideology, esp. one that engages in rebel or terrorist activities in opposition to a regular army."

and its use is nearly a century old.
posted by biffa at 6:11 AM on September 6 [3 favorites]

The use of "militia" to exclusively refer to domestic terrorist groups is also reinforced by the fact that - outside of legal and historical context - there aren't any. Nobody calls the National Guard "The state militia," for example. As a pedant and historian I also find this linguistic shift annoying, but in normal speech, there's really no confusion: A "militia" is a bunch of assholes with guns, with no government endorsement or oversight.
posted by Tomorrowful at 6:31 AM on September 6 [8 favorites]

It was in internet forums for models, during the latter years of the George W. Bush administration, where Seddon’s right-wing politics started to emerge publicly. He would engage in lengthy sparring with his peers, heckling them with insults: “we dominate you libs” and “you SOUND LIKE A FRENCHMEN need I say more?”

This is a bizarre start for a villain origin story.
posted by GenjiandProust at 6:55 AM on September 6 [3 favorites]

The use of "militia" to exclusively refer to domestic terrorist groups is also reinforced by the fact that - outside of legal and historical context - there aren't any.

This is not true. Countries using the militia approach include Switzerland, Sweden and Israel.

OED has this as a separate definition to the one above, which is not obsolete (I point this out as there are lots of definitions of the term which are obsolete): "Subsequently: a military force raised from the civilian population of a country or region, esp. to supplement a regular army in an emergency, frequently as distinguished from mercenaries or professional soldiers. Occasionally with plural agreement."
posted by biffa at 7:03 AM on September 6 [2 favorites]

From my reading on the topic, while massively complex, there was a desire to label McVeigh as a (primarily) solo operator from both sides

From my reading, the main proponent of the "McVeigh didn't act alone" (or with just a couple of guys) theory was his defense attorney, who threw that out as a pure Hail Mary pass because the evidence against McVeigh was overwhelming, and the only hope of him avoiding lethal injection was to dangle the possibility that he might point to other conspirators; McVeigh himself rejected that defense.
posted by Halloween Jack at 7:08 AM on September 6 [1 favorite]

In the “what does militia mean?” side track: in the article, it’s clear that AP3 would prefer not to be called a militia, as it gives law enforcement people for cover for joining.
posted by GenjiandProust at 7:29 AM on September 6 [4 favorites]

The other thing is, 'well regulated'. It's there in the amendment and implies that the militias (so-called) should be regulated to the nines?

Is there a NISM, or a MASB who revises the Generally Accepted Militia Principles? Who conducts regular compliance audits, upholds the federal certification regime, reviews the baselines for license to operate? Stress tests, personal criminal liability for militia operators? But nooooo...
posted by ianso at 7:51 AM on September 6 [3 favorites]

The BLM analogy is very interesting.

One of the major consequences of law enforcements treatment of the BLM movement is that people of color have been buying firearms at jaw dropping rates. Go to a range and half the people will be p.o.c.

One citation, for illustrative purposes:
https://www.nssf.org/articles/theres-a-reason-african-american-gun-ownership-is-rising/

"""
NSSF surveys of firearm retailers showed that African Americans purchased firearms in 2020 at a rate of 58 percent higher than 2019. Hispanic Americans, at the same time, were purchasing firearms at a 49 percent higher rate and Asian Americans at a 43 percent higher rate. That trend continued into 2021, where 60 percent of firearm retailers surveyed said the increased traffic from African Americans, Hispanic Americans and Asian Americans remained the same. Nearly 45 percent of firearm retailers reported an increase of African American gun buyers in 2021 and Hispanic Americans were reportedly buying firearms at 37 percent higher rates, along with a 27 percent increase of Asian Americans.
"""

Roxane Gay bought a handgun:

https://www.kqed.org/forum/2010101906673/roxane-gay-on-owning-a-gun-and-standing-her-ground

""
"“When I aim and pull the trigger and absorb the recoil,” Gay writes in a new essay, “I try to shoot straight and true. I revel in how capable I feel, what a welcome departure it is to be an active participant in my life instead of passively seething at all the things I cannot control.
"""


So I think the analogy to BLM may reinforce my point: black people got stomped so black people got strapped.
posted by constraint at 8:19 AM on September 6 [6 favorites]

> This is a bizarre start for a villain origin story.

In unabating poverty?


That said I suppose you don't really hear about femme sex workers or gig starting paramilitary movements. Get on that, y'all. (Joke.)
posted by constraint at 8:23 AM on September 6 [1 favorite]

I cannot recommend Oregon Public Broadcasting’s Bundyville Podcast highly enough. It’s a few years old, but in no way dated.

As far as solutions, I’d encourage people to think of it like gardening or health care rather than a problem that can be ‘solved’. The right is very good at spinning a simple story that appeals to many people whose life doesn’t match their expectations. The fact that it’s built on lies is (unfortunately) irrelevant.

From everything I’ve read and heard, the most effective way to combat it is to focus efforts on two things: keeping people out of the wide end of the recruitment funnel, and reducing the reach and power of the groups and people at the narrow end via social stigma/deplatforming/isolation.
posted by FallibleHuman at 9:33 AM on September 6 [7 favorites]

Nobody calls the National Guard "The state militia,"

That's because they are two completely separate things, by law.

"29A.6 Military forces of state.
The military forces of the state of Iowa shall consist of the army national guard, the air
national guard, and the militia"

and

The militia of this state shall be composed of all able-bodied male citizens, between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, except such as are or may hereafter be exempt by the laws of the United States, or of this state, and shall be armed, equipped, and trained, as the general assembly may provide by law.
posted by ArgentCorvid at 12:14 PM on September 6 [2 favorites]

Reminder that urls aren’t automatically turned into links, but can easily be made linkable (thus contributing to site accessibility) by using the “link” button in the quick-access edit buttons immediately below the comment input window. (The link button is the one on the far right of the row of buttons just under the comment box.) Linking urls properly ourselves saves mod time for actual site moderation, too!
posted by eviemath at 1:27 PM on September 6 [4 favorites]