By Alana Bleimann
SAN FRANCISCO – Six months after publicly tweeting their support for the white supremacist group, the Proud Boys, pro-Chesa Boudin recall Twitter account @cyantist, an account holder named Cyan, apologizes, stating that she “was initially confused because of lack of knowledge.”
The verified Twitter account has more than 52,000 followers and is dedicated to removing SFDA Chesa Boudin from office in order to make “SF safer” (as stated in their bio).
Their tweet posted in September of last year, that reached 227 likes, was a response to a taped statement made by Thad, Chief of the Proud Boys in Salt Lake Utah, who claimed that the organization denounces white supremacy.
@cyantist quote tweeted the video and stated:
Doing some research and it appears that characterizing this group the way the media has is incorrect. They [the Proud Boys] have a few bad apples who’ve claimed to be part of their org but in general not true.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Group and the New York Post, the Proud Boys are an “anti-white guilt” extremist group known to promote hate on the basis of race and religion.
They are male-only and have been known to not only promote, but engage in acts of political violence across the U.S..
Although they claim not to be a racist organization, many of the members are Neo-Nazis and loud supporters of former president Donald Trump.
Proud Boys’ founder Gavin McInnes has even stated that the organization is a “pro-Tump men’s club…defending themselves against the radical left.”
Today the Proud Boys are associated with far-right groups and have been thought to be one of the many groups that played a role in the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Many commenters urged @cyantist to “do some research” and Wednesday they wrote a brief apology for their own “lack of knowledge” on the organization.
@cyantist claims their account is working towards a safer San Francisco, but for a verified Twitter account to publicly state that the Proud Boys is composed of “a few bad apples” feeds more harm into the city of San Francisco than good, charge critics.
Alana Bleimann is a junior at the University of San Francisco majoring in Sociology with a minor in Criminal Justice Studies. She is from Raleigh, North Carolina. She is the team leader on the Chesa Boudin Recall – Changing the Narrative Project.
To sign up for our new newsletter – Everyday Injustice – https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9
Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:
Are they actually a “white supremacist” group? Based upon the photo accompanying this article (and other video I’ve seen), it does not appear that one of their leaders is “white”. Not sure about all of their other members.
Isn’t being white a prerequisite for membership in white supremacist groups?
No, one does not have to be white to promote a white supremacist position. Lyndsey Graham said it very well publically when he stated to black men, “you don’t have to be white to do well here, you just have to be conservative.” (Paraphrased since I am not going to take time to go look up his exact racist claptrap).
Even though he clumsily worded it what Graham was referring to is that people in South Carolina can do well getting elected to office regardless of their color as long as they are conservative. He then mentioned Sen. Tim Scott as an example.
The New York Post?
David?
Think of it like this: “Even the New York Post believes they are an extremist group” – it’s kind of like if Fox News says you are too extreme
Are you sure that’s what the New York Post said? There’s two sourced references in that comment. Was the actual, shared quote limited to “anti-white guilt”, since that’s the only part for which your author used quotations?
Also, shouldn’t links to the sources be provided?
By the way, your author also incorrectly used the word “are”, in the title of this article. (Which apparently should have at best used “have”.)
Wikipedia covers them pretty thoroughly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proud_Boys
Here’s what might be a pertinent quote from the Wikipedia source:
Regardless, the author of the Vanguard article seems to have misinterpreted what the Twitter account holder was stating, in regard to this group.
In the quoted comment below, I understood this to mean that there are not “any” (official) bad apples in that organization, in the view of that account holder.
I just couldn’t resist. How many times have you admonished me for citing the NY Post?
So you’re okay with citing the NY Post when you happen to agree with them?
That’s not what I said, is it?
It may not even be what the New York Post said (in reference to my comment). 🙂
(This is my fifth and final comment.)
Followed by this, from the account holder in question:
I believe that the author of this article may be misinterpreting the statement as an “apology”.
For what it’s worth, the Proud Boys may no longer be considered male only. Seems like there are some women who feel they are needed to keep tabs on the boys. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/woman-charged-capitol-melee-proud-boys-recruited-75938662. Also, I have to wonder if what she means is that there aren’t just a few bad apples, but an entire rotten barrel full.