Disgraceful! Richard Spencer Sucker-Punched While Giving Interview

[quadraginta]

And none have anything to do with gerrymander.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Interesting responses. For my part, I would like to think I would intervene first if possible, not to protect the Neo but out of a general aversion to violence. But if he connected and the injury was not grave, I am certain I would neither help nor hinder the attacker's escape (maybe some advice to get out of Dodge, post haste). First aid and call ambulance if needed, but positively not help or hinder investigation/prosecution. Neo is on his own.

Yup. A person who denies that we are members of the same herd can't turn around and lament the herd 'turning on them.'

I have no respect for those who make a pact to be eaten last.

 

[caveman1917]

What liberals and conservatives have done historically with Nazis was to vote to give them dictatorial powers - rule of law and all that.

 

[marplots]

What liberals and conservatives have done historically with Nazis was to vote to give them dictatorial powers - rule of law and all that.

From the link: "...nearly all of those present voted for the act, except for the Social Democrats, who voted against it."

 

[caveman1917]

From the link: "...nearly all of those present voted for the act, except for the Social Democrats, who voted against it."

Yes exactly. The communists had been arrested so couldn't vote, and the social democrats were the only ones to vote against. The rest, liberals, conservatives, etc voted for it.

 

[marplots]

Yes exactly. The communists had been arrested so couldn't vote, and the social democrats were the only ones to vote against. The rest, liberals, conservatives, etc voted for it.

Yeah, I was translating the term "social democrat" into the modern US idea of a liberal. Mostly because I am completely unfamiliar with other ways of dividing the spectrum.

 

[caveman1917]

Yeah, I was translating the term "social democrat" into the modern US idea of a liberal. Mostly because I am completely unfamiliar with other ways of dividing the spectrum.

The social democrats are parliamentary socialists, ie those who want to socialize the means of production through parliamentary rather than revolutionary means. There was also a weaker tendency which merely wanted to socialize the "commanding heights" of the economy, such as railways, banking, steel industry, mining, etc but leave the small businesses in private ownership.

In the modern US idea of a liberal, just like in the former German idea of a liberal and the general idea of a liberal, such a stance would be distinctly to the left of its left-wing, in this case to the left of Bernie Sanders. Modern US liberals aren't social democrats, they are liberals.

 

[caveman1917]

Which I'm happy to do since destroying private property has not once in my witnessing been the stated goal of a group of people among whom these brick-throwers hide themselves.

Just to dispel liberal and other right-wing nonsense like this, let's take a look at a video of a dozen or so "brick-throwers", who are rearranging a vehicle associated with the "Polizei" gang in so-called "Germany", embedded in a larger group of protesters. From other video footage one can easily determine that the larger group is indeed anti-capitalist and opposed to private property (see the banners in the following video)

 

[caveman1917]

For people who seem to have a problem identifying violent left-wing protest, as opposed to peaceful speech such as burning a limo, one need only to look at so-called "Greece":

 

[The Big Dog]

as opposed to peaceful speech such as burning a limo

There ain't no peaceful speech like uncontrolled arson next to a tank full of ultra hazardous incendiaries because uncontrolled arson don't stop!

Fantastic! Thanks for the chuckle!

 

[caveman1917]

There ain't no peaceful speech like uncontrolled arson next to a tank full of ultra hazardous incendiaries because uncontrolled arson don't stop!

Of course it stops. Do you even know what fire is? And yes it's peaceful, nobody got hurt, no?

 

[Thermal]

Of course it stops. Do you even know what fire is? And yes it's peaceful, nobody got hurt, no?

No. It was violent in the English language usage of the word. If you are going to choose a belief system and violently impose it on others, what is your logical objection to other fascists doing the same to you?

 

[The Big Dog]

Of course it stops. Do you even know what fire is? And yes it's peaceful, nobody got hurt, no?

Not a Coolio fan? Bummer, because there ain't no party like a Arson party because an Arson party don't stop!

Now Arson is, of course, a crime of violence, although I find your position that one cannot determine whether it is violent until the fire is put out intriguing .

 

[caveman1917]

No.

Yes.

It was violent in the English language usage of the word.

The definition which you gave, which you call "the English language usage", would count this post as violence - because I'm using physical force on my keyboard to write it.

If you are going to choose a belief system and violently impose it on others

Like "private property"? I'm not the one choosing that belief system and violently imposing it on others.

what is your logical objection to other fascists doing the same to you?

What "other fascists"? Delphic Oracle with the praxis of volunteering to the state to help enforce capitalist private property rights? Note there especially the appeal to local capitalists to justify said actions - as if there's only something wrong with capitalist private property when it's done by "teh fereigners". Wouldn't exactly call it fascist because it doesn't seem to directly use violence to enforce their belief system of "private property", but it's close.

 

[caveman1917]

Now Arson is, of course, a crime of violence

I just lit up a cigarette. Does that make me a violent criminal?

although I find your position that one cannot determine whether it is violent until the fire is put out intriguing .

I still wouldn't particularly call it violent but more like negligent. It's not like someone walking into somewhere and gunning random people down or something, it's a frigging limo which got rearranged, get some perspective.

 

[Thermal]

The definition which you gave, which you call "the English language usage", would count this post as violence - because I'm using physical force on my keyboard to write it.

But not destroying or damaging it, per the definition. So, no.

Like "private property"? I'm not the one choosing that belief system and violently imposing it on others.

Yes, like private property. And you absolutely are advocating the imposition of it. So no logical objection?

What "other fascists"? Delphic Oracle with the praxis of volunteering to the state to help enforce capitalist private property rights? Note there especially the appeal to local capitalists to justify said actions - as if there's only something wrong with capitalist private property when it's done by "teh fereigners". Wouldn't exactly call it fascist because it doesn't seem to directly use violence to enforce their belief system of "private property", but it's close.

'Other fascists' are others who, under your euphemisms, impose their authoritarian belief systems on others against their will. As you openly advocate.

 

[The Big Dog]

I just lit up a cigarette. Does that make me a violent criminal?

I still wouldn't particularly call it violent but more like negligent. It's not like someone walking into somewhere and gunning random people down or something, it's a frigging limo which got rearranged, get some perspective.

One expects a modicum of base level knowledge, so I don't have to explain simple concepts like "Arson" to you. As such, do you think you are a violent criminal by lighting up a cigarette? If so, let me know, and I will explain things to you as if you were a child, if you so choose.

Now as far as the protest to which you are referring, at least six people were injured, and I have personally viewed at least two videos showing Black Bloc "protesters" physically assaulting and injuring at least one person.

As such, even by your remarkably limited standards, the protests were "violent."

Say, I guess I am a consensus builder, huh?

 

[caveman1917]

But not destroying or damaging it, per the definition.

The definition says "etc" - so yes.

Yes, like private property. And you absolutely are advocating the imposition of it.

I'm not advocating the imposition of private property. Though plenty of people here do.

So no logical objection?

Objection to what?

'Other fascists' are others who, under your euphemisms, impose their authoritarian belief systems on others against their will.

The cops?

As you openly advocate.

I'm not advocating for the cops. How confused can you be?

 

[caveman1917]

Now as far as the protest to which you are referring, at least six people were injured

Yes, turns out a violent gang showed up wearing signs saying "Police" and started assaulting and kidnapping people.

and I have personally viewed at least two videos showing Black Bloc "protesters" physically assaulting and injuring at least one person.

Do you have a link or something?

As such, even by your remarkably limited standards, the protests were "violent."

I never claimed they weren't.

 

[Thermal]

The definition says "etc" - so yes.

I'm not advocating the imposition of private property. Though plenty of people here do.

Advocating the imposition of a belief system on others, not private property. But you knew that. Drop the cheesy word games, por favor?

Objection to what?

To the same question you have been awkwardly evading: Since you advocate choosing a belief system and opposing it on others against their will, do you have any logical objection to others doing so to you?

The cops?


I'm not advocating for the cops. How confused can you be?

Do you have another argumentative approach besides feigning misunderstanding?