“This is what tolerance looks like at UC Berkeley”

Giz said:
But if one side hasn't started using violence to fulfill its agenda and you resort to violence to stop them rather than democratic methods, then you are fascist one.
Click to expand...

No, that would make me the violent one. The Fascist one is still the Fascist. "Fascism" doesn't mean "violence".
 
uke2se said:
No, I'm advocating using violence against people to prevent them from achieving their fascist goals.
Click to expand...
Punching them in the face doesn't prevent anything, though.

I'd have more respect for your position if it actually involved effective fighting.

On the other hand, your idea of effective fighting seems to be to use violence to suppress speech--a blatantly fascist tactic. And to use violence extra-judicially, in defiance of the rule of law--a blatantly anti-democratic and anti-social position.

At that point, it hardly matters what ideas you are supposedly fighting against. Your way of fighting makes *you* the enemy.
 
theprestige said:
Punching them in the face doesn't prevent anything, though.

I'd have more respect for your position if it actually involved effective fighting.

On the other hand, your idea of effective fighting seems to be to use violence to suppress speech--a blatantly fascist tactic. And to use violence extra-judicially, in defiance of the rule of law--a blatantly anti-democratic and anti-social position.

At that point, it hardly matters what ideas you are supposedly fighting against. Your way of fighting makes *you* the enemy.
Click to expand...

uke2se is perhaps acknowledging that he is exhibiting fascist tendencies and is trying his best to deflect. That is an encouraging sign I suppose. Still, I'll note that the fascist tendencies are clearly present.

Such tendencies are rooted in an intense aversion to reading dissenting opinions, especially informed and persuasive ones. It manifests with sticking your fingers in your ears and running away (e.g. the equivalent of the "ignore" function at ISF), moves on to trying to persuade others to do the same, and then culminates in violently suppressing dissent when one realizes that one's allies are still willing to engage civilly with the "enemy."
 
Last edited:
Mumbles said:
I won't say that authoritarians make people free to say anything at all - in fact, they tend to punish speech that doesn't align with their viewpoints - but Milo's ultimately the one who decided to take his disgusting online trolling to the streets, so no shock if someone beats the crap out of him for it.
Click to expand...

Nobody touched Milo, let alone beat the crap out of him. All that happened was that his event got cancelled because people got rowdy around the venue.
 
caveman1917 said:
Nobody touched Milo, let alone beat the crap out of him. All that happened was that his event got cancelled because people got rowdy around the venue.
Click to expand...

Rowdy sounds so much more wholesome than riot, don't you think?
 
Newtons Bit said:
And also ignores that people of the wrong political party were physically assaulted...
Click to expand...

No doubt they felt that "the threat isn't vague or non-immediate. It's overwhelming and started a while back" and that justified going all brownshirt on their opponents.
 
caveman1917 said:
Nobody touched Milo, let alone beat the crap out of him. All that happened was that his event got cancelled because people got rowdy around the venue.
Click to expand...

No, they (the violent protestors - most seemed to be peaceful) were smashing *other* people's property, setting a tree on fire, and pepper-spraying a person (a woman, not that it matters) for wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat, all of which is indefensible. That's not the same as, say, the protesters who stormed the stage and shut him down directly at another event.
 
uke2se said:
No, that's not correct. Fighting Fascism doesn't mean you become Fascist.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're absolutely right. I was saying that the method you've chosen to do so is a fascist's method. I certainly wasn't saying that all methods of fighting fascism were like that. Just yours.
 
Mumbles formatting added said:
No, they (the violent protestors - most seemed to be peaceful) were smashing *other* people's property, setting a tree on fire, and pepper-spraying a person (a woman, not that it matters) for wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat, all of which is indefensible. That's not the same as, say, the protesters who stormed the stage and shut him down directly at another event.
Click to expand...
Not so fast. Trump is a hateful bigot, and this lady displayed support for Trump. Maybe the vigilante advocates see this as a righteous action. The ever-expanding population of assaultables is ever-expanding after all.
 
Last edited:
varwoche said:
Not so fast. Trump is a hateful bigot, and this lady displayed support for Trump. Maybe the vigilante advocates see this as a righteous action. The ever-expanding population of assaultables is ever-expanding after all.
Click to expand...

Not particularly important to your main point, but the woman was actually wearing a Make Bitcoin Great Again hat. Which I might expect the anarchists would support. Of course, anarchists are not known for their attention to detail.
 
varwoche said:
Not so fast. Trump is a hateful bigot, and this lady displayed support for Trump. Maybe the vigilante advocates see this as a righteous action. The ever-expanding population of assaultables is ever-expanding after all.
Click to expand...

Gotta fight those fascists who'd bring violence into our society. Who knows what kind of overwhelming imminent threat that hat wearing lady represented, she had to be pepper sprayed for democracy!
 
sunmaster14 said:
Not particularly important to your main point, but the woman was actually wearing a Make Bitcoin Great Again hat. Which I might expect the anarchists would support. Of course, anarchists are not known for their attention to detail.
Click to expand...

Pfft. Alternative facts will be met by alternating fists!
 
Giz said:
No doubt they felt that "the threat isn't vague or non-immediate. It's overwhelming and started a while back" and that justified going all brownshirt on their opponents.
Click to expand...

Luckily for us all, they haven't gone all brownshirt yet. They're still in the process of talking themselves up to it.
 
caveman1917 said:
Nobody touched Milo, let alone beat the crap out of him. All that happened was that his event got cancelled because people got rowdy around the venue.
Click to expand...

Please justify the rioting in the streets of Berserkly that followed.....
 
varwoche said:
Not so fast. Trump is a hateful bigot, and this lady displayed support for Trump. Maybe the vigilante advocates see this as a righteous action. The ever-expanding population of assaultables is ever-expanding after all.
Click to expand...
To be clear, this isn't sarcasm. The takeover of the country by a hostile, bigoted, generally demented, anti-democratic force complicates this entire discussion. Dear Leader is the elephant in the room.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom