Ed Dueling protests spark state of emergency in Virginia.

[BobTheCoward]

The attempt by the right to focus this discussion on Anti-fa is a pretty transparent distraction. Classic approach too: instead of defending the indefensible turn the discussion around, find a questionable minor radical group among the opposition, and make the opposition defend them. Look: the Nazis have become the victims! Amazing slight of hand magic, isn't it.

The Nazis used this concept while gaining power in Germany, so it is none too original.

The left should defend them. We should strive to constantly make our arguments better.

 

[The_Animus]

White supremacists are stupid.

But so is banning them from dating websites.

https://arstechnica.com/information...ate-group-members-announces-one-lifetime-ban/

 

[Giordano]

I think it is fine to make guesses if you explain it is a guess.

Be certain to use numbers when you guess: it makes it sound so much more believable. Better still use numbers with decimals- doesn't "I guess 19.4%"sound even more convincing than just 19%?

 

[Giordano]

The left should defend them. We should strive to constantly make our arguments better.

I have addressed accusations against Anti-fa up thread. But I don't have to defend every group who supports some of the same positions I do. This is an important hint for the right-wingers here too: similarly you don't have to defend Nazis just because they may support some of the causes you do.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Be certain to use numbers when you guess: it makes it sound so much more believable. Better still use numbers with decimals- doesn't "I guess 19.4%"sound even more convincing than just 19%?

If something says it is a guess, what is wrong with also having numbers?

 

[Delphic Oracle]

If posting content volume determines strength of feelings, one might conclude that some people believe those who express cocerns about antifa are worse than Nazis.

One would have to be consistent in their thinking to make that connection, however.

 

[Darat]

Got any actual evidence for the highlighted ?

Is this going to be one of those "yes the evidence is there but the fake media never presents it" arguments ?

Is this going to be one of those arguments where the key phrase is "political violence" and then go on to argue that killing people in church is the act of a madman, driving a car into a crowd is someone's foot slipping off the brake and so on ?

The evidence i can find does not support his claim:

https://www.adl.org/news/press-rele...g-violent-extremism-programs-places-nation-at

....Research from ADL’s Center on Extremism has found that from 2007 to 2016, a range of domestic extremists of all kinds were responsible for the deaths of at least 372 people in the United States. Seventy-four percent of these murders came at the hands of right-wing extremists such as white supremacists, sovereign citizens and militia adherents.


ETA...snip....This is also a matter of law enforcement safety,” Mr. Segal said. “Of the 45 police officers killed by domestic extremists since 2001, 10 were killed by left wing extremists, 34 by right wing extremists and one by domestic Islamic extremists. ....

 

[The Don]

http://www.snopes.com/2017/08/17/are-antifa-and-the-alt-right-equally-violent/

Of particular interest:

https://www.revealnews.org/article/home-is-where-the-hate-is/

Last nine years, 63 cases of Islamist domestic terrorism, 19 cases of left wing domestic terrorism, and 115 cases of right wing domestic terrorism (data including foiled plots).

Yeah, it's the left that are violent.

The evidence i can find does not support his claim:

https://www.adl.org/news/press-rele...g-violent-extremism-programs-places-nation-at

Thank you.

 

[sunmaster14]

I remember having a very similar conversation with you about Trump during the primaries. You claimed not to like him, but unlike all of the other candidates you would go out of your way to avoid saying anything even remotely bad about him or criticizing his gaffes directly.

I think that is more your distorted perception than reality. I don't remember criticizing any of the Republican candidates particularly much. In any case, to the extent I don't criticize Trump for some of the mind-bogglingly stupid things he says or tweets, it is because everybody else is already doing it. I think it's boring simply to repeat what everybody else already is believing and saying. Some people get a frisson of self-righteous joy out of criticizing other human beings without any risk of having to support that criticism or manage rhetorical blowback. I don't.

 

[Hellbound]

Thank you.

One note: Darat's source is the same as mine, but mine is second hand. The info in the Snopes article is also from the ADL.

Just pointing that out; two sources rather than three

 

[Skeptic Tank]

sunmaster14 is right. For those of us who've been paying attention, we're aware of the outrageous amount of left wing violence to shut down speakers on campuses in recent years.

They undermine their credibility about "Nazis and KKK" and such when you recall the fact that they have gone absolutely nuts over basic conservative speakers like Ben Shapiro, used violence and shouting over speakers and pulling fire alarms and such to completely prevent speech they don't want to hear or want others to hear. Even when the stuff in question is rather mild. Pushback on feminist issues, etc.

They call people like Ben Shapiro (Jewish) a Nazi, so the whole pointing and calling people Nazis thing is somewhat deflated in its credibility too. Though obviously at Charlottesville there were finally some people (SOME!) worthy of that title.

There were also tons of people there who are simply very concerned, as I am, at what they see happening with demographics, where they see it leading (whites a hated, scapegoated minority in ALL formerly majority white nations in a few decades) and are trying to advocate for their group. Not an outrageous thing at all.

Sure, you've got your abortion clinic bombers and Dylan Roof and all that. Nobody's denying that there are murderous racist and right wing people but they are pretty rare and these events aren't really very frequent. And you've got the Scalise shooter and people like that too.

Setting aside the issue of the rare ultra-violent mass killers with political motives, the fact is that the left is the only game in town for routine mob violence to silence political speech from the opposing side. There simply IS NOT anything like that going on from the right, and hasn't been for several decades.

 

[NoahFence]

sunmaster14 is right. For those of us who've been paying attention, we're aware of the outrageous amount of left wing violence to shut down speakers on campuses in recent years.

They undermine their credibility about "Nazis and KKK" and such when you recall the fact that they have gone absolutely nuts over basic conservative speakers like Ben Shapiro, used violence and shouting over speakers and pulling fire alarms and such to completely prevent speech they don't want to hear or want others to hear. Even when the stuff in question is rather mild. Pushback on feminist issues, etc.

They call people like Ben Shapiro (Jewish) a Nazi, so the whole pointing and calling people Nazis thing is somewhat deflated in its credibility too. Though obviously at Charlottesville there were finally some people (SOME!) worthy of that title.

There were also tons of people there who are simply very concerned, as I am, at what they see happening with demographics, where they see it leading (whites a hated, scapegoated minority in ALL formerly majority white nations in a few decades) and are trying to advocate for their group. Not an outrageous thing at all.

Sure, you've got your abortion clinic bombers and Dylan Roof and all that. Nobody's denying that there are murderous racist and right wing people but they are pretty rare and these events aren't really very frequent. And you've got the Scalise shooter and people like that too.

Setting aside the issue of the rare ultra-violent mass killers with political motives, the fact is that the left is the only game in town for routine mob violence to silence political speech from the opposing side. There simply IS NOT anything like that going on from the right, and hasn't been for several decades.

Better argument.

 

[sunmaster14]

Thank you.

Of course, because of confirmation bias, you didn't actually take the time to dig into the report to see if its methodology made sense. Upon first impression, it strikes me as fatally flawed:

THE ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE’S CENTER ON EXTREMISM
has compiled a list of over 1,000 known murders/killings by
perpetrators associated with domestic extremist movements
of all types since 1970—essentially the post-Civil Rights era.
These are primarily murders committed by American extremists
on U.S. soil, though a few cases involving American extremists
murdering other Americans abroad (such as at Jonestown) are
also included.

Because extremist connections to some murders can take
months or years to be revealed, statistics for the most recent
years will inevitably be revised upward in future years. For
example, in ADL’s report on extremist-related murders in 2015
counted 52 murders; within a year, ADL had uncovered 13 more
extremist-related murders for 2015 and revised its numbers
accordingly. Similar upward revision is likely to occur in the
future for the 2016 statistics presented here.

First problem: They take a look at murders and then try to identify whether the perpetrator belonged to an extremist group. It doesn't matter to the ADL whether or not the murder itself was ideologically motivated. They admit as much in their pie charts, and here (emphasis added):

The 69 murders preliminarily documented by ADL’s Center on
Extremism in 2016 occurred in 11 different incidents, with five of
the 11 incidents involving multiple murders. The Orlando nightclub
shooting spree was the only incident to top five deaths.

Ideology seems to have played a primary or secondary role in
only five of the incidents, but those incidents were responsible
for the great majority of the deaths, at 59. It is common for
adherents of extremist movements to commit non-ideological
acts of violence, which can range from killing a suspected informant to assassinating a rival to acts of violence stemming
from traditional criminal motives, such as anger or greed.

Second problem: Systematic bias, as the report authors admit.

The main limitation of cross-movement comparisons is that
extremist connections to killings are easier to determine
for some movements than for others. For example, white
supremacists, who frequently sport many racist and white
supremacist tattoos, or who may be documented as white
supremacists by gang investigators or corrections officials,
are often more easily identifiable.

Third problem: The ADL evidently attributes anti-government violence to the right. The government annoys a lot of people, both left and right. One does not necessarily have to be right wing to take murderous revenge on government employees for a perceived injustice.

Fourth problem: Given that the ADL is a left-wing organization, there are far, far more people on the right than on the left from its perspective. Therefore, they are drawing from a much larger pool to find murders perpetrated from the right as opposed to from the left.

I'm sure there are more problems, but I only had 10 minutes.

 

[varwoche]

sunmaster14 is right. For those of us who've been paying attention, we're aware of the outrageous amount of left wing violence to shut down speakers on campuses in recent years.

And yet neither of you have produced a shred of actual evidence. And you both ignore the contrary evidence.

Highly unimpressive.

 

[The Don]

I'm sure there are more problems, but I only had 10 minutes.

Of course

So where is the evidence to support your claim ?

 

[sunmaster14]

Of course

So where is the evidence to support your claim ?

It's out there. Seek, and ye shall find.

 

[Hellbound]

Of course, because of confirmation bias, you didn't actually take the time to dig into the report to see if its methodology made sense. Upon first impression, it strikes me as fatally flawed:



First problem: They take a look at murders and then try to identify whether the perpetrator belonged to an extremist group. It doesn't matter to the ADL whether or not the murder itself was ideologically motivated. They admit as much in their pie charts, and here (emphasis added):



Second problem: Systematic bias, as the report authors admit.



Third problem: The ADL evidently attributes anti-government violence to the right. The government annoys a lot of people, both left and right. One does not necessarily have to be right wing to take murderous revenge on government employees for a perceived injustice.

Fourth problem: Given that the ADL is a left-wing organization, there are far, far more people on the right than on the left from its perspective. Therefore, they are drawing from a much larger pool to find murders perpetrated from the right as opposed to from the left.

I'm sure there are more problems, but I only had 10 minutes.

No one claims the sources are perfect, but so far it's the ONLY source related to your claim, and it doesn't back you up.

If you have better data, please share it. I'll continue looking as well to see if there are more and/or better studies out there, although this isn't a priority for me. But you claim the knowledge, so it's expected you have something to base that on besides personal perception.

ETA: Foe everyones perusal, I did find this link:
http://www.start.umd.edu/research-p...tremist-violence-united-states-tevus-database

Gives access to a lot of studies concerning terrorism and extremist violence in the US. I haven't checked them in detail yet, but thought I'd make this available for others in the thread.

 

[The Don]

It's out there. Seek, and ye shall find.

Your claim, your burden of proof....

 

[sunmaster14]

And yet neither of you have produced a shred of actual evidence. And you both ignore the contrary evidence.

Highly unimpressive.

Pretty ironic coming from the otherwise intelligent fellow who has been wallowing in a ridiculous conspiracy theory about Russian collusion for the last six months.

 

[sunmaster14]

Your claim, your burden of proof....

What was my claim again? Please quote the post where I made the claim you're referring to.