Democrats = Antifa = BS

Police responded Wednesday night when anti-fascist activists showed up at the Washington, D.C., home of Tucker Carlson and began banging on the door and shouting threats like, “We know where you sleep at night.”

The Fox News host wasn’t home and neither were any of his four children. But his wife was there and quickly locked herself in the pantry and called 911.

“It wasn’t a protest. It was a threat,” Carlson told The Washington Post on Thursday. “They weren’t protesting anything specific that I had said. They weren’t asking me to change anything. They weren’t protesting a policy or advocating for legislation. ... They were threatening me and my family and telling me to leave my own neighborhood in the city that I grew up in.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/anti-fascist-protesters-target-fox-191703651.html
 
Okay but here's the issue.

It's naive to the point of intentionally being disingenuous to pretend you can keep "The Mob" aimed only at proper targets for very long. A worked up Mob hasn't magically become a rational and balanced force just because it has briefly found itself pointed at a legitimate threat.

You know how this goes and you know what it's going to lead to. Sure you run the racist out of the restaurant. Great pat yourself on the back. Then someone else in your tribe who wants to prove he's just a little purer to the cause then you are runs someone who's not racist but just a little racially insensitive. Then someone one ups them by running someone who just isn't as anti-racist as they think they should be. Then someone will get run out someone for not checking their privilege or some there straw SJW nonsense simply for cause purity reasons.

That's how how causes always collapse. Refining the "enemy" from "I oppose X to I oppose people who don't oppose X to I oppose people who don't oppose X enough for my taste."

And that's not even taking into account that sooner or later someone is going to be wrong. What about the guy eating dinner with his family who just looks like Tucker Carson? Or Alex Jones. Or whatever "PunnyTitle WhitePersonName" is the current viral racial incident on Youtube?

Think that's hyperbole? Think that's a strawman? Think it won't happen?

What about the guy who ran down the protesters in Charlotesville? No wait, not him the guy who's sole sin was selling his Dodge Charger to a car dealer who later sold it to to guy who would almost six months later use it to run down protesters in Charlottesville? The guy who had to flee his home and have police protection for over a week because people tripping over each other to be the first person to "Out the Alt-righter" and "make them famous" to prove their purity to the cause tracked down the license plate number of the car used in the attack via online public records on and didn't bother to fact check or just remember that public records aren't always kept perfectly update to date.

Joel Vangheluwe didn't hurt anybody. Had nothing to do with it. Wasn't even in the same time zone as the incident. Hell he was a Leftist who opposed Trump. But because the cause purity internet sleuths could "7 Degrees of Kevin Bacon" him to racism the Michigan State Police had to put him, his wife, and his children into a safe house.

Go to any Reddit thread, hell any thread here, or hop on Twitter, after an incident and you can find the same mentality. I shouldn't have to explain to anyone how bad that can go.

Perhaps you should see how Indivisible have managed to not do what you have suggested will happen here.

In the case of Carlson, IMO, karma is a bitch, and he reaps what he sows - if he expounds racism, it can (and should) run him into difficulties in his everyday life - his choice.

Its one of the reasons why I generally don't like deplatforming of alt-right speakers; IMO, its a lost opportunity to publicly harass them for their extremist and racist views.
 
Perhaps you should see how Indivisible have managed to not do what you have suggested will happen here.

In the case of Carlson, IMO, karma is a bitch, and he reaps what he sows - if he expounds racism, it can (and should) run him into difficulties in his everyday life - his choice.

Its one of the reasons why I generally don't like deplatforming of alt-right speakers; IMO, its a lost opportunity to publicly harass them for their extremist and racist views.

Double-edged sword for public figures, though. Anything you say about anything is sure to piss off someone and have them howling at you in public. Maybe they should be cut a little slack when they are offstage.
 
Although it's fun to think of horrible, smug, stains upon humanity experiencing an occasional comeuppance, I am not down with harassing these creeps on their private time in restaurants, at home, etc. Someone like Tucker Carlson is not going to be intimidated into being a better person so what's the point? The dude is just going to use the event to further his narrative of victimhood. Plus, he's a TV personality. He's now getting enormous exposure and of course sympathy from the more humane among us.

So congratulations, morons. You just found a way to make Tucker Carlson more effective at spreading his hateful crap, which I assume to be the opposite of your objective.


Ditto smartcooky; I think deplatforming is generally a bad idea because it feeds the narrative that white/conservative/Nazi/whatever-the-hell-Milo-is/etc. are the real victims in society.

Better to starve the beast of the attention it craves than to feed it more that it ever needs.
 

Links to youtube videos don't provide quite the specificity I was hoping for. Against my better judgement, I'll watch later on when I have 20 minutes to spare. Next time please provide a time marker, if not a typed quotation.

Actually, I think theprestige posted that stuff to mock liberals for being so tame.
@theprestige Well, at least I nailed this part. I watched the first video. I suppose johnny is right that you're having me on, seeing as the CNN discussion was unrelated to the crap you posted. That seems the more generous interpretation than jumping to the conclusion that you're delusional.

Because I don't appreciate having my time wasted, I won't be bothering with video #2 nor your other links.
 
The Carlson incident sounds horrible. Checking for defenders.

“The incident that took place at Tucker’s home last night was reprehensible. The violent threats and intimidation tactics toward him and his family are completely unacceptable," said a statement from Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott and Fox News President Jay Wallace. "We as a nation have become far too intolerant of different points of view. ... Those of us in the media and in politics bear a special obligation to all Americans, to find common ground.”

"Something @CNN and @foxnews can agree on: it’s completely unacceptable to threaten a TV host and his/her family," said a tweet from CNN's communications team.

Members of the media expressed the same sentiment.

"Fighting Tucker Carlson’s ideas is an American right. Targeting his home and terrorizing his family is an act of monstrous cowardice. Obviously don’t do this, but also, take no pleasure in it happening. Feeding monsters just makes more monsters," CBS late night host Stephen Colbert wrote on Twitter.

"The 'group' that staged this action call themselves anti-fascist. Do they understand how fascist is it to attack a family home like this?," wrote NPR's Scott Simon. "Denounce him on Twitter.. Boycott his sponsors. Not this."

Linky.

First, to be clear, most liberals did not defend the antifa action against Carlson, and many denounced it. Those included several media analysts at CNN, and the network itself, which was recently the recipient of one of the pipe bombs delivered to liberal leaders around the country, allegedly by a white-supremacist zealot. The New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg, who countenanced the public shaming of Trump administration officials at restaurants, drew a line in this case. Even a senior analyst at Media Matters for America, a nonprofit dedicated to tracking and criticizing conservative media outlets such as Fox News, called the protesters’ behavior “way over the line” and “unacceptable.”

This seemed like a moment—rare these days—when liberals and conservatives could come together to agree on a common boundary. It was almost that—but not quite. For every denunciation, there was a slew of replies or quote-tweets that suggested Carlson had it coming. Some came from anonymous Twitter users and assorted randos, but not all of them.

Vox’s Matthew Yglesias is a sharp and provocative pundit, one who doesn’t mind breaking taboos (including some that are liberal doctrine), so his views shouldn’t be taken as representative of anyone else’s. Still, to see 1,600 likes on a tweet excusing “terrorizing” a media figure’s “family” was jarring. (He appears to have deleted the tweets.) It’s the kind of dehumanizing sentiment that liberals have come to expect from Trump and his supporters. It now seems to be infecting the other side.

Linky.

So we had to reach all the way to a Vox pundit to find a public left figure defending the incident.
 
Yglesias must have had a brainfart. He's usually more careful.

An explanation isn't the same as an endorsement. But it could be read a kind of tacit endorsement or expression of sympathy.
 
Although it's fun to think of horrible, smug, stains upon humanity experiencing an occasional comeuppance, I am not down with harassing these creeps on their private time in restaurants, at home, etc. Someone like Tucker Carlson is not going to be intimidated into being a better person so what's the point? The dude is just going to use the event to further his narrative of victimhood. Plus, he's a TV personality. He's now getting enormous exposure and of course sympathy from the more humane among us.

So congratulations, morons. You just found a way to make Tucker Carlson more effective at spreading his hateful crap, which I assume to be the opposite of your objective.


Ditto smartcooky; I think deplatforming is generally a bad idea because it feeds the narrative that white/conservative/Nazi/whatever-the-hell-Milo-is/etc. are the real victims in society.

Better to starve the beast of the attention it craves than to feed it more that it ever needs.
That's not quite what Cooky is saying, he'd make sure they get more attention than even deplatforming them and his tactics would likely result in playing into the martyr narrative even more.

Its one of the reasons why I generally don't like deplatforming of alt-right speakers; IMO, its a lost opportunity to publicly harass them for their extremist and racist views.

So what has Carlson said or done that is so bad? I know next to nothing about the guy except that he wears a bow tie.
 
Better yet IMO, why mindlessly parrot celebrities on one side or another just to get a rise out of people you disagree with, for reasons you can't even articulate?

At this point it's either:

1) They're trolling,

2) They're lying for Jesus Trump. Win at all costs and all that.

3) They really believe what they say.

I do hope to all of hell's demon princes that it isn't (3), because that would mean that the lot of them have gone insane.
 
That's not quite what Cooky is saying, he'd make sure they get more attention than even deplatforming them and his tactics would likely result in playing into the martyr narrative even more.
Cooky can speak for himself, of course. My preference is to let these fools speak and people can respond to what they say as opposed to what other people are outraged thinking that they might say.

Case in point that Milo guy. He was already a lightning rod before I had ever heard of him, let alone heard him speak for himself. So I was pleased when Bill Maher gave him a few minutes to speak on Real Time because that allowed me to make my own decision that Milo was indeed an attention-seeking dbag with nothing interesting to say. What have we heard from him since? Not much - he spoke his peace on HBO, a much bigger percentage of the population shrugged, and now no one cares.

The best thing for a creep like Richard Spencer? Let him speak to a packed house and have all who think he's a creep quietly get up and walk out, or turn their backs on him or something. Have folks positioned in the crowd make random, loud farting noises while he's speaking. Or just let there be a poorly-sold arena for him. All kinds of things could be used to protest his hateful rhetoric, but if you punch him or "deplatform" him then you make him correct in his assertions that his opponents are violent.

So what has Carlson said or done that is so bad? I know next to nothing about the guy except that he wears a bow tie.
I do too, but that part is irrelevant. Here's a long and deep dive on Carlson. Basically he's another talking head on TV who makes money (a lot of money) from polarizing the American people through cynical punditry masquerading as journalism.
 
At this point it's either:

1) They're trolling,

2) They're lying for Jesus Trump. Win at all costs and all that.

3) They really believe what they say.

I do hope to all of hell's demon princes that it isn't (3), because that would mean that the lot of them have gone insane.

Can't it be kind of a mix, a turd goulash, if you will, of all three?

The alt right are not very serious people, quite often. They like getting a rise out of people, they don't mind lying, and they at least sort of suspect there's an element of truth to the things they say.
 
Bullhonkies.

We have to return to a civil society, a place where disagreement doesn't make one my enemy, generally speaking.

I'm reminded about the House of commons.


Members may speak only from where they were called, which must be within the House. They may not speak from the floor of the House between the red lines (traditional supposed to be two sword-lengths apart). Also, the Speaker will not call a Member in the gallery if there is room downstairs. Members must stand whilst speaking but if they are unable to do so they are allowed to address the House seated.

Politics was traditionally dirty and the rules were set up by Parliament to prevent it becoming literally bloody.

I don't know how one goes about getting it back to a civilised course - where norms and customs are important, and people are reminded why they are important.
 
Okay but here's the issue.

It's naive to the point of intentionally being disingenuous to pretend you can keep "The Mob" aimed only at proper targets for very long. A worked up Mob hasn't magically become a rational and balanced force just because it has briefly found itself pointed at a legitimate threat.

This is of course why all protests and counter protests are immoral and wrong.

Look at the criminal mob from the march on Selma, they had to be put down hard to prevent the spreading lawlessness.
 
Cooky can speak for himself, of course. My preference is to let these fools speak and people can respond to what they say as opposed to what other people are outraged thinking that they might say.

Case in point that Milo guy. He was already a lightning rod before I had ever heard of him, let alone heard him speak for himself. So I was pleased when Bill Maher gave him a few minutes to speak on Real Time because that allowed me to make my own decision that Milo was indeed an attention-seeking dbag with nothing interesting to say. What have we heard from him since? Not much - he spoke his peace on HBO, a much bigger percentage of the population shrugged, and now no one cares.

The best thing for a creep like Richard Spencer? Let him speak to a packed house and have all who think he's a creep quietly get up and walk out, or turn their backs on him or something. Have folks positioned in the crowd make random, loud farting noises while he's speaking. Or just let there be a poorly-sold arena for him. All kinds of things could be used to protest his hateful rhetoric, but if you punch him or "deplatform" him then you make him correct in his assertions that his opponents are violent.

And the people who are wrong are the counter protesters like in Charlottesville. If they had not been there and hence antagonizing the good people nothing would have happened except totally ok stuff like nazis chanting outside synagogues. If they nazis hadn't had to defend themselves by taking pot shots at protesters and the police knew that kind of thing is ok why else did they not arrest the guy who did it? Of course then the horrible antifa released video of these totally ok things and suddenly they become crimes.
 

Back
Top Bottom