Antifa's Honeymoon Coming to an end

[uke2se]

I think I'd rather defend democracy with speech and due process rather than racing to embrace the methods of the fascists. Looks like it's time for a Nietzsche quote!

You go ahead and do that, safe in the knowledge that there are people willing to stand up to the fascists, because you sure won't.

 

[shuttlt]

President Trump said nothing of the sort. He just included all the hate groups.

Maybe the Nazis rely on CNN and MSNBC for their news?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Maybe the Nazis rely on CNN and MSNBC for their news?

Hey there are clearly lots of good nazi's after all. Only a bigot would claim that someone is a bad person just because they are a nazi.

Just listen to what they said in response. They clearly heard Trump saying he was on their side.

 

[The Big Dog]

Yes, antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-Nazis

"Members of the Berkeley College Republicans were then stalked by antifa goons who followed them to a gas station and demanded they “get the [expletive] out” of their car, warning, “We are real hungry for supremacists and there is more of us.”

Most notably, they were apparently intentionally following the only female member of the College Republicans.

 

[Giz]

You go ahead and do that, safe in the knowledge that there are people willing to stand up to the fascists, because you sure won't.

Not in my name!

Seriously:
1- These guys are not taking over society. The ballot box and judicial system will work, we don't need to resort to lynch mobs to save ourselves.
2- Try and step back and think about what you are blustering. What would your reaction have been in 2003 if an American had said to you (about the Iraq War/removal of Saddam): "You go ahead and do that [use non-violence and the UN], safe in the knowledge that there are people willing to stand up to the fascists, because you sure won't." *


* Not an exact comparison as that is a foreign policy decision, as opposed to lauding a breakdown in law & order and due process in domestic society (i.e. - your position is worse!)

 

[Belz...]

It's the hypocrisy.

If the EDL marched against Islamists, or an angry mob rampaged looked for pedophiles, a lot of our esteemed liberal posters would be up in arms. But give them a bad guy who pushes their buttons... suddenly lynch mobs are the guarantee of democracy.

You won't get disagreement from me here. The logic is that Nazis really are a dire threat to democracy that counts as a defcon 1 emergency, and that in this specific case (but no other, we promise!) we can suspend our basic principles in order to, ironically, defend them. This despite the fact that Nazis are a tiny and hated minority, and that they're not likely to get much traction even if left to their own devices.

Now, there might be a good argument to be made that there _are_ situations where violence is the best way to eliminate certain threats to those very basic principles, but how does one determine what those situations are, and when to draw the line? I don't see how, unless you have one group make the determination based on their own personal values, and that just kills democracy either way. That said, Nazis do need to be fought, just with more speech. And if they turn violent, just let the authorities deal with them and continue to use speech. Keep the moral high ground.

 

[Belz...]

You go ahead and do that, safe in the knowledge that there are people willing to stand up to the fascists, because you sure won't.

Why are you responding to a perfectly reasonable argument with an appeal to emotion and shame?

 

[shuttlt]

Hey there are clearly lots of good nazi's after all. Only a bigot would claim that someone is a bad person just because they are a nazi.

Just listen to what they said in response. They clearly heard Trump saying he was on their side.

I'm quite willing to believe that the neo-Nazis are just as stupid and illinformed as antifa. At the moment though, they draw smaller crowds of supporters than furry conventions

 

[Giz]

You won't get disagreement from me here. The logic is that Nazis really are a dire threat to democracy that counts as a defcon 1 emergency, and that in this specific case (but no other, we promise!) we can suspend our basic principles in order to, ironically, defend them. This despite the fact that Nazis are a tiny and hated minority, and that they're not likely to get much traction even if left to their own devices.

Now, there might be a good argument to be made that there _are_ situations where violence is the best way to eliminate certain threats to those very basic principles, but how does one determine what those situations are, and when to draw the line? I don't see how, unless you have one group make the determination based on their own personal values, and that just kills democracy either way. That said, Nazis do need to be fought, just with more speech. And if they turn violent, just let the authorities deal with them and continue to use speech. Keep the moral high ground.

Yep. This.

 

[Cavemonster]

I'm quite willing to believe that the neo-Nazis are just as stupid and illinformed as antifa. At the moment though, they draw smaller crowds of supporters than furry conventions

Yes, but I've never heard a sitting president say that some furries are good people.

 

[The Big Dog]

But hey clearly spraying a little fire from an aerosol can is just as bad as nearly beating a man to death.

Oh like the antifa/black block have been doing in Berkeley for months!

Great point!

 

[shuttlt]

Yes, but I've never heard a sitting president say that some furries are good people.

He didn't claim Nazis were good people.

It's an irrelevant point anyway. Nobody is clamouring for him to make a statement about furries. Its the media and the left who have decided that Nazis are so credible and potent that street violence is the only thing standing in the way of the Forth Reich. This to deal with a group that has less of a draw than furries.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I wonder if Democratic politicians will face calls demanding that they denounce Antifa? Have any done so?

Antifa is an embarrassment to anyone who is an actual liberal.

From what I've gathered from supporters of these.. ahem, children in bandannas and hoods, is that anyone opposing their naive and embarrassing brand of counter-protesting, is a Nazi! Which makes sense, if you're 12, think about it.

I've said it from the beginning, the AntiFa aren't doing anyone any favours, not themselves, or the people they're supposed to be supporting.

Do we ever hear of them raising money to support any actual causes? Do they ever repair any damage done by their "protesting?" I asked one supporter in another thread about these things and got a load of evasive comments and backtracking.

As I've said before, speaking as someone who works in security, they do nothing but cause additional trouble for otherwise prearranged and routine marches.

You don't fight ignorance by displaying it.

The people who tend to support these rallies are young conspiracy theorists with a grudge and aging, now mohawk-free punk-rockers who complain about "sheeple" while collecting their Dole money from the government.

There are more sensible ways to fight causes, and nobody will give you the time of day if you insist on using violence.

To even argue that violence is the only means is pretty ridiculous, and I hear that argument all the time from pro-AntiFa supporters.

No doubt, someone will slither in here now to call me a Nazi-sympathizer.

 

[ponderingturtle]

He didn't claim Nazis were good people.

He said there are good people on the side of white supremacists. He did not specifically name nazi's as being included in the good people who are white supremacists.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

You go ahead and do that, safe in the knowledge that there are people willing to stand up to the fascists, because you sure won't.

Then why do they do it whilst hiding their identities? How're you standing up for anything if you're disguising your true self?

More to the point, how can we pretend to promote freedom of speech if we stifle the speech of those we disagree with?

 

[ponderingturtle]

From what I've gathered from supporters of these.. ahem, children in bandannas and hoods, is that anyone opposing their naive and embarrassing brand of counter-protesting, is a Nazi! Which makes sense, if you're 12, think about it.

As this is a white supremacists march, it really isn't too far off to call them all nazi's even though only a percentage might identify as such.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

As this is a white supremacists march, it really isn't too far off to call them all nazi's even though only a percentage might identify as such.

I'm talking generally about people who rightfully disagree with the AntiFa's methods.

I'm a grown man who couldn't give a damn who you are, what you believe, or where you're from. To me, an idiot is an idiot, and a good guy is a good guy, regardless of colour, creed, and whatever else.

Now, the fact that I don't side with the AntiFa seems to draw funny responses that I must be a Nazi sympathizer, and I think that smacks of ignorance and stupidity.

Some people really do not live in the real world, they live in online message-board worlds of vigilantism.

To want to fight ignorance is noble, but to display such petty ignorance in the name of fighting it is silly and ironic.

 

[Belz...]

Now, the fact that I don't side with the AntiFa seems to draw funny responses that I must be a Nazi sympathizer, and I think that smacks of ignorance and stupidity.

Or ideology. That stuff can make you ignore knowledge and intelligence.

 

[The Big Dog]

Then why do they do it whilst hiding their identities? How're you standing up for anything if you're disguising your true self?

More to the point, how can we pretend to promote freedom of speech if we stifle the speech of those we disagree with?

It is actually worse, because this weekend the main targets of the Antifa/Black block were not fascists, but rather were journalists and photographers in particular.

 

[shuttlt]

He said there are good people on the side of white supremacists. He did not specifically name nazi's as being included in the good people who are white supremacists.

He says there were people there who weren't Neo-Nazis or White Nationalists. The "very fine people" line, pretty clearly is about this third group. One could argue that he is wrong that such a third group existed. Rather than "not specifically including" Nazis in his "white supremacists are good people" comment... he pretty clearly excludes both Nazis and white supremacists. It's stuff like this that has caused me to stop believing my own side. The damn election was full of it.

Incidentally, you equivocate between the two sentences in your post.... in the first you are talking about the good people being on the side of white supremacists. I am not clear in what sense you mean this, presumably these people aren't themselves white supremacists? In your second sentence the good people are now white supremacists. This hardly matters though.