Democrats = Antifa = BS

The Shrike said:
Please pardon my ignorance on this. That does indeed strike me as messed up, despite the Supreme Court's rulings.

Okay, I'll amend my threshold to where I thought it was as opposed to where it evidently is: I'd prefer the line to be nudged back a bit so that you forfeit your free speech protection when you promote violence to people even when they aren't brandishing weapons and standing next to a target of the rhetoric. I guess chants of "white power" are vague enough for me to be protected free speech, but "Jews will not replace us" is not.

Now that's the legal stuff. Counterprotesters are free to go after even the protected speech that they find offensive, and I would gladly join in shouting down any fools chanting white power.

Again shouting down =/= smashing storefronts and starting a riot because someone said something you don't like. This is why Antifa is bs, and they're enabling the creeps they're trying to stifle.
Click to expand...

Yes and the violent rioters are a problem and should be arrested. But of course you are using the right wing methodology to say that all the counter protestors many of whom are not there to riot and do identify as antifa are not worth having around.

Simply documenting the alt right and publicising their racism and fascism was the origin of the antifa movement. But the right wing is great at shaping the narrative so that their opponents get tarred with the extremists and they don't.

Take the pro life movement, a similar single issue movement to the antifa movement. You see a lot of politicians manage to call themselves pro life and embrace the movement with the harassment of rape victims and all that with out getting tarred with the bombings and murders.
 
The Shrike said:
Okay, I'll amend my threshold to where I thought it was as opposed to where it evidently is: I'd prefer the line to be nudged back a bit so that you forfeit your free speech protection when you promote violence to people even when they aren't brandishing weapons and standing next to a target of the rhetoric. I guess chants of "white power" are vague enough for me to be protected free speech, but "Jews will not replace us" is not.
Click to expand...

Worth note: the "Jews will not" guys in Charolettesville were openly planning to bring weapons and attack people, and they did so in writing online, and these messages were shown to the town's government. That "rally" should have never been allowed in the first place.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Yes and the violent rioters are a problem and should be arrested. But of course you are using the right wing methodology to say that all the counter protestors many of whom are not there to riot and do identify as antifa are not worth having around.

Simply documenting the alt right and publicising their racism and fascism was the origin of the antifa movement. But the right wing is great at shaping the narrative so that their opponents get tarred with the extremists and they don't.

Take the pro life movement, a similar single issue movement to the antifa movement. You see a lot of politicians manage to call themselves pro life and embrace the movement with the harassment of rape victims and all that with out getting tarred with the bombings and murders.
Click to expand...

As I remember it, other than a brief moment of lauding in the wake of Charlottesville, antifa's overriding contribution to the narrative of racism and fascism in the past few years has been: totally overshadowing BLM events with their rudderless stupidity. BLM and Antifa "solidarity" (such as it can be called when antifa is involved) was brief before BLM saw a bunch of young white kids hijack their campaigns, lecture them (I remind you: young white kids lecturing black community elders) about how to wage "proper" resistance, and basically wrote the reactionary script of "black people('s supposed friends) riot (after all the black people leave an entirely too boring for even local news candlelight vigil and some speeches that wrapped up so everyone could go eat supper)" for them.
 
Mumbles said:
Worth note: the "Jews will not" guys in Charolettesville were openly planning to bring weapons and attack people, and they did so in writing online, and these messages were shown to the town's government. That "rally" should have never been allowed in the first place.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
ponderingturtle said:
. . . you are using the right wing methodology to say that all the counter protestors many of whom are not there to riot and do identify as antifa are not worth having around.
Click to expand...
I assume that it works best in a riot to disperse all the protestors rather than interview them individually to determine who is promoting violence and who is demonstrating peaceably. This is unfortunate for the peaceful protestors.

ponderingturtle said:
But the right wing is great at shaping the narrative so that their opponents get tarred with the extremists and they don't.
Click to expand...
I don't know if the Right is good at this or if they're simply shameless in their rhetoric and appealing to a more gullible electorate.

ponderingturtle said:
Take the pro life movement, a similar single issue movement to the antifa movement. You see a lot of politicians manage to call themselves pro life and embrace the movement with the harassment of rape victims and all that with out getting tarred with the bombings and murders.
Click to expand...
Because tacit endorsement of such reprehensible action does not "tar" a politician in the eyes of pro-life voters. They don't have a problem with harassing rape victims (they were asking for it) and getting bombed at an abortion clinic is simply God's justice against the baby killers at Planned Parenthood.
 
theprestige said:
It's not like any significant republicans support neo Nazis.
Click to expand...

varwoche said:
Incorrect, no soup for you.

If a Democrat said that some of Antifa were very fine people, it would be cited and tallied.

If a Democrat re-tweeted Antifa on multiple instances, it would be cited and tallied.

If a Democrat pretended not to know what Antifa was, it probably wouldn't be tallied, but we'd all rightfully think this person was a liar who was catering to Antifa.
Click to expand...
Have you had the opportunity to think this through?
 
It seems like we're pretty much all agreed that antifa are bad people, that their antics are inexcusable, that nobody should support them, and that any support for them should be denounced.

Is that correct? Do we all agree on these points?
 
theprestige said:
It seems like we're pretty much all agreed that antifa are bad people, that their antics are inexcusable, that nobody should support them, and that any support for them should be denounced.

Is that correct? Do we all agree on these points?
Click to expand...

No, we do not all agree on these points.
 
I'm not going to read the last 15 pages so maybe some kind soul can answer this for me:

Have we determined that Antifa are not some radical wing of the Dems?
 
theprestige said:
It seems like we're pretty much all agreed that antifa are bad people, that their antics are inexcusable, that nobody should support them, and that any support for them should be denounced.

Is that correct? Do we all agree on these points?
Click to expand...

No. Very few would agree on these points. Maybe one or the other in different circumstances.
 
theprestige said:
It seems like we're pretty much all agreed that antifa are bad people, that their antics are inexcusable, that nobody should support them, and that any support for them should be denounced.

Is that correct? Do we all agree on these points?
Click to expand...

Since you have no qualifiers like "some", "many", "several", the responses, in order so you don't get them mixed in with the rest of the straw in the thread.

No.
No.
No.
No.
 
theprestige said:
It seems like we're pretty much all agreed that antifa are bad people, that their antics are inexcusable, that nobody should support them, and that any support for them should be denounced.

Is that correct? Do we all agree on these points?
Click to expand...


the prestige, when faced with the reality of racists in the Republican party:
theprestige said:
You telling me that he's an overt racist is enough to make me think he's probably not that bad. But it's not enough to make me think I should bother researching him or defending him to you.
Click to expand...


I think a similar sentiment is all the response his questions deserve.
 
theprestige said:
It seems like we're pretty much all agreed that antifa are bad people, that their antics are inexcusable, that nobody should support them, and that any support for them should be denounced.

Is that correct? Do we all agree on these points?
Click to expand...

No, apparently they are good people, their actions are justified, everybody should support them and failing to provide support for them should be denounced.

And since the OP alleges that nobody high up in the Democratic Party supports them, the Democrats should be denounced.
 
Stacyhs said:
I'm not going to read the last 15 pages so maybe some kind soul can answer this for me:

Have we determined that Antifa are not some radical wing of the Dems?
Click to expand...

They can't even be demonstrated to be left wing, and certainly no one of any prominence in the Democratic Party is seen to support them or even identify them as misguided Dems
 
Thermal said:
They can't even be demonstrated to be left wing, and certainly no one of any prominence in the Democratic Party is seen to support them or even identify them as misguided Dems
Click to expand...

Thanks, Thermal. I rather thought as much. But has that stopped certain Trump supporting members from still claiming it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom