17 Aug 2017, 2:08 pm
17 Aug 2017, 2:09 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 2:10 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 2:14 pm
17 Aug 2017, 2:15 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 2:16 pm
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,196
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
17 Aug 2017, 2:18 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 2:19 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 2:21 pm
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,196
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
17 Aug 2017, 2:22 pm
17 Aug 2017, 2:26 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
No, the problem is certain people defending the racist right from behind selective talk of rights.
"Selective talk of rights"?
This you'll have to provide examples of, especially in light of those you've allied yourself with advocating that "Nazis" (as defined arbitrarily and whimsically by so-called "anti-fascists") are fair game for violence.
So tell me, Bill. Who are the people "defending the racist right from behind selective talk of rights"?
Kraichgauer wrote:
There have been in the past members that had promoted out-and-out racism. None of them lasted long on this forum.
I was not referring to WP in my post, but rather the types who had marched in the Unite The Right rally.
I was not referring to WP in my post, but rather the types who had marched in the Unite The Right rally.
Whereas I referred explicitly to PPR. You could at least read my posts before responding.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 2:51 pm
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
No, the problem is certain people defending the racist right from behind selective talk of rights.
"Selective talk of rights"?
This you'll have to provide examples of, especially in light of those you've allied yourself with advocating that "Nazis" (as defined arbitrarily and whimsically by so-called "anti-fascists") are fair game for violence.
So tell me, Bill. Who are the people "defending the racist right from behind selective talk of rights"?
Kraichgauer wrote:
There have been in the past members that had promoted out-and-out racism. None of them lasted long on this forum.
I was not referring to WP in my post, but rather the types who had marched in the Unite The Right rally.
I was not referring to WP in my post, but rather the types who had marched in the Unite The Right rally.
Whereas I referred explicitly to PPR. You could at least read my posts before responding.
From posts on the matter from the more conservative element here, there is talk about Nazis having the right of free expression, while implying that anti-racist demonstrations are violent and illegitimate. WP conservatives on related threads have already defended the Nazis by saying that they had had a permit, while the counter demonstration did not. Sometimes doing the right thing means marching without a permit.
And yes, I did read your post, but I tend to have a stream of consciousness thing going on.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 3:00 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 3:02 pm
KagamineLen wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Alexanderplatz wrote:
French Right, and it has been exported to Germany as well.
Glad to know f*cked-in-the-head crazy isn't restricted to just America.
Be careful what you say here, Kraichgauer. You just might get a warning.
Let 'em warn away.
17 Aug 2017, 3:32 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
No, the problem is certain people defending the racist right from behind selective talk of rights.
"Selective talk of rights"?
This you'll have to provide examples of, especially in light of those you've allied yourself with advocating that "Nazis" (as defined arbitrarily and whimsically by so-called "anti-fascists") are fair game for violence.
So tell me, Bill. Who are the people "defending the racist right from behind selective talk of rights"?
Kraichgauer wrote:
There have been in the past members that had promoted out-and-out racism. None of them lasted long on this forum.
I was not referring to WP in my post, but rather the types who had marched in the Unite The Right rally.
I was not referring to WP in my post, but rather the types who had marched in the Unite The Right rally.
Whereas I referred explicitly to PPR. You could at least read my posts before responding.
From posts on the matter from the more conservative element here, there is talk about Nazis having the right of free expression, while implying that anti-racist demonstrations are violent and illegitimate.
These are not mutually exclusive positions, nor are they selective application of rights. The arguments you're presenting lack any nuance, and I'd be surprised if they were actually representative of anyone's opinion, but even were we to assume they are, it's not necessarily selective by any metric other than "was violence used/advocated?".
Quote:
WP conservatives on related threads have already defended the Nazis by saying that they had had a permit, while the counter demonstration did not. Sometimes doing the right thing means marching without a permit.
Was it the right thing, though? Was the behaviour of the "counter demonstration" a contributory factor to hostilities? As far as actual Nazis are concerned, I find the best option is to ignore them as befits their insignificant fringe status.
Quote:
And yes, I did read your post, but I tend to have a stream of consciousness thing going on.
As do many of us, I'm sure. Not a good excuse for causing confusion through inattention, however.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 Aug 2017, 3:47 pm
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
No, the problem is certain people defending the racist right from behind selective talk of rights.
"Selective talk of rights"?
This you'll have to provide examples of, especially in light of those you've allied yourself with advocating that "Nazis" (as defined arbitrarily and whimsically by so-called "anti-fascists") are fair game for violence.
So tell me, Bill. Who are the people "defending the racist right from behind selective talk of rights"?
Kraichgauer wrote:
There have been in the past members that had promoted out-and-out racism. None of them lasted long on this forum.
I was not referring to WP in my post, but rather the types who had marched in the Unite The Right rally.
I was not referring to WP in my post, but rather the types who had marched in the Unite The Right rally.
Whereas I referred explicitly to PPR. You could at least read my posts before responding.
From posts on the matter from the more conservative element here, there is talk about Nazis having the right of free expression, while implying that anti-racist demonstrations are violent and illegitimate.
These are not mutually exclusive positions, nor are they selective application of rights. The arguments you're presenting lack any nuance, and I'd be surprised if they were actually representative of anyone's opinion, but even were we to assume they are, it's not necessarily selective by any metric other than "was violence used/advocated?".
Quote:
WP conservatives on related threads have already defended the Nazis by saying that they had had a permit, while the counter demonstration did not. Sometimes doing the right thing means marching without a permit.
Was it the right thing, though? Was the behaviour of the "counter demonstration" a contributory factor to hostilities? As far as actual Nazis are concerned, I find the best option is to ignore them as befits their insignificant fringe status.
Quote:
And yes, I did read your post, but I tend to have a stream of consciousness thing going on.
As do many of us, I'm sure. Not a good excuse for causing confusion through inattention, however.
As far as I'm concerned, the Nazis had intended to provoke a violent response with their racist, homophobic, and Antisemitic chants and insults. Just like that racist goon driving into the crowd of counter protesters was premeditated.
Last edited by Kraichgauer on 17 Aug 2017, 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
