Antifa vs Capitol Hill

Post Reply New Topic

Someone tried to violenty set fire to America's democracy, and some Americans are absolutely fine with that.

It doesn't matter which side of a vote you are on, this is something your forefathers fought for, something you surely all learn about in history class and democracy & freedom are something your armed forces proudly protect. People just tried to steal that from you, and some are happy to turn a blind eye?! Absolutely gobsmacking.

You do not seem to pay much attention to the facts.  I wonder why ... ?

I think the term is "alternative facts."

A little too little, a little too late.

I agree that what SHOULD matter is occasion and venue. But I disagree that rioting the capitol Hill is worse than vandalism. I think it's the opposite. Vandalism causes permanent damage while a disruption of the event is temporary. I suspect Democrats know it too, and they pretend otherwise due to their political biases.

So what you're saying is everyone actually agrees with you, just some of us are lying about it just in order to disagree with you?

I think he may be talking through his MAGA hat...

So trying to overturn a democratic election to support an authoritarian leader is not worse than breaking a window? Naturally, the Capital building was vandalized at the same time, so where does property damage and insurrection fall in your judgement? If being appalled at an insurrection is "political bias," count me in.

I feel like sacking of the capitol at the behest of the president and people being mortally wounded (some died later or on site, don't know the details) inside is a just a *little more than disruption that is going to have permanent long lasting effects on the United States.

As far as violence, BLM protests were worse since they damaged a lot of property, while Capitol Hill event did not. Also BLM protests spread across the country while Capitol Hill event did not.



These are the standard left wing arguments that have some standard right wing counter-argiments. So basically what you are saying is that you view left wing violence as more justified because you, personally, sympathize with left wing arguments more. But by that logic right wing violence is justified too since, in their eyes, right wing argunents are valid. So then it's no longer about violence but really about whom you agree with. So saying its about violence is dishonest.



Can you give me some concrete examples?



Back in the 50-s it was treated as non issue. In 60-s it began to change with protests and so forth, although I would still agree the protests were in a minority. But by the 80-s opposition to racism was mainstream. And from 90s onward most Americans are obsessed with political correctness. So, as far as the past three decades are concerned, white racism is a lot more of a taboo than liberalism.

If there is some organization for black students nobody says it's bad, but if there were any organization for white students everyone would say it's racist. Also back during summer lots of monuments were destroyed, even by local governments, because they were racist, even if the relation to racism were very loose or even non existent. But if a mosque was destroyed because of the equally loose association between Muslims and terrorists, there would be an outcry.

Just for the record, I think destroying a mosque is just as bad as destroying those monuments. I am just pointing out the hypocricy of others.

Last edited by QFT on 08 Jan 2021, 2:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I sorta sense that this Insurrection was, at least partially, an "inside job," since it seems like a certain segment of the Capitol Police sympathized with the Insurrectionists. One even took a "selfie" with an insurrectionist while the destruction was going on.

Had this been an Antifa protest, there certainly would have been tear gas spread, and perhaps rubber bullets shot. They would NEVER had been able to get into the Capitol Building.

This would have been an insurrection.....if done by ANYONE, no matter what political persuasion. An Antifa person should be punished as severely as a Trumpster for this sedition.

Last edited by kraftiekortie on 08 Jan 2021, 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The Capital building was damaged. As far as Trump supporters in organizations like the Proud Boys and Three Percenters, not only did those groups storm the Capital building, they protested across the US. This has been a nation-wide insurrection in the name of Trump.

Fighting back would have been if they were to attack Chauvin in order to rescue Floyd back when he was alive (nobody did it by the way). But what they did after he died to people that have nothing to do with it is not fighting back.

If you say that by fighting back you mean fighting back against the system, then the Republicans do that too, in their eyes. You are just sympathizing with Democrats more to begin with, and it affects the way you decide when it is "fighting back against the system" and when it isn't.



How can you say this if a number of people -- including many Republicans -- were resigning in protest and demanding the removal of Trump..



I don't see that either, given that most of the media is against Trump and also Facebook and Twitter blocked his accounts. Now can you imagine a true dictatorship (whether it be China or Iran) when something like that could happen to it's leader?



So basically you sympathize with leftist cause and that's why you are more willing to excuse their behavior. But then it's a bit dishonest to say it's about behavior. A lot more honest would be to just talk about the cause.

We might not have a dictatorship----but Trump seemed to be shooting towards that, with himself as Supreme Leader.

Unlike Putin, though, Trump is incompetent.

I heard similar argument being made with regards to Capitol Hill riot, that some of them were not Trump supporters but just professional rioters. In fact they even found some people that participated in both sets of riots.



But the displeasure was a lot more quiet for sure. I mean, in most of the other situations people that engage in vandalism go to jail. Here they didn't. On the contrary, the local officials decided to help them out by ordering some monuments to be destroyed



I thought they got violent first and police was the one who was fighting back.



I thought tear gas was used in response to violence. Maybe what you mean is that "not all" of them were violent, only "some" of them. But what is the police supposed to do?



Actually that is the exact reason why I think the antifa riots were worse. Riots that destroy property are worse than the ones that don't. How can you say otherwise?