Antifa - freedom fighters, necessary evil, terrorists?

Page 6 of 7 [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,238
Location: Long Island, New York

13 Aug 2018, 9:42 am

The_Walrus wrote:
Bataar wrote:
Spooky_Mulder wrote:
Yeah - still no sympathy for the far right from me at all.

I couldn’t give a f about the far right’s “right” to sprout bigotry.

I want Germany’s law that makes even waving a nazi flag illegal to apply to Nazis and Confederate scum in the states. Extreme? I think not. Boomers would likely disagree, but we’ve seen where kid gloves have led.


If some one or some group in the government had the power to make it illegal to wave the Nazi flag, they would have the power to make it illegal to wave any flag. Free speech is free speech even when you disagree with it. I see people proposing they make "hate speech" illegal, but what happens when they determine that saying negative things about the president is hate speech? That can of worms should never be opened.

While we must be careful, I think it's important to remember that the slippery slope is a logical fallacy - there's no reason why banning Nazi symbols would make it more likely that legitimate debate would be shut down. For example, WrongPlanet bans Nazis, but we are still having this discussion.

I think there is a legitimate case to be made that anyone chanting Nazi slogans or waving Nazi flags is effectively threatening the groups that the Nazis systematically exterminated. Even in America, free speech protections don't extend to threats.

Ideally I'd like to see this nonsense stamped out by "the marketplace of ideas". I think that's viable in Seattle, but it's not viable in places like West Virginia, that voted 68.5% for Trump.

“Slippery Slope” fears do not come to fruition everytime and sometimes end up being paranoia. An example of paranoia is the “Unite to Right”. A few hundred Nazis last year were so easily scared off they were down to two dozen this year means the situation in America was never remotely like Nazi Germany in 1933. “Slippery Slopes” do partially or totally come true often enough, quite often enough that it should always be taken into consideration. It is an important factor for why we essentially do have any legitamite privacy anymore. The particular reasons to fear the slippery slope about speech/language control mainly is because it is happaning already. Racism has gone from an individuals bieng prejudiced or discriminating against people because of there race to societal discrimination and almost any form of bigotry. Offending speech that people are advocating that needs to be or has been banned or gets you fired has gone from the type of Nazi stuff we are talking about in this thread to words that are dated such as “colored”.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,030
Location: New England

13 Aug 2018, 8:45 pm

Image


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


Spooky_Mulder
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,041
Location: NY

13 Aug 2018, 9:38 pm

Darmok wrote:
Image


:lol:

Yeah, sure... Also thanks for continuing to remind us how funny and weird Trump's reich wingers are.

NAZI GOAL:

Building a white Christian country through eliminating those of a different race and religion.

Nazis also:
- Sent LGBTQ to concentration camps since Nazis believed we brought the country down
- Extremely anti-immigrant, saw even one drop as alien blood as weakening the country
- Thought a woman's place was in the kitchen and as birthers, women didn't have the right to speak up
- Killed autistic people because they saw us as inferior
- Sent communists, socialists, and democrats to concentration camps as "political enemies"

TRUMP SUPPORTERS GOAL:

Building a white Christian country through discriminating against those of a different race and religion.

Trump supporters also:
- Seek to restrict LGBTQ rights since Trumpsters believe we bring the country down
- Extremely anti-immigrant, see foreigners as weakening the country - they cheer about foreigners being imprisoned by their furher
- Think a woman's place is in the kitchen and as birthers, see women fighting for their rights as evil
- Particularly target mocking their political enemies by saying they're autistic
- Have frequently issued death threats towards communists, socialists, and democrats (A Trumpster rally is on video calling for a genocide)

-------

RIGHT-WING SHOWS ITS OPPOSITION TO FREE SPEECH IN POLLING AND IN ACTION

Stating right-wing overall instead of a fringe, in other words most right-wingers aren't as first amendment friendly as they comically falsely lead themselves into believing.

FIRST AMENDMENT

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press[1]; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble[2], and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Polling found:

[1]51% of Republicans (only 24% Democrats) believe that the press shouldn't be allowed to criticize political leaders
[2]68% of Republicans (whereas 88% of Democrats) believe that non-violent protest should be allowed

http://www.people-press.org/2017/03/02/large-majorities-see-checks-and-balances-right-to-protest-as-essential-for-democracy/democracy_3/

So much support for the first amendment among the right. Not a surprise though, the Declaration of Independence being tweeted triggered many of them as well. :lol: (I wish I was joking)

Plus:

Trump and many to most of his supporters called for a "Muslim ban" (Trump's own words)

All Trump supporters and their fuhrer repeatedly attack the fourth estate (the press) calling them "the enemy of the American people" [nazis also did this, Trumpsters yell "fake news" Nazi yell "luggenpresse" (lying press)]

Many right wingers have called for laws against the right to peacefully assemble:

https://www.nlg.org/conservative-led-anti-protest-legislation-already-doubled-since-last-year/

Thank you for posting signs of right-wing weirdness for us to all look at and laugh about though. :mrgreen:



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

13 Aug 2018, 11:47 pm

I have some questions for free speech absolutists.

A man yells "white power" into an angry crowd. The nearest minority just happens to get beat up shortly afterwards. Given the context, should this be protected speech?

Do you believe Nazis argue out of good faith?

Are challenges towards authority and power equal to mindless hatred directed towards marginalized groups?

Do you believe people with the best ideas always have the most charisma, or are always the best at debating?

Is my life worth debating over?



Spooky_Mulder
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,041
Location: NY

14 Aug 2018, 1:17 am

RushKing wrote:
I have some questions for free speech absolutists.

A man yells "white power" into an angry crowd. The nearest minority just happens to get beat up shortly afterwards. Given the context, should this be protected speech?

Do you believe Nazis argue out of good faith?

Are challenges towards authority and power equal to mindless hatred directed towards marginalized groups?

Do you believe people with the best ideas always have the most charisma, or are always the best at debating?

Is my life worth debating over?


Precisely. All excellent points.

There is a difference between free speech and influencing others to violent action against a group of people. “Jews will not replace us” isn’t free speech - it’s a THREAT. Threats should be treated differently- the ability to incite violence (which is what the right wants) should never be tolerated. Threats with the intent to strike terror (which is what their tiki threat march was) is different from free speech (free speech doesn’t threaten someone’s life).

The other term the right likes to throw around to hide their intent “it’s just my opinion.”

Etc. “Jews are controlling the world and destroying my way of life!! !” “That’s anti semitism” “Nah, just my opinion. Stop being bigoted about my opinion!! !”

Bigotry ISN’T an opinion - bigotry is bigotry.

The way the far right defines “free speech” and “opinion” is different from the way the rest of the world does. The far right have repeatedly shown it’s a way of dressing up “I should be able to use my bigoted views to harass people without consequence.”

For example, they’d see getting fired over calling me a “fag” due to workplace harassment as an encroachment on their “free speech rights.” That definition of it, allowing harassment and forcing private institutions into accepting it, is f-ed up and shouldn’t be normalized.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,238
Location: Long Island, New York

14 Aug 2018, 2:58 am

Authoritarians be it left or right use freedom of speech as a weapon to destroy freedom of speech. They always have and always will.

Terrorists be it Nazis or Jahids want us to be afraid, very afriad. That is why they are labeled terrorists. They want us to overreact. Overreaction creates martyrs and moral equivalence where there should not be. Americans have easily and willingly given up bedrock principles and freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism. Now so many of us want to give up more so that a few dozen or a few hundred Nazis/KKK types can’t threaten people. It is all very distressing.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

14 Aug 2018, 3:28 am

RushKing wrote:
A man yells "white power" into an angry crowd. The nearest minority just happens to get beat up shortly afterwards. Given the context, should this be protected speech?


Postulate lacks important details. I could model this as a single white nazi shouting that at a crowd of angry non-white people and then getting beat up for it. In this context, the white guy is the minority and while I'd agree his opinion is s**t, I think his right not to be beaten for it should be protected.

But in the way that you probably intended this postulation to be interpreted: can you imagine someone in police custody arguing that "I can't be held responsible for my beating that guy up; someone nearby shouted a slogan I like!".

Quote:
Do you believe Nazis argue out of good faith?


No, but I don't believe Antifa does, either.


Quote:
Are challenges towards authority and power equal to mindless hatred directed towards marginalized groups?

Equal how? As in "is combating the latter worth sacrificing the means by which we do the former"? I say no, and furthermore that the climate created by people like Antifa, in which people with real and reasonable concerns about things like the effect of large-scale immigration on the labour market are branded as fascists, nazis and bigots, has contributed to the increase of the proportion of rreal nazis in the public discourse AND provided the actual nazis with a functional victim narrative.


Quote:
Do you believe people with the best ideas always have the most charisma, or are always the best at debating?

Not necessarily, but ideas need to stand on their merit and be defended on the basis of the same. This just makes it seem like you're trying to have your ideas be proclaimed superior a priori. Accepted on faith, if you will...


Quote:
Is my life worth debating over?


That's a weird phrasing. Makes it seem like your life is worthess. Can I instead suggest that your life is not up for debate? And that free speech is no threat to that proposition?


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Bataar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Sep 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,846
Location: Post Falls, ID

14 Aug 2018, 11:39 am

RushKing wrote:
I have some questions for free speech absolutists.

A man yells "white power" into an angry crowd. The nearest minority just happens to get beat up shortly afterwards. Given the context, should this be protected speech?

Yes it should. Obviously the people who attacked the minority should get punished because they took the violent action of their own free will. The person who yelled, "white power" in no way forced them to take such an action.

Quote:
Do you believe Nazis argue out of good faith?

No, not really.

Quote:
Are challenges towards authority and power equal to mindless hatred directed towards marginalized groups?

Definitely not.

Quote:
Do you believe people with the best ideas always have the most charisma, or are always the best at debating?

Again, definitely not.



Spiderpig
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,893

14 Aug 2018, 2:57 pm

What’s the point in suppressing threats? If someone is determined to harm you, it’s better to be warned.


_________________
The red lake has been forgotten. A dust devil stuns you long enough to shroud forever those last shards of wisdom. The breeze rocking this forlorn wasteland whispers in your ears, “Não resta mais que uma sombra”.


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,789
Location: London

15 Aug 2018, 3:20 am

Spiderpig wrote:
What’s the point in suppressing threats? If someone is determined to harm you, it’s better to be warned.

In most cases, the threat is the harm. The aim is to create an atmosphere of intimidation and scare people. This can be used to get someone you don't like to leave Twitter, or to stop them from leaving their house.



Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

15 Aug 2018, 3:22 am

Also, people need to stop conflating the concept of hate speech and incitement.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Tanker
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 28 Apr 2018
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 125
Location: Holland

15 Aug 2018, 6:09 am

As soon as anyone needs to use violence and censorship to make sure their ideas are heard, they are in the wrong.

Physical violence is wrong. As soon as you instigate it, you are the aggressor.

Antifa is, to my eyes, a group of dumb, shortsighted, uneducated and brainwashed idiots. who will gladly commit violence in the name of "good". Meaning their perceived and imagined "good".

They are being used to push an ideological agenda that has plagued humanity for almost a century now.

The funniest parts of Antifa: they have become the evil they were so desperate to fight. they are destroying themselves(as i predicted) and as soon as you probe them for answers on how to affect change... they clam up.

They dont have any real ideas, they just parrot what has been fed to them, like good little drones...

They are not freedom fighters, terrorists or anything else. They are pawns.



Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,665
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

15 Aug 2018, 5:20 pm

Are people now just lazily labelling anyone protesting against hard right politics as 'antifa' or are they distinguishing them from traditional anarchists and protesters?



Spooky_Mulder
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,041
Location: NY

15 Aug 2018, 6:29 pm

Biscuitman wrote:
Are people now just lazily labelling anyone protesting against hard right politics as 'antifa' or are they distinguishing them from traditional anarchists and protesters?


Trump supporters call literally everyone they're against anti-fa.

People with common sense (most of the country) are already against Trump.

We're also getting paid by Soros. :lol:

It helps with their vast conspiracy theory of why most of the country is against their orange ogre.



Hyeokgeose
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Oct 2017
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 309
Location: USA

18 Aug 2018, 9:19 pm

Biscuitman wrote:
Are people now just lazily labelling anyone protesting against hard right politics as 'antifa' or are they distinguishing them from traditional anarchists and protesters?


I can tell you, as a political activist, no, on the right most of us don't label everyone protesting as "antifa." Antifa is just that: Antifa. They're pretty easy to distinguish as they wear all black and belong to organized chapters (e.g. Boston Antifa) as a part of an overall larger movement that extends to western Europe. Otherwise, we do not call everyone Antifa, they made it clear to everyone that they are their own entity.


_________________
"It’s not until they tell you you’re going to die soon that you realize how short life is. Time is the most valuable thing in life because it never comes back. And whether you spend it in the arms of a loved one or alone in a prison-cell, life is what you make of it. Dream big."
-Stefán Karl Stefánsson
10 July, 1975 - 21 August, 2018.


Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,665
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

19 Aug 2018, 7:48 am

Hyeokgeose wrote:
Biscuitman wrote:
Are people now just lazily labelling anyone protesting against hard right politics as 'antifa' or are they distinguishing them from traditional anarchists and protesters?


I can tell you, as a political activist, no, on the right most of us don't label everyone protesting as "antifa." Antifa is just that: Antifa. They're pretty easy to distinguish as they wear all black and belong to organized chapters (e.g. Boston Antifa) as a part of an overall larger movement that extends to western Europe. Otherwise, we do not call everyone Antifa, they made it clear to everyone that they are their own entity.


thanks. I am in the UK so this is all a bit alien to me