Page 2 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447
Location: Oz

04 Oct 2019, 6:21 pm

VegetableMan wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
ANTIFA merely do what made the Greatest Generation so great - they confront and defeat fascist thugs.



They're a bunch of thugs who attack anyone who doesn't walk lockstep with radical leftist ideology. And they're not really good thugs, at that. They seem to get the crap kicked out of them on a regular basis. If they had to take on real fascists, they wouldn't last very long.


Presumably, you mean *some* members of Antifa.
The intimidation of that elderly couple in the video would hardly be representative of Antifa, surely.
Surely, a lot of the members of Antifa would have been appalled by such behaviour and condemn this sort of, err, behaviour.
Surely, the more rational individuals in the organisation would see the damage such emotionalistic nonsense like that does to the cause.
Surely, that sort of thuggery simply gives non-left-wingers a "free kick".

Surely. 8)


_________________
I'm a thinker. Some think I'm a stinker. Pepe le Pew. ;)
Down with big business!...
I'm not here to change the world...There isn't a big enough soiled nappy bin... ;)
Autistic/scout motto: "Give me a better argument and I will listen..."
"Honesty is not a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly selfish virtue man can practice: his refusal to sacrifice the reality of his own existence to the deluded consciousness of others."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8) I'm a rationalist...Deal with it...:mrgreen:


Hollywood_Guy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2017
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 778
Location: US

04 Oct 2019, 6:25 pm

Pepe wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Antifa showed their true selves not the public image of heroic anti fascists that are a little too rowdy. The elderly couples "crime" was attending a debate on Free Speech. In the antifa world Free Speech is just a fascist tool, so any means necessary is needed to stomp out free speech(except their own).


Antifa's manifesto explicitly supports violence for violence.
As such, I will never respect that particular aspect of their philosophy.

Violence against violence may have been appropriate during the social collapse in pre-Nazi Germany, but one can hardly simply superimpose tactics employed then, now.
-There is no social collapse in any of the counties I can think of where Antifa is established.
-There is due process in existence now which addresses miscreantic behaviour.

Fnord wrote:
In any oppressive ideology, free speech is just a "tool" of the opposition.

Both fascist and anti-fascist ideologies, when put into practice, violently oppose free speech.


Oh,
You are just saying that because you can. :mrgreen:


There is social collapse in more or less all the west. Anything that says it's not true at all is simply feeding from denial or delusion.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447
Location: Oz

04 Oct 2019, 6:26 pm

cberg wrote:
Because we all know more whining will stop the political violence. :roll:

If the violence is so bad in your eyes, figure out ways to make these people negotiate. If you think Antifa is as bad as the Taliban, then learn from history & bring them into a diplomatic scenario.

Right now you're just belly aching.

To whom are you directing this comment?

Hollywood_Guy wrote:
Pepe wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Antifa showed their true selves not the public image of heroic anti fascists that are a little too rowdy. The elderly couples "crime" was attending a debate on Free Speech. In the antifa world Free Speech is just a fascist tool, so any means necessary is needed to stomp out free speech(except their own).


Antifa's manifesto explicitly supports violence for violence.
As such, I will never respect that particular aspect of their philosophy.

Violence against violence may have been appropriate during the social collapse in pre-Nazi Germany, but one can hardly simply superimpose tactics employed then, now.
-There is no social collapse in any of the counties I can think of where Antifa is established.
-There is due process in existence now which addresses miscreantic behaviour.

Fnord wrote:
In any oppressive ideology, free speech is just a "tool" of the opposition.

Both fascist and anti-fascist ideologies, when put into practice, violently oppose free speech.


Oh,
You are just saying that because you can. :mrgreen:


There is social collapse in more or less all the west. Anything that says it's not true at all is simply feeding from denial or delusion.


Give me some counties, where Antifa is established, that compares to the degree of social dysfunction/collapse that was experienced in the period just prior to the establishment of the Nazi dictatorship?

I thought I made the context perfectly clear. :scratch:

Amerika has major problems but the rule of order seems well established in comparison to the aspect of history I was referring to.


_________________
I'm a thinker. Some think I'm a stinker. Pepe le Pew. ;)
Down with big business!...
I'm not here to change the world...There isn't a big enough soiled nappy bin... ;)
Autistic/scout motto: "Give me a better argument and I will listen..."
"Honesty is not a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly selfish virtue man can practice: his refusal to sacrifice the reality of his own existence to the deluded consciousness of others."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8) I'm a rationalist...Deal with it...:mrgreen:


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,054
Location: I'm on the streets like curbs

04 Oct 2019, 11:39 pm

Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
ANTIFA merely do what made the Greatest Generation so great - they confront and defeat fascist thugs.


What about the defeat of communist/socialist thugs.
Would it be preferable for a society to be "thug" free?

Your context seems to be rather broad.
Could we narrow it down to modern times in regards to my question:
Do you believe the establishment is ineffective in restraining antisocial behaviour by the alt.reich?


I do believe the establishment is often ineffective at restraining violence from the far-right. Among factors are that often the state's security apparatus includes people who are sympathetic to far-right ideology and the violence it encourages. Part of the problem is that white nationalists and their sympathizers sometimes form part of the establishment. There's an election here and she won't be running again, but my current MP is someone who speaks in front of groups with white nationalist agendas and then tries to play dumb about it. She isn't the only Tory with ties to white nationalists either. They've been a problem within the Conservative Party here basically since they merged with the Reform Party, who never even really tried to conceal those ties.

The left since the 70s (at least in Anglo-America) has generally realized that violence against other people rarely benefits their cause. Parts of the radical left still encourage property damage, but also will insist that property damage and violence against people are not morally equivalent, which isn't an unreasonable thing to suggest (even if you still end up condemning property damage, it's reasonable to see vandalism and violence as not the same thing morally).

Ideally, it would be nice to have a world were thuggery didn't exist, but since we don't live in that ideal world I really have no problem with some leftists protesters risking their safety to ensure the other leftist protesters aren't attacked by jackbooted Stormfront goons or by police looking for an excuse to riot.

If Nazis want to peacefully counter-protest, all the power to them. But since they're known for instigating violence I've got utterly no qualms about the targets of their violence responding in kind.


_________________
knife goes in, guts come out


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447
Location: Oz

05 Oct 2019, 8:16 pm

funeralxempire wrote:

I do believe the establishment is often ineffective at restraining violence from the far-right. Among factors are that often the state's security apparatus includes people who are sympathetic to far-right ideology and the violence it encourages. Part of the problem is that white nationalists and their sympathizers sometimes form part of the establishment. There's an election here and she won't be running again, but my current MP is someone who speaks in front of groups with white nationalist agendas and then tries to play dumb about it. She isn't the only Tory with ties to white nationalists either. They've been a problem within the Conservative Party here basically since they merged with the Reform Party, who never even really tried to conceal those ties.

The left since the 70s (at least in Anglo-America) has generally realized that violence against other people rarely benefits their cause. Parts of the radical left still encourage property damage, but also will insist that property damage and violence against people are not morally equivalent, which isn't an unreasonable thing to suggest (even if you still end up condemning property damage, it's reasonable to see vandalism and violence as not the same thing morally).

Ideally, it would be nice to have a world were thuggery didn't exist, but since we don't live in that ideal world I really have no problem with some leftists protesters risking their safety to ensure the other leftist protesters aren't attacked by jackbooted Stormfront goons or by police looking for an excuse to riot.

If Nazis want to peacefully counter-protest, all the power to them. But since they're known for instigating violence I've got utterly no qualms about the targets of their violence responding in kind.


What stands out to me is the difference between defending oneself and actively engaging/initiating violence and intimidation.
I have no problem with self-defence, even with the possible legal repercussions, but not premeditated and deliberately antagonistic anti-social behaviour.

When I was younger (and dumber) I was incensed when a non-disabled person parked in disabled, err, parking.
I then reasoned that the only people I would approach were those who were not in a position to intimidate me.
I acknowledged to myself that I wouldn't be so "brave" if a gang of bikies abused the parking restrictions.
My sanctimonious, self-righteous and virtue signalling position was contingent on the other party's physical strength.
At this point, I decided not to involve myself in such matters again.

If you look at the video, you see a very "brave" young "individua"l, flanked on one side by two of her own protesting group, intimidating a frail old couple.
How virtuous and epically heroic of this person. <extreme vitriolic sarcasm>

As I have said before, I believe this incident is hardly representative of the bulk Antifa's membership.
Well, I sincerely hope so. 8O


_________________
I'm a thinker. Some think I'm a stinker. Pepe le Pew. ;)
Down with big business!...
I'm not here to change the world...There isn't a big enough soiled nappy bin... ;)
Autistic/scout motto: "Give me a better argument and I will listen..."
"Honesty is not a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly selfish virtue man can practice: his refusal to sacrifice the reality of his own existence to the deluded consciousness of others."
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8) I'm a rationalist...Deal with it...:mrgreen: