4 ms·

> Antifa have become the very thing they supposedly oppose. You know the funny thing about Antifa? They would cease to exist if these aspiring fascists stoppe

by nyargh 9y ago

> Antifa have become the very thing they supposedly oppose. You know the funny thing about Antifa? They would cease to exist if these aspiring fascists stopped supporting violence (direct or state-sponsored) against minority communities. You can't say the opposite is true. This attempt at moral equivalence is weak, weak, weak. Joey Gibson loudly, proudly aligns with fascist white nationalists and gaybashers, goes to liberal enclaves to provoke (er... "trigger" -- in his words) and gets punched. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Despite all the Freeze Peach winging that goes on here - "Fighting Words" are an important limitation of that right in the 'States. Gibson walks hand-in-hand with those who regularly threaten violence and intimidate minorities. There is no "both sides-ism" on this issue in civil society. You can't simultaneously support those who terrorize American minorities and claim you are supporting our nation's ideals. The math isn't that difficult here. EDIT: And before you drag the ACLU into this as a counterexample a) they have a solid track record of defending all sides - where Gibson clearly has an agenda to provoke one side and b) they have drawn the line at defending armed protest after the shit show in Charlottesville.

krapp 9y ago
>They would cease to exist if these aspiring fascists stopped supporting violence (direct or state-sponsored) against minority communities. They would have to be a surprisingly disciplined bunch of radicals were that to be the case.
- nyargh 9y ago
  > They would have to be a surprisingly disciplined bunch of radicals were that to be the case. True, white supremacists don't exactly have a great history of non-violence.
  - krapp 9y ago
    I was talking about Antifa, but yes. Although it is easier for the white supremacists to keep the law on their side, unfortunately. The ones who aren't utter thugs know not to throw the first punch. There's probably a lot of low hanging fruit left, though. But would Antifa really just pack up their masks and bats and go home if the white supremacists stopped giving them the rationale around which they've built their identity? It seems doubtful to me.
    - nyargh 9y ago
      > But would Antifa really just pack up their masks and bats and go home ... ? You know that "Antifa" has been around in various incarnations since 1930s, right? They have "packed up and gone home" many times over the past 80+ years as fascist/far-right movements have come and gone. Also, I believe giving agency to the latest version of "Antifa" as some sort of cohesive, organized group is a mistake. I don't believe they have any sort of hierarchy or are particularly well organized, beyond doing a good job consistently showing up at recent far-right rallies.
MrZongle2 9y ago
"...if these aspiring fascists..." Defined by whom?
- nyargh 9y ago
  Maybe include the rest of the quote: "... if these aspiring fascists stopped supporting violence (direct or state-sponsored) against minority communities. "
  - MrZongle2 9y ago
    Ok, I'll bite: how are they supporting violence? Who has made that determination?
    - nyargh 9y ago
      I really shouldn't bite, but by advocating for a white, christian ethnostate in a multi-cultural society, there remains the question of what do you do with the non-hetro, non-christian, non-white population. Unless, of course, you believe white nationalists are honestly arguing for a peaceful, consensual "final solution" to that question, and that they would never act in violence to achieve their goals. But that just doesn't seem to be how they roll. For example, in Portland, the murder of Seraw didn't happen in a vacuum, it was wildly lauded by white supremacists and it gave rise to local SHARPS / ARA (somewhat of an ideological predecessor to today's "Antifa") factions in Portland who eventually ran the white supremacists out of town: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulugeta_Seraw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulugeta_Seraw And more more recently: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/08/29/man-who-fired-weapon-charlottesville-counterprotesters-identified-ku-klux-klan-imperial https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/08/29/man-who-fired... It's not hard to find examples of this sort of behavior. Again, the "both sides" argument is pretty disingenuous when one side advocates genocide. I've said what I want to say on this, and will assume you are either trolling/willfully ignorant or are sympathetic to the white nationalists. I've seen this argument play out dozens of times online and don't care to take it any further.
ipsocannibal 9y ago
So its ok for a group of masked citizens with no legal authority to physically abuse another human being for what that person thinks and says. I'm not talking about moral equivalence nor condoning his beliefs. I'm simply interested in the lengths you see as reasonable to silence a person with those beliefs. So I'll ask again. Are you condoning extrajudicial violence by masked vigilantes?

by nyargh 9y ago

krapp 9y ago

>They would cease to exist if these aspiring fascists stopped supporting violence (direct or state-sponsored) against minority communities. They would have to be a surprisingly disciplined bunch of radicals were that to be the case.

nyargh 9y ago
> They would have to be a surprisingly disciplined bunch of radicals were that to be the case. True, white supremacists don't exactly have a great history of non-violence.
- krapp 9y ago
  I was talking about Antifa, but yes. Although it is easier for the white supremacists to keep the law on their side, unfortunately. The ones who aren't utter thugs know not to throw the first punch. There's probably a lot of low hanging fruit left, though. But would Antifa really just pack up their masks and bats and go home if the white supremacists stopped giving them the rationale around which they've built their identity? It seems doubtful to me.
  - nyargh 9y ago
    > But would Antifa really just pack up their masks and bats and go home ... ? You know that "Antifa" has been around in various incarnations since 1930s, right? They have "packed up and gone home" many times over the past 80+ years as fascist/far-right movements have come and gone. Also, I believe giving agency to the latest version of "Antifa" as some sort of cohesive, organized group is a mistake. I don't believe they have any sort of hierarchy or are particularly well organized, beyond doing a good job consistently showing up at recent far-right rallies.

MrZongle2 9y ago

"...if these aspiring fascists..." Defined by whom?

nyargh 9y ago
Maybe include the rest of the quote: "... if these aspiring fascists stopped supporting violence (direct or state-sponsored) against minority communities. "
- MrZongle2 9y ago
  Ok, I'll bite: how are they supporting violence? Who has made that determination?
  - nyargh 9y ago
    I really shouldn't bite, but by advocating for a white, christian ethnostate in a multi-cultural society, there remains the question of what do you do with the non-hetro, non-christian, non-white population. Unless, of course, you believe white nationalists are honestly arguing for a peaceful, consensual "final solution" to that question, and that they would never act in violence to achieve their goals. But that just doesn't seem to be how they roll. For example, in Portland, the murder of Seraw didn't happen in a vacuum, it was wildly lauded by white supremacists and it gave rise to local SHARPS / ARA (somewhat of an ideological predecessor to today's "Antifa") factions in Portland who eventually ran the white supremacists out of town: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulugeta_Seraw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulugeta_Seraw And more more recently: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/08/29/man-who-fired-weapon-charlottesville-counterprotesters-identified-ku-klux-klan-imperial https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/08/29/man-who-fired... It's not hard to find examples of this sort of behavior. Again, the "both sides" argument is pretty disingenuous when one side advocates genocide. I've said what I want to say on this, and will assume you are either trolling/willfully ignorant or are sympathetic to the white nationalists. I've seen this argument play out dozens of times online and don't care to take it any further.

ipsocannibal 9y ago

So its ok for a group of masked citizens with no legal authority to physically abuse another human being for what that person thinks and says. I'm not talking about moral equivalence nor condoning his beliefs. I'm simply interested in the lengths you see as reasonable to silence a person with those beliefs. So I'll ask again. Are you condoning extrajudicial violence by masked vigilantes?