3 ms·

I wasn't talking about calling it a terrorist organization. I was responding to the parent: > If the former, you also know that "antifa" is short for "antifasc

I wasn't talking about calling it a terrorist organization. I was responding to the parent: > If the former, you also know that "antifa" is short for "antifascist" and your clear designation of that as an enemy is also clear signaling that you're in for fascism. In particular, I'm responding to "designation of that as an enemy" which is not the same as calling it a terrorist organization. People who oppose fascism and violence may call antifa an enemy for the violence committed and espoused in antifa's name. If someone commits violence against me, or any other innocent people I call allies, then they are certainly my enemy, whether I agree with their ideology or not. You can agree with something in principle (be anti-fascist) but not support particular methods (violence).

mellow2020 6y ago
What you're quoting is in turn a response to someone basically saying the military should be deployed because "antifa" has been "designated as a terrorist organization". In this context, "designating as enemy" is a rather polite description of that, and you can't just take issue with what they said and ignore what it's a reply to. > People who oppose fascism and violence may call antifa an enemy for the violence committed and espoused in antifa's name. Great, but can they either a.) bring that up on their own, or at least b.) pay attention to the context they attach this complaint to? Unless you want to make the case for labeling antifa a terrorist organization, what you may "call enemy" or "disagree with" some or all aspects of what you may or may not consider antifa is simply not relevant. The strong ["antifa is a terrorist organization"] has been made, it's on the table; and you're defending an infinitely weaker claim nobody even hinted at disagreeing with, apropos nothing.
- PureParadigm 6y ago
  One of the original points I wanted to push back against is when the parent said that "your clear designation of [antifa] as an enemy is also clear signaling that you're in for fascism." In particular, I don't think that it is fair to say someone is "in for fascism" just because they call antifa their enemy, or even if they think antifa is a terrorist organization. You can think antifa is a terrorist organization but also be against fascism.
  - mellow2020 6y ago
    > You can think antifa is a terrorist organization but also be against fascism. Without a clear argument as to why antifa is a.) an organization and b.) as such terrorist, I don't think you can. It's like saying "Jews start all wars, I'm against antisemitism".
    - PureParadigm 6y ago
      That analogy is not the same at all, and is quite a leap. The difference lies in the double negative in the antifa situation, if you will. The parent was claiming that if you are against antifa ("anti-antifa" such as by calling them a terrorist organization), then you are pro-fascist. But the antifa label comes with a lot more baggage than simply being against fascism. They are known for their militant/violent tendencies, which many people may not support, and some may go as far as to call terroristic. I'm not interested in debating whether or not antifa is a terrorist organization, and doing so is not necessary to support the point I am making. All I am saying is that some people may have a different understanding of antifa, and believe antifa is a terrorist organization not for its stance against fascism, but for its violent methods. These same people may be completely against fascism but oppose those labeled antifa for the baggage associated with such a label. The root issue is the implication that being antifa is nothing more than being against fascism. If that were true, then I agree with you. But it's not. The antifa label has become associated with political violence (just read the Wikipedia article). To most people, it no longer means simply being against fascism, but also has associations to antifa's violent methods. Many of the debates about antifa, and I think also this one, stem from the fact that people have different understandings of what antifa actually means. I think it is deceptive to pretend that antifa means nothing more than being against fascism, in the current political context. Perhaps it meant that in the past, but that is not the common understanding anymore.

mellow2020 6y ago

What you're quoting is in turn a response to someone basically saying the military should be deployed because "antifa" has been "designated as a terrorist organization". In this context, "designating as enemy" is a rather polite description of that, and you can't just take issue with what they said and ignore what it's a reply to. > People who oppose fascism and violence may call antifa an enemy for the violence committed and espoused in antifa's name. Great, but can they either a.) bring that up on their own, or at least b.) pay attention to the context they attach this complaint to? Unless you want to make the case for labeling antifa a terrorist organization, what you may "call enemy" or "disagree with" some or all aspects of what you may or may not consider antifa is simply not relevant. The strong ["antifa is a terrorist organization"] has been made, it's on the table; and you're defending an infinitely weaker claim nobody even hinted at disagreeing with, apropos nothing.

PureParadigm 6y ago
One of the original points I wanted to push back against is when the parent said that "your clear designation of [antifa] as an enemy is also clear signaling that you're in for fascism." In particular, I don't think that it is fair to say someone is "in for fascism" just because they call antifa their enemy, or even if they think antifa is a terrorist organization. You can think antifa is a terrorist organization but also be against fascism.
- mellow2020 6y ago
  > You can think antifa is a terrorist organization but also be against fascism. Without a clear argument as to why antifa is a.) an organization and b.) as such terrorist, I don't think you can. It's like saying "Jews start all wars, I'm against antisemitism".
  - PureParadigm 6y ago
    That analogy is not the same at all, and is quite a leap. The difference lies in the double negative in the antifa situation, if you will. The parent was claiming that if you are against antifa ("anti-antifa" such as by calling them a terrorist organization), then you are pro-fascist. But the antifa label comes with a lot more baggage than simply being against fascism. They are known for their militant/violent tendencies, which many people may not support, and some may go as far as to call terroristic. I'm not interested in debating whether or not antifa is a terrorist organization, and doing so is not necessary to support the point I am making. All I am saying is that some people may have a different understanding of antifa, and believe antifa is a terrorist organization not for its stance against fascism, but for its violent methods. These same people may be completely against fascism but oppose those labeled antifa for the baggage associated with such a label. The root issue is the implication that being antifa is nothing more than being against fascism. If that were true, then I agree with you. But it's not. The antifa label has become associated with political violence (just read the Wikipedia article). To most people, it no longer means simply being against fascism, but also has associations to antifa's violent methods. Many of the debates about antifa, and I think also this one, stem from the fact that people have different understandings of what antifa actually means. I think it is deceptive to pretend that antifa means nothing more than being against fascism, in the current political context. Perhaps it meant that in the past, but that is not the common understanding anymore.