4 ms·

The problem is it give approved extremists a voice while bragging about not giving unapproved extremists a voice. That should be controversial.

BugsJustFindMe 6y ago
I'm trying to understand how to channel what you said. Are you saying that being extremely against Nazis is bad because being extremely anything is bad and we should only have non-extreme feelings?
- wernercd 6y ago
  My problem is with those who stand against "extremists" (ZOMG Those silly Nazi's) while supporting "extremists" (AntiFA/BLM groups responsible for dozens of riots, hundreds of millions in damage, many dead and federal buildings ransacked/burned, etc...)... Why is it hard to understand how hypocritical it is of most groups screaming about the DC riots when those same groups are tactly supportive of worse over longer periods of time? At no point did I say "being anti nazi" is bad... I said being anti-extremist while being pro-extremist is... questionable.
  - BugsJustFindMe 6y ago
    > My problem is with those who stand against "extremists" while supporting "extremists" It sounds like you see an equivalence between "rioting" and "rioting". I get what you're saying, but I'm also pretty sure that the people you're calling hypocrites have a more nuanced view than that and differentiate based on context and cause and don't consider "white supremacist Q-conspiracy-lie-believers rioting" (which this was) to be equal to "people rioting because police officers keep killing in circumstances that don't warrant it without serious repercussion" (which the BLM riots were). We can also note that many of the BLM riots only turned violent _after_ local police started shooting gas, pepper balls, and rubber bullets at crowds. But even if that weren't the case, the causes and contexts would still be different. It seems to me like the people you're talking about are in fact neither anti-extremist nor pro-extremist. They're anti-white-supremacists and anti-police-getting-away-with-murder. Those are not contradictory positions. > groups screaming about the DC riots I haven't seen anyone screaming about context-free "DC riots". I see people screaming about "white supremacist Q-anon-lie-conspiracy-believers rioting in DC trying to capture or kill congresspersons and overthrow a (mostly-if-you-ignore-voter-suppression) fair democratic election" and I think that makes a big difference. It's not the riots that these people are worried about. It's the reason for the riots, and the reasons are not equal.
    - wernercd 6y ago
      > more nuanced view ... based on context What's nuanced about supporting violence/rioting/looting/etc while fighting violence being hypocritical? My main point remains "you were silent while 100's of millions in damage was done and now you're mad about 6 hours of less violent protests and a single building being damaged?" > reasons aren't equal Reasons aren't equal... but there is plenty of reason to pick apart the hypocrisy WAY beyond DC vs Portland riots. I can point out many "police brutality" stories that aren't really when facts come out. (IE: "hands up, don't shoot"). I can do the same to most of the 'non contradictory' positions. It's important to stand up for what you believe in peacefully... it's also important to try and not be a hypocrite while doing so. I stand against the hypocrisy in the other positions you mentioned as well even if not mentioned in detail. The hypocrisy destroys the message.

BugsJustFindMe 6y ago

I'm trying to understand how to channel what you said. Are you saying that being extremely against Nazis is bad because being extremely anything is bad and we should only have non-extreme feelings?

wernercd 6y ago
My problem is with those who stand against "extremists" (ZOMG Those silly Nazi's) while supporting "extremists" (AntiFA/BLM groups responsible for dozens of riots, hundreds of millions in damage, many dead and federal buildings ransacked/burned, etc...)... Why is it hard to understand how hypocritical it is of most groups screaming about the DC riots when those same groups are tactly supportive of worse over longer periods of time? At no point did I say "being anti nazi" is bad... I said being anti-extremist while being pro-extremist is... questionable.
- BugsJustFindMe 6y ago
  > My problem is with those who stand against "extremists" while supporting "extremists" It sounds like you see an equivalence between "rioting" and "rioting". I get what you're saying, but I'm also pretty sure that the people you're calling hypocrites have a more nuanced view than that and differentiate based on context and cause and don't consider "white supremacist Q-conspiracy-lie-believers rioting" (which this was) to be equal to "people rioting because police officers keep killing in circumstances that don't warrant it without serious repercussion" (which the BLM riots were). We can also note that many of the BLM riots only turned violent _after_ local police started shooting gas, pepper balls, and rubber bullets at crowds. But even if that weren't the case, the causes and contexts would still be different. It seems to me like the people you're talking about are in fact neither anti-extremist nor pro-extremist. They're anti-white-supremacists and anti-police-getting-away-with-murder. Those are not contradictory positions. > groups screaming about the DC riots I haven't seen anyone screaming about context-free "DC riots". I see people screaming about "white supremacist Q-anon-lie-conspiracy-believers rioting in DC trying to capture or kill congresspersons and overthrow a (mostly-if-you-ignore-voter-suppression) fair democratic election" and I think that makes a big difference. It's not the riots that these people are worried about. It's the reason for the riots, and the reasons are not equal.
  - wernercd 6y ago
    > more nuanced view ... based on context What's nuanced about supporting violence/rioting/looting/etc while fighting violence being hypocritical? My main point remains "you were silent while 100's of millions in damage was done and now you're mad about 6 hours of less violent protests and a single building being damaged?" > reasons aren't equal Reasons aren't equal... but there is plenty of reason to pick apart the hypocrisy WAY beyond DC vs Portland riots. I can point out many "police brutality" stories that aren't really when facts come out. (IE: "hands up, don't shoot"). I can do the same to most of the 'non contradictory' positions. It's important to stand up for what you believe in peacefully... it's also important to try and not be a hypocrite while doing so. I stand against the hypocrisy in the other positions you mentioned as well even if not mentioned in detail. The hypocrisy destroys the message.