3 ms·

I looked for 30 min. I found no evidence from my own searching and asking some new media acquaintances. No one can show me where Gavin and Proud Boys was starte

I looked for 30 min. I found no evidence from my own searching and asking some new media acquaintances. No one can show me where Gavin and Proud Boys was started by any [far] leftist or involved any far leftists. In fact I can’t even find Vice being created by a single far leftist. I also only found one or two sources denying that Proud Boys is not [far] right wing. Including sympathizers. Do you have any knowledge on what type of [far] leftist Gavin or any Proud Boy was? Also perhaps I’m not as knowledgeable. How is it wrapping around if different people are reacting? Antifa is about anti fascism. It isn’t about being far left. Antifa isn’t only anarchist or communist. Any information you or any one else has would help me a ton. Id love to add this topic to my substack. But I don’t want to repeat what you wrote without it making sense.

nailer 3y ago
> No one can show me where Gavin and Proud Boys was started by any [far] leftist or involved any far leftists. Nobody is claiming this. It seems like you didn’t read the comment you’re replying to. > Antifa is about anti fascism. And the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a democratic republic run by its people. Sometimes things have a meaning that goes beyond how they would like to be perceived.
- skinnymuch 3y ago
  > other words if you move super far to the left, do you end up wrapping back around on the right wing? > That’s how the Proud Boys were created - as a response to Antifa violence. You quoted something talking about wrapping around. However you talked about being reactionary. Being reactionary isn’t wrapping around any more. It goes one way since the left and right wing paradigms were established in the 1700s (or since power/hierarchies first formed between people). Reactionary is reacting to power and tradition. Which is what antifa is. However it’s not what Proud Boys are. It’s a negative thing aka reactionary create a powerful reaction or response to a leftist decentralized minor movement. I have studied political science and helped on a paper on reactionaries so I got carried away assuming you meant reactionaries can go from far left to far right or even talking about reactionaries. Also I assumed you were talking politically in a political discussion. > Sometimes things have a meaning that goes beyond how they would like to be perceived. And sometimes they don’t have meaning beyond. The example you gave is correct, yes. Also what does antifa mean beyond anti fascist and what I described above? — > Also perhaps I’m not as knowledgeable? How is it wrapping around if different people are reacting. Antifa is about anti fascism. It isn’t about being far left. Antifa isn’t only anarchist or communist. You didn’t respond to any of this. I wrote 3 lines about antifa. You responded to one. I also specifically asked: > …How is it wrapping My entire issue and explanation was about the way you wrote what you wrote. Too much vagueness when responding to wrapping around being the discussion. While you didn’t respond to any questions or concerns. I have revolutionary optimistic however so I still give you the respect of a full laid out response.
  - nailer 3y ago
    Using violence against people that disagree with your politics, or people that attempt to document your authoritarian violence is not “reacting to power”. It is power. You know this. I know you know this. Let’s not pretend otherwise. You don’t need to ask me what antifa is beyond ‘fighting fascism’. You know that too. Stop pretending you don’t or that you’re being respectful, it’s very clear you’re not. You understand the DPRK analogy. You know who antifa is. You’re too intelligent not to. This is “negative”, or as normal people would put it, bad. If you think using words like “negative” makes for intelligent discourse, you’re not correct. Likewise mentioning your ‘studies’ is still the ‘appeal to authority’ logical fallacy. Honestly judging by ‘studies’ (not degree) and ‘I have revolutionary optimism’ I feel like you’re in high school. There’s a great chrome extension that lets you block people on hacker news. You’ll think I’m going to use it because your arguments are strong, but I’m using it because they are weak.
    - skinnymuch 3y ago
      > Using violence against people that disagree with your politics, or people that attempt to document your authoritarian violence is not “reacting to power”. It is power. You know this. I know you know this. Let’s not pretend otherwise. Who is saying otherwise?? are you equating me with Antifa or something? You keep pretending I believe I’m so smart. I don’t think I am. I believe I’m a lumpenprole. I know what I know. Nothing more I don’t know what you keep saying about me. Do you enjoy appealing to the status quo or centrism or moderation or civility? So like I was saying to my audience: Some people don’t understand what reactionary means…some people think communism isn’t reactionary. Then again those people typically don’t know what communism is. Nor socialism. Usually they don’t have much education outside the Global North or other privileges. The appeal to authority fallacy is only valid if I’m asking someone to believe me because I have authority. I’m asking others to be at my level and understand what words mean. So I don’t have to talk down to them. Alas, on you go. Also fallacies are a fallacy. It sounds like I’m talking to a techbro of VC bro or petit bourgeoisie. > You’ll think I’m going to use it because your arguments are strong, but I’m using it because they are weak. We are all cliches, comrade.
      - 3y ago

nailer 3y ago

> No one can show me where Gavin and Proud Boys was started by any [far] leftist or involved any far leftists. Nobody is claiming this. It seems like you didn’t read the comment you’re replying to. > Antifa is about anti fascism. And the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a democratic republic run by its people. Sometimes things have a meaning that goes beyond how they would like to be perceived.

skinnymuch 3y ago
> other words if you move super far to the left, do you end up wrapping back around on the right wing? > That’s how the Proud Boys were created - as a response to Antifa violence. You quoted something talking about wrapping around. However you talked about being reactionary. Being reactionary isn’t wrapping around any more. It goes one way since the left and right wing paradigms were established in the 1700s (or since power/hierarchies first formed between people). Reactionary is reacting to power and tradition. Which is what antifa is. However it’s not what Proud Boys are. It’s a negative thing aka reactionary create a powerful reaction or response to a leftist decentralized minor movement. I have studied political science and helped on a paper on reactionaries so I got carried away assuming you meant reactionaries can go from far left to far right or even talking about reactionaries. Also I assumed you were talking politically in a political discussion. > Sometimes things have a meaning that goes beyond how they would like to be perceived. And sometimes they don’t have meaning beyond. The example you gave is correct, yes. Also what does antifa mean beyond anti fascist and what I described above? — > Also perhaps I’m not as knowledgeable? How is it wrapping around if different people are reacting. Antifa is about anti fascism. It isn’t about being far left. Antifa isn’t only anarchist or communist. You didn’t respond to any of this. I wrote 3 lines about antifa. You responded to one. I also specifically asked: > …How is it wrapping My entire issue and explanation was about the way you wrote what you wrote. Too much vagueness when responding to wrapping around being the discussion. While you didn’t respond to any questions or concerns. I have revolutionary optimistic however so I still give you the respect of a full laid out response.
- nailer 3y ago
  Using violence against people that disagree with your politics, or people that attempt to document your authoritarian violence is not “reacting to power”. It is power. You know this. I know you know this. Let’s not pretend otherwise. You don’t need to ask me what antifa is beyond ‘fighting fascism’. You know that too. Stop pretending you don’t or that you’re being respectful, it’s very clear you’re not. You understand the DPRK analogy. You know who antifa is. You’re too intelligent not to. This is “negative”, or as normal people would put it, bad. If you think using words like “negative” makes for intelligent discourse, you’re not correct. Likewise mentioning your ‘studies’ is still the ‘appeal to authority’ logical fallacy. Honestly judging by ‘studies’ (not degree) and ‘I have revolutionary optimism’ I feel like you’re in high school. There’s a great chrome extension that lets you block people on hacker news. You’ll think I’m going to use it because your arguments are strong, but I’m using it because they are weak.
  - skinnymuch 3y ago
    > Using violence against people that disagree with your politics, or people that attempt to document your authoritarian violence is not “reacting to power”. It is power. You know this. I know you know this. Let’s not pretend otherwise. Who is saying otherwise?? are you equating me with Antifa or something? You keep pretending I believe I’m so smart. I don’t think I am. I believe I’m a lumpenprole. I know what I know. Nothing more I don’t know what you keep saying about me. Do you enjoy appealing to the status quo or centrism or moderation or civility? So like I was saying to my audience: Some people don’t understand what reactionary means…some people think communism isn’t reactionary. Then again those people typically don’t know what communism is. Nor socialism. Usually they don’t have much education outside the Global North or other privileges. The appeal to authority fallacy is only valid if I’m asking someone to believe me because I have authority. I’m asking others to be at my level and understand what words mean. So I don’t have to talk down to them. Alas, on you go. Also fallacies are a fallacy. It sounds like I’m talking to a techbro of VC bro or petit bourgeoisie. > You’ll think I’m going to use it because your arguments are strong, but I’m using it because they are weak. We are all cliches, comrade.
    - 3y ago