3 ms·

Yes, exactly my point. And once you are picking targets and taking violent actions, you can no longer excuse your aim and your violence by saying your heart is

Yes, exactly my point. And once you are picking targets and taking violent actions, you can no longer excuse your aim and your violence by saying your heart is in the right place. Antifa has, for many decades, done wrong actions with good intentions. You can oppose them without being fascist.

direwolf20 8mo ago
Are you saying that if someone punches a Nazi (or let's say Hitler himself) in the face, they're a bad person?
- ToValueFunfetti 8mo ago
  Of course I'm not saying this! There's no way to read what I said and get this out unless you put it in! You're supposed to be charitable here and you are actively doing the opposite. If you punch John Doe in the face becaune you think he's Hitler; if you torture Hitler's parents just to stick it to him, yes, you are in the wrong.
donkeybeer 8mo ago
It works. It worked in WW2. Were the Allied soldiers fascist?
- ToValueFunfetti 8mo ago
  If they genocided German citizens, yes! We still argue today about whether Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified; nobody argues they weren't antifascist.
otikik 8mo ago
> done wrong actions with good intentions I would like some evidence there, please
- ToValueFunfetti 8mo ago
  Okay, well you can look at the wikipedia page referenced above: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States) You can read Freddie deBoer's (notable communist writer) article: https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/antifa-is-a-fatherless-child https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/antifa-is-a-fatherless-... Or this article on PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/black-clad-anarchists-swarm-anti-hate-rally-california https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/black-clad-anarchists-sw... Or google it or ask an LLM to google it for you and put 10 minutes into actually participating in this conversation?
  - otikik 8mo ago
    Hm. Have you actually read that wikipedia page? I don't think it serves to validate your claims. It does say that the Trump administration and one police department claims that they are like you say. On the same page it also mentions that the Trump administration has been involved on several hoaxes trying to incorrectly portray it. Most of all the other groups paint it in a positive light. > [g]iven the historical and current threat that white supremacist and fascist groups pose, it's clear to me that organized, collective self-defense is not only a legitimate response, but lamentably an all-too-necessary response to this threat on too many occasions. I would not mind being associated with the group portrayed on that page. The article from Freddie deBoer is from 2021. He writes: > The association of antifa with violence stems from the fact [in Europe] that these fascists or neofascists would often prowl the streets [...] Though many people would love to pretend that this isn’t the case, we are not in fact living in an America where Proud Boys wander through Chelsea randomly beating up gay people without resistance from the police I think he would write something very different today. He does mention one case were a journalist was shot paint and mace and was thrown on the group by a group that could have been antifa. Or not. Third link is from 2017. Black-clad anarchists swarm "anti-hate" rally in California, says the title. But it was an "anti-marxist" and "pro-trump" rally, which was cancelled(?). But people showed up anyway(?). And then: > officers were told not to actively confront the anarchists Come on. That reeks of being staged. The people in black were almost certainly proud boys. The wikipedia page mentions their leader employing this exact tactic: > In posts on Parler, leaders of the Proud Boys had disclosed plans to attend the rally wearing "all black" clothing associated with antifa activists and arrive "incognito" in an apparent effort to shift blame for any violence on antifa I did this analysis in a bit more than 10 minutes, no LLMs used.

direwolf20 8mo ago

Are you saying that if someone punches a Nazi (or let's say Hitler himself) in the face, they're a bad person?

ToValueFunfetti 8mo ago
Of course I'm not saying this! There's no way to read what I said and get this out unless you put it in! You're supposed to be charitable here and you are actively doing the opposite. If you punch John Doe in the face becaune you think he's Hitler; if you torture Hitler's parents just to stick it to him, yes, you are in the wrong.

donkeybeer 8mo ago

It works. It worked in WW2. Were the Allied soldiers fascist?

ToValueFunfetti 8mo ago
If they genocided German citizens, yes! We still argue today about whether Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified; nobody argues they weren't antifascist.

otikik 8mo ago

> done wrong actions with good intentions I would like some evidence there, please

ToValueFunfetti 8mo ago
Okay, well you can look at the wikipedia page referenced above: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States) You can read Freddie deBoer's (notable communist writer) article: https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/antifa-is-a-fatherless-child https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/antifa-is-a-fatherless-... Or this article on PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/black-clad-anarchists-swarm-anti-hate-rally-california https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/black-clad-anarchists-sw... Or google it or ask an LLM to google it for you and put 10 minutes into actually participating in this conversation?
- otikik 8mo ago
  Hm. Have you actually read that wikipedia page? I don't think it serves to validate your claims. It does say that the Trump administration and one police department claims that they are like you say. On the same page it also mentions that the Trump administration has been involved on several hoaxes trying to incorrectly portray it. Most of all the other groups paint it in a positive light. > [g]iven the historical and current threat that white supremacist and fascist groups pose, it's clear to me that organized, collective self-defense is not only a legitimate response, but lamentably an all-too-necessary response to this threat on too many occasions. I would not mind being associated with the group portrayed on that page. The article from Freddie deBoer is from 2021. He writes: > The association of antifa with violence stems from the fact [in Europe] that these fascists or neofascists would often prowl the streets [...] Though many people would love to pretend that this isn’t the case, we are not in fact living in an America where Proud Boys wander through Chelsea randomly beating up gay people without resistance from the police I think he would write something very different today. He does mention one case were a journalist was shot paint and mace and was thrown on the group by a group that could have been antifa. Or not. Third link is from 2017. Black-clad anarchists swarm "anti-hate" rally in California, says the title. But it was an "anti-marxist" and "pro-trump" rally, which was cancelled(?). But people showed up anyway(?). And then: > officers were told not to actively confront the anarchists Come on. That reeks of being staged. The people in black were almost certainly proud boys. The wikipedia page mentions their leader employing this exact tactic: > In posts on Parler, leaders of the Proud Boys had disclosed plans to attend the rally wearing "all black" clothing associated with antifa activists and arrive "incognito" in an apparent effort to shift blame for any violence on antifa I did this analysis in a bit more than 10 minutes, no LLMs used.