Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Naturegirl1999]

You're comparing a higher level concept of violence to literally throwing a brick at someone's face, or smashing a can of Pepsi in to it.

When someone spits on you, blocks you from going anywhere, throws a punch, then that's violence everyone, including the law, can and does recognize.

Also, like.... you do realize you wrote these two sentences in the same post, right?

I guess I'm too slow to see your point, so I guess I'll just be deliberate. You're arguing a sociological definition of violence against the very real, very immediate physical act of violence. I merely listed what's actual constituted as a crime, because at the end of the day that's what people AND the law will respond to. I'll be blunt: the sociological definition of alternative forms of violence is something I understand, and agree with. But there are plenty of people who would call that "pussy liberal bullshit" at worst, the extension of PC and victimization culture which, let's be real, a good portion of the US population is sick of hearing about. It's not an argument that works for a lot of people, even though if they saw it or experienced it in their own lives it would sicken them. What I listed is the kinds of things someone on the street might do that are actual crimes that they can get arrested for, which you can't really argue with. Spitting on someone is assault. Blocking them is imprisonment. Striking is obviously assault too. That's the level of harassment is that unequivocally actionable. What you're talking about is much harder to action, or even prove. So to bring it full circle again, it's not the kind of violence that I think warrants or necessitates what Antifa likes to do with their time.

In regards to neo-Nazis and such, the logic still holds- if they've abandoned civility, there's no benefit to embracing it for your own group- that way lies self-annihilation. If they go aggressive when your side is civil, why delude yourself into thinking that they won't keep going aggressive if you attempt to go back to civil (under the presumption that overall, neo-Nazis were the instigators)? Of course, once you stake out that position, there are ramifications.

It really comes down to this: do you still believe this too shall pass, or are you ascribing to a new future where this is the new norm? Has Trump managed to shatter America so that we're all ready to start acting like barbarians, or is his presidency eventually going to be over and things will change and shift yet again. I'm not giving in to hysteria, or doom or any of that. This country isn't broken. People are just completely pissed off about everything, and this is how we're handling it. We've got a tinpot wanna be dictator who is testing out the limits of his loathsome authority, and the people under him are too worried about re-election to actually stand up for what's right. I'll continue to believe things will change, because if we are totally fucked, I don't want to spend my time from now until then being bitter, paranoid and hateful. If I'm going to be screwed, I'd rather be a screwed optimist than a screwed pessimist. I'm acting as though there is a day after Trump we still have to address, and I'd like to be able to look myself in the mirror when it arrives.

America has always been divided. Trump didn’t shatter it so much as make the shattering much more visible

[Doomblade187]

Minor Break From the Apocalypse Discussions
A few things you can do that would help the situation, albeit in a small way, from within the system.
1. Be a Poll worker (You get paid)
2. Campaign for local office (I specify local because the races are small, but the power you wield can be massive)
3. Be a census worker (Trump and admin has been trying to cripple the census against minorities. Don't help them.)

[SalmonGod]

Trumpist America has always been there, simmering with the pot-lid bolted down.

Trump just let the lid off, and naturally, a steam of foul gas has escaped and filled all available volume.  It is wrong to think that these kinds of thoughts and beliefs were gone from our country; Thoughts and beliefs like these never actually die.  They just go into remission.

There's a reason why the phrase says "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance" .

Trump and Co have platformed nationalism in general, because it was a powerful vehicle that nobody was driving (and for good reason), and it has gotten him into high office.  Now we are dealing with the consequences.  America was always broken, just with band-aids and sutures on all its wounds.  Now we have ripped open and bloody gashes instead.

Yes.  This.  Please.  For the millionth time.  Read the stuff I said about how there is shitloads of evidence that this was in the works long before the 2016 election.  Trump didn't bring this about, and him leaving office won't make it go away.  This is a cultural problem that has been growing for a long time.  And if we focus on individual characters as isolated symptoms and pretend that once they're gone the problem is too, then it will just continue to get worse.

Angry xenophobic paramilitary-fetishist white guys were a feature of my childhood in the mid-90's.  They've always been around.  But back then, I might encounter a couple of them sitting at a kitchen table as I sold cookies for a school fundraiser, or listen to a peer talk about how it was to the family's shame that the crazy uncle and racist grandparent engaged in this kinda talk at family gatherings.  Isolated people and events.  IT WAS TABOO.  They weren't welcome to speak about their fascist leanings in public.  They didn't have internet.  They were scattered grumblings between a couple people now and then.

What's different today is the taboo has been eroded by free speech and civility arguments, using the exact same playbook that was written 100 years ago.  And they've used this freedom of speech and movement to normalize, organize, consolidate, and embolden.  To find and support each other.  Transform their isolated grumblings into plans of action.  Get the message out that it's ok to be a fascist in public.  It's just a different opinion.  If diversity makes you uncomfortable, go have a listen to these people who offer an alternative perspective.  Get comfortable with it.  Get comfortable voting for it.  Get comfortable running for office on it.  Get comfortable civilly disagreeing with your fascist neighbor's differing political perspective as your other neighbor gets deported.  It's just politics, right?

The taboo has to be reinforced, and as detailed very well in the Philosophy Tube video I hope you watch, liberal (in the classical sense of the word liberal) political systems will always by their nature be an obstacle to this.  It's an old problem.  But what is the vanilla squeamish non-political public going to do about it if we appeal to their delicate sensibilites?  Not a fucking thing.  So what's the point in catering to them?

I ask again.  Fascists were gaining momentum ignored and unabated for decades already pre-2016.  Has it turned out that ignoring them throughout this period was a good thing?  Why hasn't the marketplace of ideas shut them down?  When their members carried out terrorist attacks after publishing blatant white nationalist manifestos, did the bland passive condemnation those terrorists receive have any effect on fascist recruiting efforts?  Can we pleeeeeaaaaase address this?  What exactly is the alternative approach to tackling this problem?

[WealthyRadish]

Personally, I think Antifa's problems are more or less organizational teething problems to be expected in a society that is very inexperienced with direct action and political organization outside of sanctioned channels. It's enough for me that people are getting organized and gaining experience doing so, while raising the general level of political awareness of concepts that most Americans have had no exposure to before. I think it's likely that just the existence of Antifa in the public eye will do much for creating space and potential for future movements, hopefully with a chance of actually accomplishing something.

[wierd]

@salmon

The preferred vehicle is a calm, but forceful teardown of the central pillars of the ideology, and a calm but forceful showing of all the things it has historically (and has always consistently) led to.

EG, denouncement through pure evidence based, rational discourse.


The problem is that when that fails, there does have to be a fallback.  Our current crop are not interested in being informed, or wiser, or making proper and right political decisions.  They have emotion, and they want to act on it.  Emotion is not rational, and never will be.

I simply have reservations about antifa, because they fall victim to the same pathology;  Emotion driven decision making.  To do this right, you have to put them down, but do so without emotion or invective.  When you fail to do that, you subtly reinforce their notions that this is a war of ideology, and that "If we make enough people believe the way we do, it will all be good!"  No. No it wont. It never has worked that way.  Instead, millions of people died, because there is no end to "they are different from me!"  We put it down because of that: Because it leads to unabated, unrestrained mass murder, without remorse or conscience.  We can discuss why that is coldly and rationally. We can protest just as coldly and rationally.  We can respond to the media just as coldly and rationally.

And if it comes to it, we can start physically dismantling their propaganda apparatus, just as coldly and rationally.

When you get hot around the collar, and start screaming and yelling, you put fuel on the fire.  this has to be done as emotionless, but unrelentingly, as possible.

[PTTG??]

Personally, I think Antifa's problems are more or less organizational teething problems to be expected in a society that is very inexperienced with direct action and political organization outside of sanctioned channels. It's enough for me that people are getting organized and gaining experience doing so, while raising the general level of political awareness of concepts that most Americans have had no exposure to before. I think it's likely that just the existence of Antifa in the public eye will do much for creating space and potential for future movements, hopefully with a chance of actually accomplishing something.

The US lost a lot of progressives in the past 70 years. I suppose it's reasonable to say that we do have to re-learn political action.

[Kagus]

Angry xenophobic paramilitary-fetishist white guys were a feature of my childhood in the mid-90's.  They've always been around.  But back then, I might encounter a couple of them sitting at a kitchen table as I sold cookies for a school fundraiser, or listen to a peer talk about how it was to the family's shame that the crazy uncle and racist grandparent engaged in this kinda talk at family gatherings.  Isolated people and events.  IT WAS TABOO.  They weren't welcome to speak about their fascist leanings in public.  They didn't have internet.  They were scattered grumblings between a couple people now and then.

What's different today is the taboo has been eroded by free speech and civility arguments, using the exact same playbook that was written 100 years ago.  And they've used this freedom of speech and movement to normalize, organize, consolidate, and embolden.  To find and support each other.  Transform their isolated grumblings into plans of action.  Get the message out that it's ok to be a fascist in public.  It's just a different opinion.  If diversity makes you uncomfortable, go have a listen to these people who offer an alternative perspective.  Get comfortable with it.  Get comfortable voting for it.  Get comfortable running for office on it.  Get comfortable civilly disagreeing with your fascist neighbor's differing political perspective as your other neighbor gets deported.  It's just politics, right?

The taboo has to be reinforced, and as detailed very well in the Philosophy Tube video I hope you watch, liberal (in the classical sense of the word liberal) political systems will always by their nature be an obstacle to this.  It's an old problem.  But what is the vanilla squeamish non-political public going to do about it if we appeal to their delicate sensibilites?  Not a fucking thing.  So what's the point in catering to them?

I ask again.  Fascists were gaining momentum ignored and unabated for decades already pre-2016.  Has it turned out that ignoring them throughout this period was a good thing?  Why hasn't the marketplace of ideas shut them down?  When their members carried out terrorist attacks after publishing blatant white nationalist manifestos, did the bland passive condemnation those terrorists receive have any effect on fascist recruiting efforts?  Can we pleeeeeaaaaase address this?  What exactly is the alternative approach to tackling this problem?

Y'know, it's funny... Endemic cultures of random violence against specific groups didn't do a very good job of keeping either the blacks or the gays out of the limelight. What makes you think that doing the same thing to a group that inherently desires violence will work better?

The best defense against American Nazification is to not act like a fucking Nazi. Don't acknowledge them as the mighty force they desperately want to be. Don't use their methods. Don't play into their fantasy about them being the plucky heroes fighting courageously against systemic oppression of their moral righteousness.


Don't play The Stupid Game against Nazis; they're better at it than you are, and they'll win.

[SalmonGod]

I'm saying words in response to the things people are saying, and the same things are just being repeated as if they haven't been said before and I never responded to them.  So.... *shrug*

Except for weird... who sort of just re-stated an old sentiment which has also been debated here before, and has sort of been addressed this time around too but maybe not directly enough. 

The problem is fascists aren't putting forth arguments to be deconstructed and debunked.  They're putting forth propaganda.  And responding to the propaganda as if they're arguments just assists them in maintaining a platform for their propaganda under the guise of "rational debate".  It doesn't dissuade anyone from seeing things their way.  Those who *feel* drawn to fascist mythology and promises continue to find and embolden each other.  To everyone else, it just normalizes exposure to their language, so it becomes not alarming and just your average political discussion. 

And the immediate consequence of this is fascism is free from there to recruit and organize and actually engage in politics and take control of state apparatus to carry out their violent ideology through channels that may provoke condemnation and protest but carry that validity and force the state has and becomes really hard to do anything about... you know... the thing that actually happened because we mostly ignored fascists as they rationally debated us through forums and social media and video essays for the 20+ years leading up to 2016.

Again, Olly's got a great section on the nature of propaganda here -- Philosophy of Antifa

Maybe.... actually look into this and when you guys repeat the same ideas, maybe do it in a way that acknowledges in some fashion the things I've said about those ideas.

[wierd]

Which is why the campaign should not be on the streets, but in getting the likes of Twitter and Facebook to police their services like they should be.  Not by screaming at facebook, but by rationally pointing it out to them, and asking them to please do their part to stop such hatred early.

EG, coldly and rationally dismantling their propaganda machine.

Likewise, calm and cold letters to CNN and pals to do only minimal coverage that "yes, this happened."

Be present at the events, carry the signage, and when interviewed, be cold and rational. No emotion.

[Reelya]

I think it's a false dichotomy to say that because we haven't got any better idea, then Antifa is the default best action. I'd say Antifa is the best recruiting tool the right actually has. It's not really causing people to flock to the left.

If someone just waves a flag and Antifa guys come and beat that person with steel pipes, then that looks awfully similar to events such as when the British beat down peaceful protestors in India back in the colonial days. It's very bad PR. The right has awful propaganda? Don't just hand them even better propaganda on a plate. If you beat down an individual with clubs, you stop that one guy, but he becomes a martyr for his cause.

[RazielReaver]

Spoiler: Paradox of Tolerance (click to show/hide)

[img=http://wy3mg1xgify37n21x223cw7xl1-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/HcuZIT5w8xJLMXoISDexG1GNz5Dj7xHO_QGeueMtdPU.jpg][/img]

More reading!

This is why fascists lean on civility so hard. It's not out of any respect from the system. It's because they know they can get away with it and abuse the system to get into power. Then use that power to eliminate the tolerant.

Point: The Hong Kong protests are antifa. Literally antifascist action. They assault police officers and block major roads and transportation systems. The fights are so prolonged and continuous because their government took things too far.

We haven't yet seen our government reach that far. I'd rather like that to not be the case. Antifa now likely means less fascism down the line as they're forced back into hiding. Especially after this president gets elected out and the damage he's done gets fixed.

The Hong Kong are literally anticommunists standing up to the government of China, lol

[SalmonGod]

I think it's a false dichotomy to say that because we haven't got any better idea, then Antifa is the default best action. I'd say Antifa is the best recruiting tool the right actually has. It's not really causing people to flock to the left.

If someone just waves a flag and Antifa guys come and beat that person with steel pipes, then that looks awfully similar to events such as when the British beat down peaceful protestors in India back in the colonial days. It's very bad PR. The right has awful propaganda? Don't just hand them even better propaganda on a plate. If you beat down an individual with clubs, you stop that one guy, but he becomes a martyr for his cause.

Ok, so that's why fascism was growing before antifa?  Because they have awful propaganda?... and you're ignoring this thing I've repeatedly brought up after I very politely said plleeeeeaaaaase... why?  I'm not going to let the claim go that antifa is responsible for the growth of fascism until somebody addresses this.

Also.... was there an instance of antifa guys beating someone with steel pipes that I'm not aware of?... if not, then why are you reinforcing this portrayal?  I know I'm in the process of sticking up for antifa's occasional acts of mild violence in spirit (not always in every instance and execution - like that one guy with the bike lock! *shock and horror*).  But this is a good opportunity to point out that it's really extreme bullshit that they're assigned (assigned because they sure as fuck didn't earn it) this reputation of being hyperviolent trigger-happy vigilantes roving the streets looking for any opportunity to beat someone up.  Which is factually an enormous lie.

Which is why the campaign should not be on the streets, but in getting the likes of Twitter and Facebook to police their services like they should be.  Not by screaming at facebook, but by rationally pointing it out to them, and asking them to please do their part to stop such hatred early.

EG, coldly and rationally dismantling their propaganda machine.

Likewise, calm and cold letters to CNN and pals to do only minimal coverage that "yes, this happened."

This I can partially agree with.  Getting those platforms to put strong measures in place to prevent the spread of fascism should be a major focus.

But my question is... if anybody did this in the way you describe, would you know about it?  Even if a very large number of people did this, and this businesses then ignored them, would you know about it?  How do you know that this didn't happen and it just never went anywhere?  Because I sure as fuck saw some calls for exactly this type of action among some of my left-leaning info streams in the years leading up to 2016. 

But the thing is... those businesses are ruthless, hyper-capitalist ventures.  And historically, fascists get along really, *really* well with that crowd.  This is another point that is discussed in Philosophy of Antifa.  And... you know what kind of dude Zuckerberg is, right?  Let's just say I have little faith in his concern for ethics.

Be present at the events, carry the signage, and when interviewed, be cold and rational. No emotion.

I think this is first unfair and unrealistic.  You're expecting professional levels of discipline from people who are using their free time to confront fascists (who love to provoke and will go to great lengths), many of whom fear that their futures are at stake.  Most cannot contain that type of emotion.  Yeah, it would be nice if everyone had perfect emotional discipline.  But... please. 

To be honest, leftist protesters are almost always admirably well-disciplined, in the context of the situations they face.  Like if you actually study left-leaning protests, you'll find many times more people graciously receiving violence without retaliating than you will find people actively participating in scuffles.  Ghandi is cited near-religiously.  I acknowledge that there's a bit more of an anarchist vibe in the Antifa makeup than usual.  Because leftist anarchists are the only group I'm aware of that's been openly acknowledging the rise of fascism in the USA since 9/11, and have the deepest legacy of confrontation with fascists.  But from what I've seen, it's still mostly your typical flavor of leftist protest.

Second, much of the reason for showing up is to drown them out.  Shout them down so they can't speak.  That's de-platforming.  It's better to make the event a spectacle of confrontation than it is to let them stand at a microphone in a dapper suit giving off the shallow appearance of civility as they speak and are listened to.  Yeah, they take advantage of the confrontation in some ways.  But it's less harmful than the alternative.  Be calm and composed for interviews, absolutely.  But just showing up to the event to be calm and non-disruptive would serve no purpose.

[scriver]

I think it's a false dichotomy to say that because we haven't got any better idea, then Antifa is the default best action. I'd say Antifa is the best recruiting tool the right actually has. It's not really causing people to flock to the left.

If someone just waves a flag and Antifa guys come and beat that person with steel pipes, then that looks awfully similar to events such as when the British beat down peaceful protestors in India back in the colonial days. It's very bad PR. The right has awful propaganda? Don't just hand them even better propaganda on a plate. If you beat down an individual with clubs, you stop that one guy, but he becomes a martyr for his cause.

Ok, so that's why fascism was growing before antifa?  Because they have awful propaganda?... and you're ignoring this thing I've repeatedly brought up after I very politely said plleeeeeaaaaase... why?  I'm not going to let the claim go that antifa is responsible for the growth of fascism until somebody addresses this.

Because it is a nonsense point. Regardless of antifa's be or not be as a propaganda machine for the right, there could also be other events, people, or ideas that cause people to move rightwards. Your "antifa can't be contributing to right wing growth because the right wing was already growing before" is a false dichotomy or whatever you would call the fallacy of thought in question.

[Reelya]

you're not making a lot of sense.

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2018/08/he_brought_an_american_flag_to.html
https://thetomfernandez29gmail.com/2019/07/01/suspect-alleged-portland-antifa-man-who-fractured-victims-skull-with-metal-pipe-identified-on-twitter/

It ended with Welch taking a club to the back of the head, lying on the ground in a pool of his own blood.

Only Welch was not a Proud Boy, a Patriot Prayer supporter or among the other conservative activists who descended into the area that day, many from out of town.

He was one of hundreds of progressive Portlanders who had turned out to oppose the right-wing rally held at the Tom McCall Waterfront Park.
...
"My bones turned to Jell-O and I just went down," said Welch, who believes he was struck with a metal object affixed to the end of the weapon.

So, Antifa gets a free pass because this isn't indicative of the average member? Do we also give right-wingers a pass over that guy who drove a car over the protestors, because most right-wingers don't drive cars over protestors? It seems like a double-standard to say we judge the right by the actions of the worst of the right, but the left gets a free pass because we're not all like that.

The media focuses on that alt-righter who killed the girl by driving over herm and the media also focuses on antifa people who club random people on the head and leave them lying in bloody pools. Because both things have happened, and both are caused by the rhetoric of their respective sides. You can't claim "but our rhetoric is in a good cause, so it cannot be questioned". The rhetoric itself is causing random people to get badly beaten up, same as e.g. things said by Trump.

[SalmonGod]

I think it's a false dichotomy to say that because we haven't got any better idea, then Antifa is the default best action. I'd say Antifa is the best recruiting tool the right actually has. It's not really causing people to flock to the left.

If someone just waves a flag and Antifa guys come and beat that person with steel pipes, then that looks awfully similar to events such as when the British beat down peaceful protestors in India back in the colonial days. It's very bad PR. The right has awful propaganda? Don't just hand them even better propaganda on a plate. If you beat down an individual with clubs, you stop that one guy, but he becomes a martyr for his cause.

Ok, so that's why fascism was growing before antifa?  Because they have awful propaganda?... and you're ignoring this thing I've repeatedly brought up after I very politely said plleeeeeaaaaase... why?  I'm not going to let the claim go that antifa is responsible for the growth of fascism until somebody addresses this.

Because it is a nonsense point. Regardless of antifa's be or not be as a propaganda machine for the right, there could also be other events, people, or ideas that cause people to move rightwards. Your "antifa can't be contributing to right wing growth because the right wing was already growing before" is a false dichotomy or whatever you would call the fallacy of thought in question.

No.  That is a complete departure from what has been said so far. 

I'm driving this in response to the idea that has been repeated over and over again here and every other place this discussion has ever happened that the proper response to fascists is to ignore them.  That if they are just left alone, they will make fools of themselves and get nowhere.  That if antifa wasn't making a spectacle of them, that everyone would ignore them or regard them as a laughingstock.  That it's the street confrontations that are giving them a platform and winning them sympathy.  That the marketplace of ideas would shut them down if only the likes of antifa wasn't making the issue emotional instead of calm and rational.  And most recently, Reelya saying that they have awful propaganda.

Over and over and over again the single most common argument against antifa is comprised of two basic premises

1.  That the fascists are pathetic and incapable of getting anywhere if left alone
2.  We need to be ever so afraid that being confrontational with them will grow their cause

I'm saying these two premises are demonstrated factually incorrect by recent history because

1.  While everyone ignored them, they grew large and entrenched enough to install a president and instigate mass scale illegal abuses of law enforcement power targeting immigrants.
2.  Maybe... but it's not proven.  Nobody has backed this up in any other way other than repeating it over and over, I'm assuming on the basis that it's intuitive.  Meanwhile, everything everybody says about how we should respond to the rise of fascism HAS been proven by recent history to allow fascism to grow, a la premise #1.

And I think I've provided a sufficient starting point for discussing these premises if anybody really wants to step up and back them up in any way.  But until somebody does, I'm going to continue calling bullshit on them and every time it's stated point out that the calls of bullshit are being ignored.