Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is driving over people violence?
Yes, but advocating for the (peaceful) establishment of entho-states is not. Even if it makes me think less of them.
How does one peacefully establish an ethno-state?
ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
151–160 of 163 posts
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean that the G20 meeting of state heads in Hamburg was a "fascist and racist rally"? Antifa and the extreme left do apply that kind of rhetoric in their critique of "capitalism", but I find it quite extreme and not to be taken seriously. Still, the black block trashed the city and attacked people with deadly force (it's a wonder no one was killed.)
There is a point between a peaceful environmental or justice or equality protest and something as inherently violent as fascism or racism which was the mix in Charlottesville. Historically, fascism has always had an aspect of violence, and the same with racism. You simply cannot make the same case with either antifa or even black block, they are reactionary to fascism and oppression, if not racism respectively. Black…
Riots in Hamburg were not anti-oppression. They were anti-people and anti-city.
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a point between a peaceful environmental or justice or equality protest and something as inherently violent as fascism or racism which was the mix in Charlottesville. Historically, fascism has always had an aspect of violence, and the same with racism. You simply cannot make the same case with either antifa or even black block, they are reactionary to fascism and oppression, if not racism respectively. Black…
Riots in Hamburg were not anti-oppression. They were anti-people and anti-city.
The use of violence as a tactic while wrong isn't the same as violence-dependent ideologies like fascism and racism.
Both should be opposed in effective ways.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/opinion/how-to-make-fun-o...
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
Riots in Hamburg were not anti-oppression. They were anti-people and anti-city.
The use of violence as a tactic while wrong isn't the same as violence-dependent ideologies like fascism and racism. Both should be opposed in effective ways. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/opinion/how-to-make-fun-o...
To me, antifa looks very much like a violence-dependent ideology.
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fear though that "Peaceful Racists" will spread to all conservatives. That > 60 million people could legitimately vote for a racist, xenophobic and sexist bigot seem to point out that these people are OK with racism, even if they're not active participants. Which is extremely disturbing. From what I've read, anti-semitism, while it existed, wasn't mainstream in Germany as well. But the Nazis were "Peaceful Racists"…
The association of Nazis with conservatives, who defend JUDEO-Christian values, is dishonest to say the least.
What JUDEO-Christian values are you talking about? Those espoused by Donald Trump? Good Sir, conservatives voted for Trump DESPITE him being a manifestation of everything OPPOSITE to the values you speak of (liar, doesn't pay his debt, treats everyone else poorly, assaults women etc.). And if not for those values, what do conservatives stand for, really? Just a party of opposition/trolling liberals?
So who is being dishonest?
Let's drop the sham that not all conservatives will go down the terrible path of Nazism/White Supremacy in this current political climate. If not a certainty, from how Trump has been able to get away with one amazingly blatant political scandal after another, it shows just how its terrifyingly possible for that to happen. There is a path from A to B, and to ignore it is dangerous, disingenuous and dishonest
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
The use of violence as a tactic while wrong isn't the same as violence-dependent ideologies like fascism and racism. Both should be opposed in effective ways. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/opinion/how-to-make-fun-o...
To me, antifa looks very much like a violence-dependent ideology.
Violence in defense is also not the same as violence in offense. Defending yourself or your group is the right thing to do, but you can overreact and be counterproductive to your goals. Fascism and racism have no qualms about using offensive violence.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/us/antifa-left-wing-facti...
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me, antifa looks very much like a violence-dependent ideology.
Violence in defense is also not the same as violence in offense. Defending yourself or your group is the right thing to do, but you can overreact and be counterproductive to your goals. Fascism and racism have no qualms about using offensive violence. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/us/antifa-left-wing-facti...
The G20 riots had absolutely no element of "violence in defense". Same applies to many cases.
I find it obscure how people go on justifying violence when it just happens to feel good with the political agenda.
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Violence in defense is also not the same as violence in offense. Defending yourself or your group is the right thing to do, but you can overreact and be counterproductive to your goals. Fascism and racism have no qualms about using offensive violence. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/us/antifa-left-wing-facti...
The G20 riots had absolutely no element of "violence in defense". Same applies to many cases. I find it obscure how people go on justifying violence when it just happens to feel good with the political agenda.
Violence doesn't work for a political agenda. It never has.
I am distinguishing between the historically offensive violent ideologies of nazis and racists, with the historically reactionary use of violence-as-a-tactic for antifa and black bloc.
The latters use of violence should be stopped, since it isn't helping in furthering the lefts political agenda. We wouldn't be talking about them at all if not for the rise of Hitler in the 1930s and Trump now.
These groups are not all the same level of threats to society. We need to focus on stopping the violence on all sides through better protesting permits apparently, and stopping the fascists and racists from gaining more political power.
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
This post doesn't blacklist any specific organizations, but rather any case that involve violence. The ACLU will likely continue[1] to defend peaceful white supremacists. The ban will go for any situation or organization that involves violence. As for Antifa, I've been unable to find any videos/pictures/unbiased reports that Antifa started any of the violence this past weekend. I don't understand the need to equate t…
> If the KKK didn't exist, Antifa wouldn't exist The Anti-Fascist movement is, as the name suggests, concerned with more than the KKK, but, more broadly, it's sole uniting purpose would be absent without fascist, neo-fascist, and related violent racist movements.
No,the "anti-fascist" movement has other uniting purposes. For instance, opposing capitalism or market economy.
There was nothing fascist, neo-fascist or racist about the G20 meeting in Hamburg. The black-clad antifas still attacked it with lots of force and violence.
They were quite happy to dress up in Nike and take photos with iPhones, though.
Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If the KKK didn't exist, Antifa wouldn't exist The Anti-Fascist movement is, as the name suggests, concerned with more than the KKK, but, more broadly, it's sole uniting purpose would be absent without fascist, neo-fascist, and related violent racist movements.
No,the "anti-fascist" movement has other uniting purposes. For instance, opposing capitalism or market economy. There was nothing fascist, neo-fascist or racist about the G20 meeting in Hamburg. The black-clad antifas still attacked it with lots of force and violence. They were quite happy to dress up in Nike and take photos with iPhones, though.
> No,the "anti-fascist" movement has other uniting purposes. For instance, opposing capitalism or market economy.
While Antifa membership is largely drawn from the an anarchocommunist community and some other radical anticapitalism groups, anticapitalism is not it's purpose. As some American Antifa members pointed out in response to criticism that Antifa did not organize against Obama in the US:
“To criticize antifa for not mobilizing against Obama is to misunderstand the movement: anti-fascism is not a comprehensive critique of hierarchical society in and of itself. Anti-fascist work is done as a piece of, and not a replacement for, a larger radical vision. […] Mobilizing large radical movements against neoliberal (or populist) capitalism is not the focus of anti-fascism; this is the work of the anarchist and anti-capitalist movements as a whole.”
https://anarchistnews.org/content/what-do-us-antifascists-ac...