How so? Are you saying I’m the real problem here, not the people who advocate for genocide. That’s a pile of bullshit if ever I heard it. The US got BETTER when we stopped treating racists who advocate for segregation and ethnic cleansing as one side of the coin with civil rights. Those assholes need to crawl back under the rocks which they came from and stop making our lives worse. Once again, WHITE SUPREMACISTS COMMIT MURDER, among many other violent crimes. They don’t need someone punching them in the face as an excuse to do so. They DO IT ANYWAY because they want to bring about a white ethno-state. This is not acceptable discourse. I mean, next you’ll be telling me that we should teach holocaust denial in schools, because it’s the same thing as accepting it as a historical fact.
Wackos are gonna wacko whatever other people say. That’s what makes them wackos.
And while I don’t glorify punching an ethnic cleansing enthusiast, I do see it as a very minor concern compared to the facts that media outlets are giving right-wing populists with a violent agenda a platform, that a lot of LEOs are sympathetic to them, and that the “president” calls some of them very fine people.
Quite right - the US (and quite a number of countries) intervened in the Russian revolution.
The context I was referring to was the post-WWII cold war, although that’s another point in favor that the “violence is necessary to nip it in the bud” philosophy that’s apparently popular here (!) isn’t particularly effective.
JonS, if you know when American and Soviet troops fought each other post WW II, please enlighten me. I had thought both sides were very careful not to escalate to direct violence for obvious reasons, although it got close on occasion.
Ah, my apologies. The comparison with Hitler’s ‘danger’ seems odd, given any nuclear armed nation has way more destructive capability, so by that measure, Jimmy Carter was way more dangerous than Hitler. (You can’t say more likely to use the arsenal, because for Hitler, P = 1.)
A more apt comparison would seem to be Trump being more dangerous than any leader with a nuclear arsenal. That comparison makes sense and I think is accurate (although toss up between him and Kim Jong-un - neither strike me as massively stable.)
Given likes, I am seeing a lot of people who are saying you are a bad person if you don’t support the punching of Nazis. Read above - “They came for us”, “purposefully ignore”, “you are a white supremacist”, etc. are all quite popular sentiments, all in response to my detailing why I think the support of private violence has a cost (and my acknowledging that not supporting punching Nazis has a cost).
Since the context here is the punching of Spencer, this is also not about counter-demonstrations, muscular defense, nor is it about government intervention, all of which I support. This is about support of running up and punching Nazis (at least that’s what the article and the initial videos are about).
People have made it explicit that a failure to support vigilantism directed at an abhorrent ideology is equivalent to supporting an abhorrent ideology and those posts garnered a lot of likes. I think it’s likely that they pretty accurately express the general opinion of many of the readers here.
As for scolding, my initial post included:
I suppose that is a scold - but I explicitly added the post that even factoring the leakage of violence, you may come to a different decision from me.
The “worst of the worst”? The only thing that will stop the fighters for ISS/Nazi Germany/whatever is killing every last one of them?
No, dim sociopaths are, for the most part, looking for a violent tribe to belong to. Ideology tends to come from whatever happens to be culturally convenient, which is why you want the law to discourage such groups and strong law enforcement when such groups actually plan violence.
Honestly, I think punching the occasional Nazi will have a much smaller effect than the fact that the sands of history are running down for the alt-right spike and these Nazis will simply, like so many other scares in history, fade back into background noise of the low-level violence that is always present.
Of course, they don’t always, so the question is do we fight a never-ending violent war against these abhorrent ideologies? That’s what a lot of people on the right think, and apparently a lot of people on the left (although the definition of abhorrent changes).
Um, no. I’m not quite certain how you got that sentiment from my reply.
So first - Nazis are evil. They are scum. We all agree.
Punching Nazis in the face isn’t going to make them worse. We all agree.
All I am saying - and again, this is all I am saying: is that our public support for private violence against Nazis will leak as support for private violence of things we find less abhorrent. It happens (and we complain) when it flows from the right. It’s just as true when it flows from the left.
However, this may not be as important as celebrating our hatred of Nazis. I suspect most people here are of that opinion,and I’m okay with that.
I simply want the understanding that our support for private violence in any context has a cost.
This isn’t just a local or US problem. The fascists are everywhere and pushing their agenda as hard as they can.
Yep. And that cost will be innocent lives, like that of my niece and nephews, ages 6, 4 and 2, if we don’t convince the Nazis that they’ll face personal and painful consequences for their genocide fantasies, even with El Cheeto’s support.
Slippery slope fallacy: the punching of nazis will not lead to the punching of people who are not nazis simply because you claim it will happen.
Maybe it would help if you said who you call Nazis? Anyone?
I suppose you could call a year of death threats, bricks thrown at my windows and getting beaten up by a fascist within close viewing distance of a major road on a bright sunshiny day pushing my buttons. I have already said above that the cops were fucking useless. Every time I turned to the government or liberal organisations they did not do so much as one fucking thing to help.
Non-violence died for me that year (2004), as did my belief in social democracy and social liberalism. If liberals won’t protect me (even non-violently) but antifa will, then my decision is made.
I sincerely hope that you never have your beliefs broken in the way I did that year, but I wish that you would understand that what happened to me is not an isolated situation.
But of course this would never happen because all racists are [cliche description of ignorant poor people liberals always use to pretend nazis aren’t majority middle/upper class whites].
Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, …
Of course it does.
But that’s the kicker…
Everything has a cost.
Action has a cost. Inaction has a cost. No matter what you do, or don’t do, there will be a cost. That’s a part of life. Each one of us has to look at the risks and rewards of our choices, and somehow try to choose what will benefit more, and cost the least. And everyone’s choices are likely to be different.
To you, the threat of normalizing violence as a reaction to social dissent is a scary thing. And yes, it is. The question is, is that threat greater or lesser than the Nazi/fascist threat facing our society now?
Well, I’m glad to have correctly identified the source of the disagreement. I think white supremacist recruitment is dangerous on the same level as incitement to commit crimes, you don’t.
But with phrases like, “You are not the one who gets to decide” and the rhetorical “why does the law work this way?” you come across a bit like you don’t think this is a difference of opinion, but rather that I am mistaken about where the line ought to be drawn.
I’m not going to accept that allowing certain speech is right or necessary for democracy simply because it is the status quo in America in 2018. Lots of western democracies have hate speech laws and even laws that specifically target nazis (e.g. making it illegal to deny the holocaust). It’s not like it’s an unfortunate reality that we have to accept white supremacy to protect democracy, it’s a choice that is being made by each nation, with America being the nation that has the hardest time denouncing hate speech and advocacy of mass displacement or extermination of ethnic or religious groups.
@mindysan33 already answered you point about whether or not its legal to jump out of nowhere and punch someone on the street. It isn’t, it isn’t about to become legal. If you are going to go after someone in that way because you think their ideology is a threat so society you had better be ready to be judged both by history and by the actual judicial system. That’s true whether I agree that the guy had it coming or not.
I agree that no group is deserving of violence. What we ought to have is a society that deals with people who spout hate and recruit people into violent ideologies through the legal system rather instead of leaving the tension to boil over into random street violence. If we repealed the laws against vandalism we’d see a huge amount of violence result as people sought their own justice for wrongs done against them. But I wouldn’t be out there tut-tutting the people who got into fights when people vandalized their property, I’d be saying, “We really need those anti-vandalism laws back”. No Justice No Peace isn’t just a slogan, it’s a cause and effect relationship.
Not necessarily. Some of them might be scummy trollies who think of it as all one big joke, others might be cowards who feel invincible because Trump and his ilk have risen to power, and now feel they can safely do whatever they want with no consequence. A swift punch to the face teaches them that people are NOT going to sit by quietly and let this happen, that there ARE immediate and harsh consequences for being a Nazi, and that they are not as invincible and safe as they think they are. It’s not going to make them change their beliefs- I have no illusion that punching a Nazi magically makes them not a Nazi- but it may make them change their mind about strapping on an armband and rallying others to their cause and send them scurrying back to the fringe where they belong. All the more reason to do it now, before they actually have real power to back them up.
I hope you’re right, but given what happened last time Nazis rose to power, there’s an awful lot of risk to just assuming that’s what will happen. A lot of people who might normally agree with you have also had their mind changed by Trump’s victory, which also seemed like a distant, impossible threat until it suddenly happened before their eyes. If it comes down to hoping everything will turn out for the best on its own or punching people who unquestionably deserve to be punched, whether it’s legal or not, I don’t blame anyone for choosing to pop a Nazi in the jaw.
This. ^
Just because people start punching Nazis does not mean they’re going to start punching all white males everywhere, or non-vegans or climate-deniers or whatever. As people have told Timoth3y about 500 times in this thread, Nazis are simply not the same as other groups.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
No, Richard Spencer on many occasions have said if he and folks like him got into power and minorities resisted forceful deportation despite being natural born citizens that he would have no problems using force to exterminate them. This isn’t debatable since he’s posted on forums saying as much. There’s nothing peaceful or accommodating about the ideology of white nationalists. They’re like the Nazis, they want to kill people one way or another. To say he needs to have freedom to say such things or to suggest it is not acceptable. This false sense of “free speech” doesn’t work when that speech’s aim is the destruction of the free speech of others (which would include their ability to even exist to have such free speech recognized). There’s no room to discuss this. You really need to ask yourself if your absolutism on free speech is acceptable considering the consequences of the ideology of white nationalism. Because if the free speech of a white nationalist is far more important to you than the protection of actual living human beings today and on in the future then I’m just going to say you got your priorities mixed up. We can recover speech, we can’t raise the dead.
Nonviolence is only effective if the other side sees you as a moral equal or a human being. This is why nonviolence rarely is used in history. It’s not because it’s unique enough to be never be tried in the past but because its utility is very limited. So keep your powder dry for the day when the fascists do take power and do seek to kill kith and kin. Don’t pretend they won’t try and don’t pretend the law will protect us forever. Only fools assume law itself has magical potency to define right and wrong. Law is mind without reason as Aristotle said it best.
You know, I think you’re taking a very specific thing - people not feeling particularly sorry for someone like Spencer getting punched in the face, and conflating it with the idea that we always support violence. I don’t think that’s fair or accurate to what any of us has said.
Again, you are grossly mischaracterizing the arguments people are making here. No one is saying that NOT punching nazis makes one a bad person - we’re saying that punching nazis is a perfectly response in some circumstances. If you read through the various points, not everyone agrees where that line is - but people who have been targeted in recent years (some people who are here, actually) feel the need to physically defend themselves.
While he was giving his views on national TV in support of a racist president, in the context of the inauguration itself, which drew larger protests for and against. He was not an innocent bystander. He has actively worked to build a white power coalition that helped to get Trump elected.
Not either speaking out or acting to defend others is where most people feel supports an ideology. That doesn’t have to include direct physical action or confrontation. It can be making white supremacists know in a peaceful way, how odious and unacceptable you find their views.
Spencer is no “dim sociopath.” He is a person who came from wealth and power and who used that to disseminate hateful ideologies. He was a ABD at Duke before he created his think tank to spread his hateful ideas. He may believe in twisted in evil things, but he’s not a dim wit. And as for the rank and file, right wing organizations have long appealed to young, especially working class men, who feel adrift.
The arc of history doesn’t bend towards justice all by itself. If Germany hadn’t invaded poland, how knows how long the Nazi regime would have lasted. The nazis were destroyed by violence, not be disappearing into the sands of time. History doesn’t happen, people make history.
What are the options here? Do you honestly think that people like Spencer who get off on the surge of power he feels embracing white supremacy, are just going to go away if we ask nicely? It doesn’t work like that. Sometimes violence has to be part of the equation. The second world war was incredibly destructive, but the alternative would have been a Nazi Empire at least across Europe, and you can make damn sure they would have finished the job they started in the Holocaust, as a start.
I disagree. It would certainly make the nazis think twice about spewing their hate in public. Punk scenes in the 80s and 90s were rife with battles between punks and neo-nazi punks - the neo-nazis quickly learned to avoid punk shows if they didn’t want to get their asses beat. Punks made the decision to make sure that neo-nazis knew they were not welcome in punk spaces.
That may be true, but doing nothing has a cost as well. And I think too many people don’t understand the danger that is represented by organizations like Spencer’s. I’d highly recommend you read Deborah Lipstadt’s book on holocaust denial, written in the 1990s. I’ve been reading it recently and it’s shocking how similar what’s happening today is:
It’s chilling and it should worry us that white supremacy is once again become part of polite discourse.
It’s also mostly effective as a minority tactic against an entrenched power structure, so I can understand why the Notzees are crying for non-violence - but too frackin bad morans. No. Wear a swastika → get a head punch.
Not what I’m saying.
Please read the context.
