No, that’s also you.
We can explain this to you, but can’t understand it for you.
4 Likes
Since it’s OK to punch Nazis and their supporters because they advocate violence, is it also OK to punch Antifa members and their supporters because they advocate violence?
Or is it only bad when the violence is directed at groups we like?
1 Like
It’s OK to punch Nazis and their supporters because they advocate violence fascism and genocide.
FTFY.
26 Likes
So it’s not the advocation of violence but fascism. So is it OK to punch those who advocate communism? What about members of those groups that actually display the hammer and sickle flag? Stalin was genocidal and murderous manic as well.
2 Likes
And not a fucking communist…
21 Likes
I eventually would like to leave this world a slightly better place than I entered it, and I’m still figuring out the best way to make that happen
PROTIP: supporting and apologising and false-equivalencing for nazis is not a good way to make the world a better place.
27 Likes
33 Likes
That’s why I’m not doing that. I am asking the person who is advocating violence to explain their rationale for doing so. The whole “Members of Group X are irrational and can’t be reasoned with. They must be met with violence.” thing has been around for a long time. It’s usually said by people who have never seriously tried to engage Group X and are looking for a fight, either directly or by proxy.
That kind of thinking is simple. Hate is easy. But here’s the thing, hating bad people does not make you a good person.
1 Like
“Not like?” We’re talking about people who explicitly want to violently displace and/or murder other people because of their race, religion, or sexual orientation. People who have managed to succeed, at least temporarily, to turn most of a continent to that purpose.
“Not like” doesn’t begin to start.
13 Likes
Oh we’ve engaged seriously with the nazis before. Very very seriously. Eventually they came to accept the force of our arguments, and we were very definitely the good guys.
27 Likes
Came for the Grumpy Cat - was not disappointed
(Meow, my brother by another mother!)
4 Likes
I remember that one, too.
I cracked that book at 8.
It changed who I am, and I knew that even at that age.
Not enough people know the atrocities. They only think of a quick gassing.
Some folks don’t believe it at all.
It’s sick.
2 Likes
12 Likes
#bettereveryloop.
5 Likes
This post should be in any discussion about antifa and violence.
I never felt safer than when I was near antifa. They came to defend people, to put their bodies between these armed white supremacists and those of us who could not or would not fight. They protected a lot of people that day, including groups of clergy. My safety (and safety is relative in these situations) was dependent upon their willingness to commit violence. In effect, I outsourced the sin of my violence to them. I asked them to get their hands dirty so I could keep mine clean.
32 Likes
Seems like a lot of people are willing to play word games when it comes to Nazis. Those bastards stand for hate of everyone who isn’t another Nazi. They’re willing to commit harm beyond imagination on the bodies of little kids, as well as adults. Their crimes are so unbearably awful that some people would rather deny that it happened rather than rise against them. I haven’t see or read of anyone here who advocates outright killing them. Hitting them seems to be a form of communication they understand because they damn sure don’t want to listen. When they are out in public spewing their venom they need to know they aren’t welcome. What’s up with acting like Nazi’s are nice people. If you aren’t a fellow Nazi they want to eliminate you. That doesn’t call for nice.
14 Likes
So are you saying that failing to support violence is supporting Nazis? I would have to say that “purposely ignoring” seems pretty much equivalent for casting covert support.
It’s the unlikely tail that worries me. If we had the ability to predict how incitement or support of violence can morph into something beyond what the initial supporters imagined, history would be very different. For a recent example, see the Chinese government vis-a-vis treatment of the Japanese.
My general worry is that we there are far worse injustices being done every day. Our general support makes it clear that as long as you have the right motives, violence is justified. That’s an attitude that has a few notable successes and a lot of catastrophic failures.
Again, perhaps antifa is unique to Nazis, but there’s a lot of injustice out there. Aren’t there far greater threats justifying far greater violence?
Anyway, I’m not saying it’s likely to occur. But I consider a small threat of very bad consequences not to be worth the benefit that antifa brought. Others may differ.
emo_pinata may disagree :-).
That is an attitude held by the NRA. Advocating good gun use makes it in no way responsible for bad gun use. I strongly disagree.
Again, I disagree. We see many examples of that “bleeding over” in over zealous policing and wrongful prosecution. I believe in having a justice system, but the inevitable bleeding over is my responsibility for support of the system, and thus my responsibility to help try and mitigate.
Just because I don’t support misuse of the system doesn’t absolve me of responsibility of the misuses that will inevitably occur when a justice system that I do support meets the fallible creatures that are man.
Considering how often we decry support for very ugly sentiments and point out how they motivate ugly actions, it would be remiss not to turn examine our own support in the same light.
Actually, this is saying that the treating a war and a civilian context as the same thing is almost always a very bad thing.
Not no problem, but yes, a hell of a lot less problem. As part of a democracy, I strongly believe in the government holding the monopoly on violence. The result has not always been good, but the consequence of wide-scale belief that citizens are justified in taking violence into their own hands has almost always been bad.
This may be a Canadian/American thing.
I don’t hand wring about a Nazi being punched. I do clutch my pearls a bit when I see this getting fairly widespread support from those who traditionally condemn violence.
Wanderfound, don’t you find Nina Illingworth’s speech to be very similar to Jack Nicholson’s “You can’t handle the truth” speech?
I understand it’s a pretty human reaction for humans on all sides of the political spectrum, but I always thought it was something to be fought against, not embraced.
I’d prefer practical superiority - not moral superiority. A decision is always better made when you understand the costs of your policy.
3 Likes
Just Asking Questions without listening to the answers is called arguing in bad faith.
Some people may live in countries where if Nazis organize in public the cops will put a stop to it.
We do not.
22 Likes
Which part of the speech? The idea that violence is sometimes a regrettable necessity? The observation that some people prefer to avoid the acknowledgment of that fact due to privileged squeamishness? Or something else?
I believe we’re running into some fundamental liberal vs socialist differences here.
-
Liberals tend to focus on the legitimacy/illegitimacy of tactics and procedure, whereas Socialists tend to be more focused on outcomes.
-
Liberals tend to be deeply committed to the rule of law, the legitimacy of capitalist state authority and the maintenance of social stability. Socialists, especially revolutionary Socialists, not so much.
BB has run through these arguments a few times before…
14 Likes
WELL YOU SEE it depends on whether teh buttsecks is officially considered to be a crime in that particular jurisdiction and historical era 
Violence is always wrong except when the Proper Authorities insist upon it.
Speaking of which
@Papasan aren’t you suppsed to post something like
I'm sucking all the fun out of Richard Spencer RIGHT NOW!
15 Likes
