This is where El Guap-o says “I like these guys. They are funny guys. Only kill one of them.”
6 Likes
As if there were only two sides to an issue. Everyone involved has their own individual position and agenda. It’s to Trump’s advantage to boil this down as an Us vs Them for his base to stay interested.
4 Likes
Well, it took a bit of creative googling, but I officially Get This Joke.
3 Likes
As much as I hate the fascists and neo-nazi’s I agree with Chomsky’s point that Antifa
is a major gift to the right
1 Like
I support people who fight in self defence when attacked, not people who start fights and vandalise property for the hell of it. I trust that you can tell the difference.
Serious anarchists = people who know the history of their movement and the details of their ideology. Anarkiddies = idiots and ignoramuses who are looking to draw attention to themselves and cause mayhem. I’ve met both types, and the latter can’t tell Emma Goldman from Goldman Sachs. The latter also play into the bogus media and police narratives about “dangerous progressives” and “scary anarchists.” They’re the idiots who torch those police cars and light trash cans on fire and break Starbucks windows to show how edgy they are. They’re also great vectors for infiltration by police agents provocateurs because they seem incapable of checking for telltale signs like cop-issue boots and expensive jackets worn by their “comrades” who urge them to initiate violence.
The serious anarchists I’ve met, on the other hand, can discuss their ideology intelligently, and understand that rejecting the authority of the state does not mean abandoning movement discipline. When they use black bloc tactics, they use them effectively and defensively. They contribute greatly to progressive demonstrations in many other ways, and if some of them have a fault it’s making excuses for the very small number of violent anarkiddies in their movement.
[Since the thread has been cleaned up, I’ll restate some other points here: unlike the fascist movement, where the rule rather than the exception is to be a violence-inclined thug, anarkiddies are a very small part of the anarchist movement; and since 2007, when the threat of the right grew more serious and the neoliberal narrative hardened, organisers of most progressive protests seem to have gotten a clue and have made a serious effort to let anarkiddies who initiate violence know that they’re not welcome to attend]
15 Likes
Resisting is fine. It’s becoming a monster in the process I’m concerned about.
that said chick had the right idea there. Guy said he was going to kill her whole family. Volence is not a response i LIKE, but it is appropriate.
1 Like
Literally anything that can be spun by the spineless media as being even remotely confrontational is a gift to the right, because we are so hell bent on “balance” in journalism. We’re letting the hard right control the narrative here.
29 Likes
Only to the extent that we let the right unilaterally define public discourse, and the narrative of leftist causes. But that would be problematic anyway.
ETA: Ninja’d by @Mindysan33
9 Likes
AH, pardon me, then, and you’re exactly right!
Can every quote of Trump’s be followed by “he said, stupidly.” Or is it just implied?
10 Likes
I have never seen such a succinct and accurate description of how I interact with internet citizens in my life. Thank you.
9 Likes
irrelevant aside: I went to high school with Angie Harmon
1 Like
dude…digits, i needs them. 
She’s awesomesauce.
We ran in different circles but did share some mutual friends. I remember seeing her at a few parties but didn’t really know her that well.
Angie’s Bacon number is 2 and I see that she’s still connected to some old friends on FB. Does that mean that my Bacon number is 3?
3 Likes
hahaha. You know I was kidding of course. About the digits…I am absolutely serious that she is awesomesauce.
Well I’ve been watching the same news and finding that some pretty staunch Republicans (ie. the two Bushes and others) were rightly critical of Trump’s failure to condemn the neo-nazis and his attempt to equivocate the two sides, and given we’re in an age where a smartphone and a twitter account can have millions of followers I don’t buy this “control” of the media by one group.
Even though a fringe group, their tactics are ammunition for the right. The same goes with Chomsky’s argument for free speech - free speech is not just for viewpoints you agree with.
I don’t know how to convey the essence of my frustration with you directly on these points, I will just share a story:
After Trump fired off the transgender military ban tweet, I was motivated to take to the streets and protest. My very first rally, a rally for trans veterans, we had a nazi from Virginia in our crowd taking notes on the speakers and Proud Boys watching from the bar across the street.
The next day there was to be a protest against the ACA repeal / for universal healthcare. I was shaken from the previous day and once we arrived at the park I was about to turn and leave because I felt very unsafe. I just thought about all the other people there and how I was on the more visible (tall, purple hair, trans) and less dexterous end of the spectrum and presumably everyone else there was just watching out for themselves. I kept having a vision of a “lone wolf” coming by and opening fire on us, everyone scattering and me tripping or being picked out first.
I turned to leave but then I saw the antifa arrive, clad in black and very much an intimidating sight, and they took up station around our perimeter. I felt a sudden wave of relief. I paradoxically stopped thinking about the possibility of violence and contributed my voice to a very energetic rally.
Nazis, by their very presence, cool free speech for everyone else. Antifa are the response. The media is going to start shit anyway about the left because that’s good business, but with the antifa I and presumably quite a few other people were able to engage in free speech.
ETA: My only prior exposure to antifa was via liberal media, and it painted a very different (very negative) picture from what I saw that day and have seen since.
36 Likes
The problem is simply this. People like those in this thread and else where condemning antifa never stop and ask…if the neonazis and those like them didn’t exist would antifa still exist? The answer is no. Their existence is a direct response to the existence of and current brazen activity of white supremist and hate groups today.
I am sorry you dealt with that and glad you found the support to exercise your voice. /cheers
19 Likes
The Washington Examiner is one of those toy papers that exists to spout spineless propaganda. Say what you will about the Post, but the Examiner doesn’t even try…
7 Likes
btw, here’s noam chomsky’s thoughts on the matter.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/5th2sa/i_emailed_noam_chomsky_about_antifa_freespeech/
“You draw the line where the actions are principled and tactically effective. You therefore oppose these actions, on both grounds.
I’ve received so many inquiries I’ve been reduced to form responses, below:
Wrong in principle, and tactically self-destructive. When we move to the arena of violence, the most brutal guys win – that’s the worst outcome (and, incidentally, it’s not us). The right response is to use the opportunity for education and exposure, not to give a gift to the hard right while attacking fundamental principles of freedom of speech.
We’ve been through all of this before, for example, with Weathermen. The Vietnamese pleaded with them to stop actions like these, understanding very well that each such act simply increased support for the war. In this case, the motive is far less significant, but the consequences are very likely to be the same, and we can see that they already are. That’s quite apart from the question of principle. There could be a constructive response that would not simply be a welcome gift to the far right and those elements in the state yearning for a pretext for repression: to use the opportunity for education and organizing.”
3 Likes
