Skipping rope will not stop the rise of white nationalism in the U.S. which is why I don’t recommend it as a strategy to stop the rise of white nationalism in the U.S. You can skip rope all you want but don’t pretend it will help anything.
No, the fundamental narrative of the fascist is authoritarian nationalism. The strong rule the weak is not a feature unique to fascism nor does it define it.
When the law ceases to protect the people, when law enforcement has been infiltrated at every level by white nationalists, when the leader of our nation is publicly sympathetic to the white nationalist agenda, the rule of law becomes a farce. The law ceases to be the refuge for the people and instead acts to obstruct positive change. In such times it may be necessary act rather than wait for the rusted gears of the justice system to squeak once more.
Citation needed. I don’t seem to remember Hitler not gassing people because someone insisted he be reasonable.
Advocate for an objective reality? And just what do you suppose that means. Can we even say objectivity exists? And how can advocating for objectivity bring health to society when objectivity as a concrete thing may be beyond the grasp of us monkeys? No, I’m sorry but that’s just word salad tossed at the wall. It’s meaningless and does nothing to bring us closer to resolution.
So perhaps more white males need to stand up and punch a Nazi. Maybe this means it’s their duty to do so.
To be fair the question of when the Falangist regime ended is a bit of an open question. You can take it to be to the official acceptance of the new constitution in 1978 or the elections in 1982.
Either way, while the regime was not overthrown by violence the transition was not ‘peaceful’ by any means.
The 23F coup attempt as you say was unsuccessful because the army did not support it. So - essentially failed for a lack of being able to apply sufficient violence.
Ditto the Greek junta. That also involved an unsuccessful assassination attempt on the head of the junta, a self-immolation, a student uprising and the invasion of Cyprus by Turkey.
Plenty of violence there.
I was just trying to come up with an insult strong enough but one that wouldn’t offend others. nazi would usually work but as the guy was a nazi no dice.
I’m up in New England and there are a lot of caterpillars around right now so it popped into my head
I was going to go with caterpillar licker, but that didn’t sound right. 🤷
So the solution is to go around beating up people who publicly announce their fascism? We’ll deal with fair elections after we seize power back… I think I’ve heard that one before.
At no point did I say nothing needs to be done - only that punching nazis on the street is not the answer.
Again, how will punching the nazis help?. There are better things you can do to help those people - protest, pressure your elected reps, provide shelter and resources.
Now I can see your response here - punching nazis and any of the above actions are not mutually exclusive. But how are you supposed to help when you’ve been thrown in jail by the fascist police for punching a nazi?
Ah - classic way to just shut someone down. On that note, I’m off for a coffee!
Yep, sure. Fine principle, I’m behind it. But there are exceptions to every rule.
I could exercise free speech by talking about how sex with children isn’t necessarily abuse and so on; advocate a prac component for sex ed in schools. It could be argued that sex with the kids could be a fine thing from the perspective of utilitarianism.
And I’d attract condemnation from a wider cross-section of people than if I was pimping genocide.
How did we come to this? Could it be, that by allowing hate speech to poison discourse, we’ve let this shit get normalised? Oh look, the POTUS is a massive bigot. Whoops.
If the question is “how do we fix the broken world we live in” then you are correct. If the question is “How do I send a strong message to Nazi’s that their existence will no longer be tolerated.” well then, punching a Nazi is the answer.
As Popper points out in the paradox of tolerance, this noble thought will lead to the end of a tolerant society. You see, we cannot tolerate the existence of those who are intolerant for if we do, we will usher in the end of our tolerant society. We cannot defend the intolerants right to speak or write.
However, once again I should point out: antifa are defensive. They did not got to the nazi’s neighbourhood and hunt him down. He came to them.
White males need to do a lot of things - the problem is that they assume that they know what is best for everyone.
Yeah, sorry. I was actually poking light fun at your statement. The idea that someone might have a problem with an action for no other reason than the fact that not everyone is capable or in a position to take the same action just seems to stretch the bounds of reasonableness.
But does it send that message? As others have pointed out, many Nazi’s seem to be goading people into punching them, so they don’t appear to view it as a threat to their existence.
If you start using violence to promote your movement then you can’t just turn it off when you win, you’re going to end up with a system rooted in violence.
More briefly, the ends don’t justify the means, the means become the ends.
What do you think punching a political opponent is if not “forcible suppression of opposition”?
Then do more work politically, you lose one damn election and you become a revolutionary?
You think punching Nazi’s would have stopped Hitler? Losing WWI and the resulting treaty triggered the rise of the Nazis, and it’s hard to throw a harder punch than that.
I’m glad you like the phrase “word salad”, it doesn’t apply here.
A common theme of authoritarians of all stripes in outrageous lies and false statements, Trump is famous for it but the GOP has been doing it for years.
You want to fight authoritarians? Fight their lies and advocate for the truth, Trump’s campaign wouldn’t have succeeded if not for years of misinformation from right wing media.
So what happens when someone takes it a step further and becomes an actual left wing terrorist? Or even if they punch someone who wasn’t quite a full Nazi and ends up killing them? Or the Nazi’s decide it’s game on and start using terrorism back at us? There’s a lot of ways for your strategy to backfire spectacularly.
I think you’re trying to shut down anti-fascist momentum by throwing out hypotheticals.
While all of those possibilities are true, it’s also equally possible that the leader of the country has been hiring actual Nazis on his staff and tacitly encouraging the growth and activity of these groups.
I think the first step is very simple: making it very clear that either explicitly or symbolically advocating for the death of anyone non-white through words, actions, or wearing of symbols is unacceptable and may be met with violence or other consequences.
I’ve seen the video & it looks like the Nazi has a glass jaw.
I don’t have a movement to promote. I’m hoping to end one. Our nation was created in the crucible of violence. Does that forever damn our nation to be rooted in violence?
Oh, it is forcible suppression of opposition but what you fail to realize is that forcible suppression of opposition is not unique to fascism nor is it a defining characteristic without all the other very important distinctions such as radical authoritarian nationalism characterized by dictatorial power.
And how will political work stop white nationalism in the U.S.? This isn’t about loosing an election. This is about the rise of white nationalism.
Shooting them did. Do you think we need to go that route?
Like many did in Germany? The people he lined up and shot? That didn’t work then. Why would it work now? I mean sure, you go ahead and do that since it seems to be your path. Just understand that it was not the pacifists who stopped Hitler and Mussolini.
Lazy slippery slope arguments aren’t very compelling.
Actually it does a bit.
Among wealthy nations the US is notorious for its levels of violence and I really think a violent founding myth is part of it. Just look at how the rhetoric behind the 2nd fuels the gun culture.
Forcible suppression of opposition is a pretty fundamental part of authoritarianism.
But more importantly, do you want to live in a society with forcible suppression of opposition? If not then why do you advocate for it?
Pacifism worked for the civil rights movement, why can’t it work again?
If it escalates into a literal civil war probably. If not then no.
Someone trying it failed once therefore we must never try again!!
You sure give up quickly, what about all the nascent fascist movements that got stopped because people didn’t freak out and start reacting with violence?
I’ll cue the GOP to use that phrasing when they defend their rhetoric about running down protesters with their cars.
You’re advocating using physical violence against a political opponent. This isn’t a slippery slope, this is you running down the slope.
And yet every nation was founded through violence making your point moot.
No, but I recognize and understand the paradox of tolerance.
The civil rights movement succeeded after years of bloody violence.
Hundreds perhaps thousands of someones.
These aren’t political opponents. These are actual for real opponents who espouse white supremacy, the death of people like me, and the rise of white nationalism. That’s not politics, that’s insurgency.
“Our people have made the mistake of confusing the methods with the objectives. As long as we agree on objectives, we should never fall out with each other just because we believe in different methods or tactics or strategy to reach a common goal.”
– Malcolm X, “The Black Revolution”, April 8, 1964
