ADVERTISEMENT

"White Civil Rights" Rally Approved for D.C. in August

Ummm, it appears you have it back-asswards. The article is about a "White Civil Rights Rally" and the stated purpose is "...protesting civil rights abuse...." However you have decided that the agenda of the group is actually white supremacy rather than civil rights and freedom of speech. Shameful.
:rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot
I'm surely not going to give Krugman clicks, but I can only assume that he acknowledges that this goes both ways. I mean, unless he demonstrates that the data clearly states it is worse for a minority or female today than it was three years ago or ten years ago.


/dws because we all know he isn't objective
Krugman is describing the escalating hatred towards immigrants led by Trump. The article references the blood libels that were regularly spread about the Jewish people in Europe prior to pogroms. He claims that the libels are now being spread about immigrants e.g., higher crime. He reflects that the purveyours of these libels were not the disenfranchised but were and are perhaps principally the enfranchised elites. He cites the role of Henry Ford in popularizing and publishing the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
You mean I'm taking one out of the ole Goat playbook? Let's not pretend it's 2012.

Sonny...let me tell you a story about a far off time called 2012! It was a scary time, where women and racial minorities faced incredible challenges...nothing like the bucolic utopia these whiners currently enjoy! :rolleyes:
 
Sonny...let me tell you a story about a far off time called 2012! It was a scary time, where women and racial minorities faced incredible challenges...nothing like the bucolic utopia these whiners currently enjoy! :rolleyes:

This was in response to Goat, not the article.
 
Krugman is describing the escalating hatred towards immigrants led by Trump. The article references the blood libels that were regularly spread about the Jewish people in Europe prior to pogroms. He claims that the libels are now being spread about immigrants e.g., higher crime. He reflects that the purveyours of these libels were not the disenfranchised but were and are perhaps principally the enfranchised elites. He cites the role of Henry Ford in popularizing and publishing the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

What are the enfranchised elites worried about in this context? It would seem that modern day elites span both sides of the aisle and likely have vastly different views on immigration. In other words, threatening their power through a movement towards communistic society is clear to me. But, what exactly is happening in regards to immigration that will threaten the power of the elites in this country, in particularly people that are left-leaning (e.g. Buffett, Zuckerberg, etc.)?
 
What are the enfranchised elites worried about in this context? It would seem that modern day elites span both sides of the aisle and likely have vastly different views on immigration. In other words, threatening their power through a movement towards communistic society is clear to me. But, what exactly is happening in regards to immigration that will threaten the power of the elites in this country, in particularly people that are left-leaning (e.g. Buffett, Zuckerberg, etc.)?
The question that is left unanswered in the piece is why the enfranchised elites like Henry Ford or, now, Donald Trump, push blood libels. There is not an economic interest at stake in either case...if anything the economics goes the other direction with the enfranchised elites benefiting from commerce with Jews and immigrants. Krugman proposes that it is not economics that was or is at work. Rather he proposes it is hatred. Perhaps it is in the nature of things for the powerful to hate the weak as a way to justify to themselves why they should feel free to abuse the weak. But that is just a thought.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
Ummm, it appears you have it back-asswards. The article is about a "White Civil Rights Rally" and the stated purpose is "...protesting civil rights abuse...." However you have decided that the agenda of the group is actually white supremacy rather than civil rights and freedom of speech. Shameful.

Nah, they are totally white supremacists. I do not support what they stand for, I am arguing they have a right to express that opinion.
 
Nah, they are totally white supremacists. I do not support what they stand for, I am arguing they have a right to express that opinion.
Who are you arguing with? The argument the rest of us have been having is whether they SHOULD stage such a rally. Some of us claim it is a deplorable thing to have a rally for white supremacy...others, I guess, disagree.
 
My question, on so many levels, is why do we need a "White Civil Rights" rally?

I just hope people who would oppose a rally like this (ideally most of the sane population) stay home/out of DC and don't take the bait. "Tick off and incite liberals" was probably high on their checklist of things to do in planning for this. Let the few hundred hillbillies from God knows where get together for their racist circle-jerk and be done with it.

I know it wouldn't be legal, but I'd be perfectly fine with The National Park service denying their claim for a rally, based on historical context of what a group like that brings and who is a part of it.

I can see Stephen Miller leading the charge. Always the victim. Even when society has always been designed to accommodate white men like him.

Nothing will make this crowd happier than posit off the “libs”. This crowd isn’t interested in unity- like Milton in the movie “office space”, they just want to “burn this GD place down”.

Nothing irritates me more than white privilege/grievance. You guys have probably picked up on that from my posts by now.

And the over/under on the % of the crowd that’ll be comprised of Trump supporters is approximately 98%. I’m taking the over.

I really hope they’re going to have some serious police presence. This could be Charlottesville, but on a possible larger scale. And we all know how that ended.

PS- I saw where the projection of the nation being majority minority was moved up again. Sometime in the 2040’s. I have a feeling we’re going to see a lot of white dudes acting a fool for a while.
 
That's exactly what I said. The rally is about white civil rights, not white supremacy.

Uhh... they’re the same thing. And if you are offended, or don’t understand why that’s the case, it’s time to take a good long look in the mirror brother.

It’s ironic that the group most likely to use a term like “snowflake” are... snowflakes.

“White civil rights” is ridiculous. I guess I missed in history where whites in the US were enslaved, denied the right to vote, hanged, incarcerated at a much higher rate, shot by police officers at a much higher rate, received longer sentences for every offense, but especially drug offenses, etc.

I support their right to free speech. But, I can mock the hell out of it at the same time.
 
Who are you arguing with? The argument the rest of us have been having is whether they SHOULD stage such a rally. Some of us claim it is a deplorable thing to have a rally for white supremacy...others, I guess, disagree.

That is like asking if the sky should be blue.

I generally find rallies to be stupid on their face. I cannot think of too many reasons of why you "should" have a rally for anything. No racists shouldn't have rallies to spout racial separatist rhetoric. But to me that is just signaling that you are not a racist, I generally do not believe anyone here is (except that Accuro (iirc) guy that was here months ago).
 
It's becoming clear there are three types of white people:

1) Those that get are offended by the loud, obnoxious leftists to the point that they feel the need to demonstrate in poor taste (e.g. Charlottesville)

2) Those, like many on this board, that get offended by whackos deciding to protest because it makes them feel ashamed and guilty to be white

3) Those that don't give a flying fvck about any of it and think people that protest are pathetic, regardless of their political affiliation or views. They also tend to think people that get so bent out of shape about things said by CNN or Breitbart are just as pathetic. If only there wasn't such a shrinking amount of this group.

This country was FOUNDED on protest. The right to be a complete @sshole was guaranteed long ago by folks that... protested British rule/taxes.

I hope the news outlets completely ignore these @sshats. Zero coverage would absolutely destroy them. They LIVE to piss off others. If they stand for one thing and one thing only, that’s it.

They’re a bunch of f’n losers that never got any @ss as teenagers (whatever their orientation may be). Emotional immaturity and grievance at its finest.


How many will lose their jobs this time around, after their faces are plastered all over social media? Or, will they not even try to hide it, and wear hoods?

PS-

I’m thoroughly convinced that if everyone was sexually satisfied (save for pedophiles, of course), there would be a lot less anger and hate in this world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bulk VanderHuge
That is like asking if the sky should be blue.

I generally find rallies to be stupid on their face. I cannot think of too many reasons of why you "should" have a rally for anything. No racists shouldn't have rallies to spout racial separatist rhetoric. But to me that is just signaling that you are not a racist, I generally do not believe anyone here is (except that Accuro (iirc) guy that was here months ago).
Accuro was the only poster who was open about it, but there are a couple of other true blue racists here. They are smart enough to try to hide it, though, so you have to read between the lines to see it.
 
False equivalence. Despite your, my, or anyone else's disagreement with their message, all of those racist idiots have every right to shout whatever the hell they want to shout. And those who think that they are racist idiots have every right to shout that back and let their disapproval be known. What neither side has the right to do is put their hands on the other. Period. I do not care how morally superior any of them think their position may be. If they are doing nothing but yelling stupidity, they have every right to do so.

The police are given agreed upon authority to enforce our laws. They are given force latitude that you and I do not have. That is part of the social contract we have with them. Antifa and Neo Nazis do not have that same agreement from society.

The only one spouting fallacies here is you. We do not need the Bolsheviks and the Brown Shirts brawling in the streets. We are developed enough to hear a dumb argument and reject it without punching someone in the face.

Are they allowed to use cars on people?
 
Accuro was the only poster who was open about it, but there are a couple of other true blue racists here. They are smart enough to try to hide it, though, so you have to read between the lines to see it.

I think there are some who probably hold some prejudices (we all do, but some more than others) but I do not think anyone is really actively racist. Just my opinion.

I am not a fan of pin the tail on the racist. Except Accuro, he totally is.
 
Accuro was the only poster who was open about it, but there are a couple of other true blue racists here. They are smart enough to try to hide it, though, so you have to read between the lines to see it.
Whatever happened to Accuro? He was a racist knucklehead to his core but he made everyone else seem reasonable by comparison.
 
I think there are some who probably hold some prejudices (we all do, but some more than others) but I do not think anyone is really actively racist. Just my opinion.

I am not a fan of pin the tail on the racist. Except Accuro, he totally is.
A couple of people have let things slip that would only be said by a genuine racist (or a troll pretending to be one). One of them is permabanned for unrelated reasons. Can't even remember his handle.
 
No.

And I hope the D.C. police are smarter than the Charlottesville PD and they take away the shields and clubs. You don't need those to give speeches.

That was ingrained in the psyche of the protesters. Not sure if white supremacists can have tact and self control.
 
That was ingrained in the psyche of the protesters. Not sure if white supremacists can have tact and self control.

They and the Antifa crowd both came looking for a fight. There was a more sizable portion of people that I would call the "normals" who were upset about having that type of rally in their city. The girl that was hit by a car and unfortunately died was one of those "normals". I do not believe those people were expecting the level of violence that broke out and they got caught in the middle of a street brawl.

If you go to a rally or a protest armed with shields, clubs, pepper spray, etc. you are looking to cause trouble. Like I said, I hope the police in D.C. do a better job of separating and disarming the two sides if/when this goes down.
 
They and the Antifa crowd both came looking for a fight. There was a more sizable portion of people that I would call the "normals" who were upset about having that type of rally in their city. The girl that was hit by a car and unfortunately died was one of those "normals". I do not believe those people were expecting the level of violence that broke out and they got caught in the middle of a street brawl.

If you go to a rally or a protest armed with shields, clubs, pepper spray, etc. you are looking to cause trouble. Like I said, I hope the police in D.C. do a better job of separating and disarming the two sides if/when this goes down.

The anti fascism crowd went looking for a fight with Nazis. Nazis went looking for a fight cuz they’re Nazi assholes. And it was the Nazis that ran over and killed an innocent woman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rockfish1
The anti fascism crowd went looking for a fight with Nazis. Nazis went looking for a fight cuz they’re Nazi assholes. And it was the Nazis that ran over and killed an innocent woman.

And? This isn't WW2, nobody has permission to go and punch a Nazi. I do not understand why this is so hard for you guys to understand. No matter how deplorable you may find the statements of another person, you have no right to put your hands on them. Zero. That social compact is what keeps us civilized. Those asshats can march with their tiki torches and shout all sorts of nonsense and if the city has permitted them, then they are free to do so (although the torches could very well constitute a weapon, so take those away too). And Antifa can show up and yell about how stupid they are and they can all yell at each other until they are hoarse. That is how it is supposed to work.

I don't care if Antifa holds a moral ground that is a smidgen better than the Nazis and frankly I view the tactics of Antifa as very fascistic, they are Nazis without the racial component, so I guess that makes them a step better...but barely. Whether their viewpoint is slightly more moral, they still have zero right to attack anyone. ZERO. Period, end of discussion. Yeah, the racist douchebags may be worse douchebags but the Antifa crowd fighting them are douchebags too. My position is anti-douchebag. My position is pro-normal, i.e. the 90% of the people who showed up to protest with their presence and their voice, not with clubs and chemical agents. Everyone else was a bad actor.

Edit:

I am going to remove the racial component to try and make my point more clear. Antifa goes around deciding who they think are "fascists" and "Nazis". In some instances, most of us would agree that the people they are fighting are white nationalists (like Charlottesville). In others we massively disagree on who are fascists (Ben Shapiro and more recently ICE agents). When you accept that Antifa has the right to attack what most of us would consider "real Nazis", you also accept that they can be violent to the other people they label as fascists where there would be much more widespread disagreement with their assessment. You leave the decision on who is a legitimate target up to them.

To bring this full circle, anti-abortion groups feel that abortion is literally killing a child. In some instances a Doctor like Gosnell is going to be a guy that most of us would agree is a monster. So if he gets roughed up a bit by anti-abortion groups, then enh...not a big deal. He is a bad person. But if beating him up is ok, then so is going after anyone else who agrees with abortion. At the end of the day, the process is the same, he was just more inhumane. Do you see how this kind of thing gets out of hand really quickly? We have a social compact for a reason. I am not defending Nazis, I am saying that accepting political violence as discourse has ALWAYS ended bad.
 
Last edited:
And? This isn't WW2, nobody has permission to go and punch a Nazi. I do not understand why this is so hard for you guys to understand. No matter how deplorable you may find the statements of another person, you have no right to put your hands on them. Zero. That social compact is what keeps us civilized. Those asshats can march with their tiki torches and shout all sorts of nonsense and if the city has permitted them, then they are free to do so (although the torches could very well constitute a weapon, so take those away too). And Antifa can show up and yell about how stupid they are and they can all yell at each other until they are hoarse. That is how it is supposed to work.

I don't care if Antifa holds a moral ground that is a smidgen better than the Nazis and frankly I view the tactics of Antifa as very fascistic, they are Nazis without the racial component, so I guess that makes them a step better...but barely. Whether their viewpoint is slightly more moral, they still have zero right to attack anyone. ZERO. Period, end of discussion. Yeah, the racist douchebags may be worse douchebags but the Antifa crowd fighting them are douchebags too. My position is anti-douchebag. My position is pro-normal, i.e. the 90% of the people who showed up to protest with their presence and their voice, not with clubs and chemical agents. Everyone else was a bad actor.

Edit:

I am going to remove the racial component to try and make my point more clear. Antifa goes around deciding who they think are "fascists" and "Nazis". In some instances, most of us would agree that the people they are fighting are white nationalists (like Charlottesville). In others we massively disagree on who are fascists (Ben Shapiro and more recently ICE agents). When you accept that Antifa has the right to attack what most of us would consider "real Nazis", you also accept that they can be violent to the other people they label as fascists where there would be much more widespread disagreement with their assessment. You leave the decision on who is a legitimate target up to them.

To bring this full circle, anti-abortion groups feel that abortion is literally killing a child. In some instances a Doctor like Gosnell is going to be a guy that most of us would agree is a monster. So if he gets roughed up a bit by anti-abortion groups, then enh...not a big deal. He is a bad person. But if beating him up is ok, then so is going after anyone else who agrees with abortion. At the end of the day, the process is the same, he was just more inhumane. Do you see how this kind of thing gets out of hand really quickly? We have a social compact for a reason. I am not defending Nazis, I am saying that accepting political violence as discourse has ALWAYS ended bad.

A side note:

I read a LOT of news sources. From all ends of the spectrum. And the only place I’ve EVER seen the term “antifa” is from far right sources. The term is literally a creation of the far right- including Fox News.

And, I haven’t seen any articles, even from far left sources, that advocate for what “antifa” stands for. It’s a term created solely to create fear and division- and create even more of an “us vs them” mentality among the folks on. the right. It seems that fear really drives that side of the spectrum.

And, I despise violence. In any form. But always remember that without “white nationalists”, antifa wouldn’t exist. It’s a response to the Trump phenomenon, which has elevated these racist @sshats, and made them feel it’s ok to be out in the open with their views.

In other words, I don’t think “antifa” is an organized thing, and isn’t all that large.

JMHO.
 
And? This isn't WW2, nobody has permission to go and punch a Nazi. I do not understand why this is so hard for you guys to understand. No matter how deplorable you may find the statements of another person, you have no right to put your hands on them. Zero. That social compact is what keeps us civilized. Those asshats can march with their tiki torches and shout all sorts of nonsense and if the city has permitted them, then they are free to do so (although the torches could very well constitute a weapon, so take those away too). And Antifa can show up and yell about how stupid they are and they can all yell at each other until they are hoarse. That is how it is supposed to work.

I don't care if Antifa holds a moral ground that is a smidgen better than the Nazis and frankly I view the tactics of Antifa as very fascistic, they are Nazis without the racial component, so I guess that makes them a step better...but barely. Whether their viewpoint is slightly more moral, they still have zero right to attack anyone. ZERO. Period, end of discussion. Yeah, the racist douchebags may be worse douchebags but the Antifa crowd fighting them are douchebags too. My position is anti-douchebag. My position is pro-normal, i.e. the 90% of the people who showed up to protest with their presence and their voice, not with clubs and chemical agents. Everyone else was a bad actor.

Edit:

I am going to remove the racial component to try and make my point more clear. Antifa goes around deciding who they think are "fascists" and "Nazis". In some instances, most of us would agree that the people they are fighting are white nationalists (like Charlottesville). In others we massively disagree on who are fascists (Ben Shapiro and more recently ICE agents). When you accept that Antifa has the right to attack what most of us would consider "real Nazis", you also accept that they can be violent to the other people they label as fascists where there would be much more widespread disagreement with their assessment. You leave the decision on who is a legitimate target up to them.

To bring this full circle, anti-abortion groups feel that abortion is literally killing a child. In some instances a Doctor like Gosnell is going to be a guy that most of us would agree is a monster. So if he gets roughed up a bit by anti-abortion groups, then enh...not a big deal. He is a bad person. But if beating him up is ok, then so is going after anyone else who agrees with abortion. At the end of the day, the process is the same, he was just more inhumane. Do you see how this kind of thing gets out of hand really quickly? We have a social compact for a reason. I am not defending Nazis, I am saying that accepting political violence as discourse has ALWAYS ended bad.
Violence is wrong, no matter who employs it, but Nazis and white supremacists are inherently vile. Those who oppose them aren't morally equivalent to them even when they both use violence against each other.
 
That is like asking if the sky should be blue.

I generally find rallies to be stupid on their face. I cannot think of too many reasons of why you "should" have a rally for anything. No racists shouldn't have rallies to spout racial separatist rhetoric. But to me that is just signaling that you are not a racist, I generally do not believe anyone here is (except that Accuro (iirc) guy that was here months ago).
It is weird that you can't bring yourself to condemn Nazis and the Klan rallying without also hitting out at a bunch of other stuff...e.,g., rallies in general and antifa specifically. It has the effect of equating things that aren't equal. The violence at a Klan rally is no different than the violence among soccer hooligans rioting. But, even so, the Nazi and Klan variety is worse because their cause is not soccer but destroying our democratic state and obliterating the civil rights starting with minorities and then moving on to everyone else.
 
A side note:

I read a LOT of news sources. From all ends of the spectrum. And the only place I’ve EVER seen the term “antifa” is from far right sources. The term is literally a creation of the far right- including Fox News.

And, I haven’t seen any articles, even from far left sources, that advocate for what “antifa” stands for. It’s a term created solely to create fear and division- and create even more of an “us vs them” mentality among the folks on. the right. It seems that fear really drives that side of the spectrum.

And, I despise violence. In any form. But always remember that without “white nationalists”, antifa wouldn’t exist. It’s a response to the Trump phenomenon, which has elevated these racist @sshats, and made them feel it’s ok to be out in the open with their views.

In other words, I don’t think “antifa” is an organized thing, and isn’t all that large.

JMHO.

With all do respect, you are severely misinformed on Antifa. They take that moniker when they are engaged in this political fight. When they are fighting their other mortal enemy (capitalism) they call themselves anarchists. In either case they are the people wearing black masks, rioting, and attacking people whenever you see these things on the news.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States)

I do not fear Antifa. I fear mainstreaming their actions. Whenever they get brought up I hear, "well I am against violence, BUT" Drop the but. That is what I am saying. There is no "but" with these people. Their entire message is made illegitimate because of their stated goal of using violence.

As far as feeling they are a fringe, I agree. I feel the same about the White Nationalists. Nobody wants to claim the douchebags who are thrust on our "side" because we may hold similar opinions on other topics. I don't want to claim my side's radicals either, I get it.
 
The question that is left unanswered in the piece is why the enfranchised elites like Henry Ford or, now, Donald Trump, push blood libels. There is not an economic interest at stake in either case...if anything the economics goes the other direction with the enfranchised elites benefiting from commerce with Jews and immigrants. Krugman proposes that it is not economics that was or is at work. Rather he proposes it is hatred. Perhaps it is in the nature of things for the powerful to hate the weak as a way to justify to themselves why they should feel free to abuse the weak. But that is just a thought.

That's why I was surprised it wasn't tied with the "they took our jobs" crowd. I'm struggling to see good equivalence at this point, though agree with you that the rhetoric is too similar.
 
It is weird that you can't bring yourself to condemn Nazis and the Klan rallying without also hitting out at a bunch of other stuff...e.,g., rallies in general and antifa specifically. It has the effect of equating things that aren't equal. The violence at a Klan rally is no different than the violence among soccer hooligans rioting. But, even so, the Nazi and Klan variety is worse because their cause is not soccer but destroying our democratic state and obliterating the civil rights starting with minorities and then moving on to everyone else.

Literally in almost every ****ing post I have said that their views are despicable. I have no problem saying that. I do not qualify it with a "but" or anything like that. Their views are despicable and they have every right to hold them and every right to express them. And we have every right to point and laugh at them because they are idiots.

What we do not have the right to do is physically attack them for holding those views.

I give up, you guys are so obtuse whenever this shit gets brought up. **** it all. Yell at people eating dinner. Take a baseball bat to an abortionist. Threaten the children of political opponents. It's all good because at least you are not a racist. I have never seen so many smart people try so hard to be so dumb. Congratulations on that.
 
This country was FOUNDED on protest. The right to be a complete @sshole was guaranteed long ago by folks that... protested British rule/taxes.

I hope the news outlets completely ignore these @sshats. Zero coverage would absolutely destroy them. They LIVE to piss off others. If they stand for one thing and one thing only, that’s it.

They’re a bunch of f’n losers that never got any @ss as teenagers (whatever their orientation may be). Emotional immaturity and grievance at its finest.


How many will lose their jobs this time around, after their faces are plastered all over social media? Or, will they not even try to hide it, and wear hoods?

PS-

I’m thoroughly convinced that if everyone was sexually satisfied (save for pedophiles, of course), there would be a lot less anger and hate in this world.

That is quite the rant.

That's where we differ. I 100% agree and hope they are ignored. I also prefer that leftist protests also get ignored by the media. But I'm sure you don't.

By the way, I have no problem with general protesting so long as it isn't shoved down our throats via media outlets and doesn't disrupt society (protesting on the highway is absolute bullshit and I should be able to run you over).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lucy01
With all do respect, you are severely misinformed on Antifa. They take that moniker when they are engaged in this political fight. When they are fighting their other mortal enemy (capitalism) they call themselves anarchists. In either case they are the people wearing black masks, rioting, and attacking people whenever you see these things on the news.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States)

I do not fear Antifa. I fear mainstreaming their actions. Whenever they get brought up I hear, "well I am against violence, BUT" Drop the but. That is what I am saying. There is no "but" with these people. Their entire message is made illegitimate because of their stated goal of using violence.

As far as feeling they are a fringe, I agree. I feel the same about the White Nationalists. Nobody wants to claim the douchebags who are thrust on our "side" because we may hold similar opinions on other topics. I don't want to claim my side's radicals either, I get it.
The only defining ideology of the Antifa according to your weblink is their conviction that fascists and white supremicists should not enjoy the benefits of free speech. Their motto is "we go where they go". I disagree with their tactics and would say that I am conflicted about the question of whether fascists should enjoy the benefits of free speech. The fact that Nazis exploited such rights in Germany and brought Hitler to power with all that entailed simply can't be ignored.
 
kHZn5WG.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot
And? This isn't WW2, nobody has permission to go and punch a Nazi. I do not understand why this is so hard for you guys to understand. No matter how deplorable you may find the statements of another person, you have no right to put your hands on them. Zero. That social compact is what keeps us civilized. Those asshats can march with their tiki torches and shout all sorts of nonsense and if the city has permitted them, then they are free to do so (although the torches could very well constitute a weapon, so take those away too). And Antifa can show up and yell about how stupid they are and they can all yell at each other until they are hoarse. That is how it is supposed to work.

I don't care if Antifa holds a moral ground that is a smidgen better than the Nazis and frankly I view the tactics of Antifa as very fascistic, they are Nazis without the racial component, so I guess that makes them a step better...but barely. Whether their viewpoint is slightly more moral, they still have zero right to attack anyone. ZERO. Period, end of discussion. Yeah, the racist douchebags may be worse douchebags but the Antifa crowd fighting them are douchebags too. My position is anti-douchebag. My position is pro-normal, i.e. the 90% of the people who showed up to protest with their presence and their voice, not with clubs and chemical agents. Everyone else was a bad actor.

Edit:

I am going to remove the racial component to try and make my point more clear. Antifa goes around deciding who they think are "fascists" and "Nazis". In some instances, most of us would agree that the people they are fighting are white nationalists (like Charlottesville). In others we massively disagree on who are fascists (Ben Shapiro and more recently ICE agents). When you accept that Antifa has the right to attack what most of us would consider "real Nazis", you also accept that they can be violent to the other people they label as fascists where there would be much more widespread disagreement with their assessment. You leave the decision on who is a legitimate target up to them.

To bring this full circle, anti-abortion groups feel that abortion is literally killing a child. In some instances a Doctor like Gosnell is going to be a guy that most of us would agree is a monster. So if he gets roughed up a bit by anti-abortion groups, then enh...not a big deal. He is a bad person. But if beating him up is ok, then so is going after anyone else who agrees with abortion. At the end of the day, the process is the same, he was just more inhumane. Do you see how this kind of thing gets out of hand really quickly? We have a social compact for a reason. I am not defending Nazis, I am saying that accepting political violence as discourse has ALWAYS ended bad.
I will again point out, that if you change this scenario to a pro-Jihad Muslim group walking thru the streets of a town in Iowa chanting Death to America, you probably would not have the same viewpoint that they don’t deserve to be punched.
 
Violence is wrong, no matter who employs it, but Nazis and white supremacists are inherently vile. Those who oppose them aren't morally equivalent to them even when they both use violence against each other.
This is obviously true. It take a special type of cognitive dissonance to ignore that these antifa clowns wouldn’t show up without the tikis first showing up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ohio Guy
The only defining ideology of the Antifa according to your weblink is their conviction that fascists and white supremicists should not enjoy the benefits of free speech. Their motto is "we go where they go". I disagree with their tactics and would say that I am conflicted about the question of whether fascists should enjoy the benefits of free speech. The fact that Nazis exploited such rights in Germany and brought Hitler to power with all that entailed simply can't be ignored.
@IUCrazy2 does have a valid point in that some of these decentralized antifa type groups, especially on college campuses, are waaaaay too undiscerning in what they consider to be fascist or “hate” speech. Because they can’t get their collective shit together and stop blowing air horns at guys like Ben Shapiro (who is an interesting fellow), they’re not to be taken seriously.
 
I will again point out, that if you change this scenario to a pro-Jihad Muslim group walking thru the streets of a town in Iowa chanting Death to America, you probably would not have the same viewpoint that they don’t deserve to be punched.

I would totally want to punch them, but I would not. I understand wanting to punch people you disagree with. I have that knee jerk reaction on a bunch of things. But you know what, I have never punched a person over a religious or political disagreement. Never. If the actions of the people doing that chanting led law enforcement to take a closer look at them and they were found to be involved in other more nefarious activity which subsequently led to their incarceration, I would thoroughly revel in that. I would not physically attack them for being idiots though. I may say some mean stuff to them, but I would not physically engage them.

I do not believe in giving anyone the right to physically attack people over their views. Free speech is literally one of the classical liberal positions that this country is founded upon. You know who beats up political opponents to silence them? Fascists. You know who limits speech that they disagree with? Totalitarians and Fascists.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT