The Antifa Myth

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Get rid of qualified immunity.

Surely discuss it

Originally Posted by Ian

Start the conversation without all the BS noise about how the conversation gets invalidated by riots

Peaceful assembly and protest WHEN THEY HAVE COMPLETELY LEGIT POINTS get dented pretty hard when others co-opt the movement with throwing bricks and looting businesses.

Originally Posted by Pete F.

They drove the rector off and disrupted an event, supporting a constitutionally given right to assemble organized by St Johns by using tear gas, rubber bullets and flashbangs to drive them off St Johns grounds for a campaign photo event.
Wrong on many levels.
Perhaps you can justify lining them up and shooting them to keep people safe.

It was stupid, like many things.

Originally Posted by wdmso

TRUMP DEFENDER pull your head from his a s s .. police have a job and the military have a job and neither over lap ... let the police do their job and the military to theirs .fight wars .. you acting as if the United states has never seen unrest ..

You'd love to see dead protesters and applaud while it was happening and you think something is wrong with me.... its comical ..

I have no issue with shooting looters it will only take one ,,,but like most things you see looting and protest as one in the same ... just like police and the military

Trump should offer you a job you'll fit right in.

Would be good if some politicians did not create open space for people angry to vent there frustrations looting and killing. Probably could have stopped at NG MP and presence forces. Probably could have stopped the protestors from surrounding Di Blasio's People's House demanding his resignation.

NG and RA SHOULDN'T NEED to be on the streets

Originally Posted by Pete F.

We should be scared

“An essential step in the fascist march to acceptance and power was to persuade law-and-order conservatives and members of the middle class to tolerate fascist violence as a harsh necessity in the face of Left provocation.”
Robert O. Paxton, "The Anatomy of Fascism" (2004)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yep - if you are against hard left violence you are a fascist. Even if you are against hard right violence. FFS

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

We should be scared

“An essential step in the fascist march to acceptance and power was to persuade law-and-order conservatives and members of the middle class to tolerate fascist violence as a harsh necessity in the face of Left provocation.”
Robert O. Paxton, "The Anatomy of Fascism" (2004)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by JohnR

Yep - if you are against hard left violence you are a fascist. Even if you are against hard right violence. FFS

It won't happen over night, but the slope we are on has gotten a lot more slippery. The conditions that sparked these protests, a lack of racial justice and an increasingly militarized environment in this country exist, and Tweety has done nothing but exacerbate the situation.

We now see how Tweety and his followers who share his authoritarian views respond to civil unrest that resulted from genuine grievances. What will they do if protests erupt if this administration tries to postpone the election, suppress the vote in Democratic areas, refuses to accept its result if he loses, or are likely to occur if he wins? Even if he loses the election, Tweety will remain president until January 20, 2021.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Yep - if you are against hard left violence you are a fascist. Even if you are against hard right violence. FFS

You seem to continue to operate under an assumption that many people think Antifa violence is acceptable. Noting that they're totally overblown isn't condoning behavior, it's putting it in perspective and should be seen in context of all violence where it is relatively small.

The problem is when people like Trump fixate on Antifa for political purposes, the right-wing media beats the Antifa drum and now you have a portion of the country softened to social media hoaxes and believing busloads of Antifa are heading to their suburbs to loot the rich people. It's just sowing more division and mistrust.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

It's just sowing more division and mistrust.

One of the main goals of ATIFA.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

One of the main goals of ATIFA.

And if that's the case why promote them to the big boys table before they're ready? He's just helping their cause.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

And if that's the case why promote them to the big boys table before they're ready? He's just helping their cause.

They're already at the table. Exposing and prosecuting them weakens their effort to create "division and mistrust" and helps to remove them from the table.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

They're already at the table. Exposing and prosecuting them weakens their effort to create "division and mistrust" and helps to remove them from the table.

Now you’re just perpetuating the myth. 43 suffered from this as well.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Now you’re just perpetuating the myth. 43 suffered from this as well.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nope. It was perpetuated by ANTIFA.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

One of the main goals of ATIFA.

Youtube right
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Youtube right
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Wrong.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Peaceful assembly and protest WHEN THEY HAVE COMPLETELY LEGIT POINTS get dented pretty hard when others co-opt the movement with throwing bricks and looting businesses.

So start small. Don’t let it get dented here. You know they are different, defend it.

This is a hard one to navigate, because otherwise, we make it too easy to manipulate the system into never fixing itself. Every time someone protests a legit gripe, send in some rioters so no one believes them. I’m not saying that’s what happened here, I’m just saying that if you’re willing to associate the two, you allow that to be a possibility.

The other choice here is to develop some habits where we distance the two conversations, discuss them on their own merits, and vigorously defend each thread from being poisoned by the other.

But both groups of opinions on this site are guilty of not doing this, heck I even failed to do it the other day when I found myself devolving into a rant about trump during a message that started about protests, right after saying we should be better about separating this stuff, so I know I’m not perfect.

BUT if we each admitted that the topics themselves had merit without spilling over to the others, the sharp minds here would probably get somewhere closer to consensus, and might actually move some opinions forward.

Instead we cut the meaty dialog around the merits of the protests short by saying things like everyone is an animal that can’t function in society because they just start rioting, or all cops are bahstads.

And that’s fooked up
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device