Necessitating Violence

[Costa Fierro]

It is a satire, and a poor quality one at that. If you look past the pseudo-intellectualism in the opening post, you will see it contains very little substance and lacks any reasonable form of logical coherence. This post was created for bait.

NSG summer is upon us it seems.

No. She's fairly frequent, if albeit not on NSG.

[Braecland]

Can't tell if serious or "satire"....

Hopefully the latter....

It is a satire, and a poor quality one at that. If you look past the pseudo-intellectualism in the opening post, you will see it contains very little substance and lacks any reasonable form of logical coherence. This post was created for bait.

It would seem so, it's far too senseless to be honest.

[Aphryss]

As a transgender person, allow me to say the following:

No. Just no. Some kind of left-wing putsch or kristallnacht is not what anyone needs. Your idea is bad and you should feel bad.

[Sack Jackpot Winners]

I'm still wondering whom this uprising is against, because it doesn't look like you have an actual target. I mean we aren't talking about pre-Civil Rights hate crime frequency, unless I missed the memo.

[Minzerland]

I'm still wondering whom this uprising is against, because it doesn't look like you have an actual target. I mean we aren't talking about pre-Civil Rights hate crime frequency, unless I missed the memo.

Judging from the beginning of their post:

As women, LGBT people, and people of colour get slaughtered in the streets on a daily basis, I'm starting to think it's necessary the left take a no tolerance approach -- by that, I mean by using violence.

Presumably anyone who isn't a woman, a LGBT person and isn't a 'PoC'.

[Gurori]

Black Lives Matter and Liberals are two different things, at least proper liberals. I hope to think in an intellectual society you are one of the first eliminated

You do realize that the far-right extremists have militias, neo nazi skinhead groups, the KKK, biker gangs, veterans, law enforcement, etc.

What do your 'intellectuals' have? Wikipedia sources and hot coffee from starbucks? Lmao

I believe that these intellectuals may have the military.

[Aelex]

I believe that these intellectuals may have the military.

Top kek. The military has always been a force of conservatism so I honestly doubt they would help to create this permanent civil war rather than just seize power and purge the fuck out of the said "intellectuals".

[The Archregimancy]

As women, LGBT people, and people of color get slaughtered in the streets on a daily basis, I'm starting to think it's necessary the left take a no tolerance approach — by that, I mean by using violence.

Is there any inherent virtue in free speech? What argument is , therebeyond a religious and occult idea of being "endowed by our creator" with the right to perpetuate injustice? Consider that bigots already defend rape, murder, and harassment — of course they will object to that assertion, because they themselves have a vested interest in protecting themselves as well as criminals (if any overlap exists) — so is the right to violent expression, by association, not cause for alarm?

Or perhaps it is that they are calling for more than mere expression. While, if this expression had no indirect effects, it might be acceptable, it instead causes irreparable harm that we would combat with violence if it occurred directly. When a legislator passes an order, that is not mere expression.

Is it not right, then, to react to the causes and perpetrators of violence with violence? Is the historic bloc is to be replaced, is it not necessary to act on it as it has acted on us?

What do you dare to think, NSG?

I'm a racist, a bigot, a Fascist and people like me are desperately relying on a violent reaction from liberals and their Black Lives Matter friends to kick things off. Guess what, when it goes down, the mainstream lemmings are going to side with us. Can't wait for the day of the rope

Up to the underlined, this was nothing more than a robust expression of a pro-fascist opinion. Many here would find it objectionable, but it wasn't actionable.

The reference to the 'Day of the Rope' moves this beyond a robust expression of a pro-fascist opinion into an inflammatory expression of approval for the violent murder of minorities and 'race traitors'.

*** Warned for trolling ***

I'm a racist, a bigot, a Fascist and people like me are desperately relying on a violent reaction from liberals and their Black Lives Matter friends to kick things off. Guess what, when it goes down, the mainstream lemmings are going to side with us. Can't wait for the day of the rope

Black Lives Matter and Liberals are two different things, at least proper liberals. I hope to think in an intellectual society you are one of the first eliminated

That someone is trolling isn't an excuse to wish for the 'elimination' of the person doing the trolling.

*** Warned for trolling ***

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

So, let me get this straight. You want to solve violence from one class, as you put it the opposing class, by using another? And what of this "majority" and "minority" thing? I am not so sure what you mean. Also, your claim about women, black people, and LGBQT being slaughtered in the streets needs a citation for me to take seriously.

Of course, being any of those things in the Western world isn't perfect, but I implore you to try and voice your opinions anywhere else in the world. Seriously, I dare you. Over here you get this exchange;

-"Minorites are being murdered in the streets!"
-"I don't believe you."
-"YOU RIGHTIST MISOGYNIST RACIST TRANSPHOBE TRUMP-HUMPER!"

*meanwhile in China*

-"Minorities are being murdered in the stre-"
*boom headshot*

Do you really think that violence will solve violence? Are you even aware of your own Leftist history? The 1917 revolution in Russia was not the beginning of the conflict, but you'd be intellectually dishonest if you thought it were the end. The Civil War? The Kronsdadt Mutiny? Even after Lenin, Stalin's purges and various power struggles? It's just an endless cycle, and no ideology or religion can justify it.

Even in Maoist China, possibly another apple of your eye, Mao remarked how revolution was a continuous process, even after the Civil War and the revolution. You see, even after the "victory", there are still enemies. Why? Because the desire to have enemies that you pity or despise for having more power is greater than just accepting people have different views. If you don't want to live in a country where your views are challenged but not shut down, then you need to leave.

[Crockerland]

Kek.

National Socialists have always used violence (such as myself) and we will continue to until all degeneracy is removed.

Zozzle.

Kek is degeneracy.

[Lady Scylla]

Eleven pages in and I haven't. Lock me up.

Then what was the point of all of this? If you don't care about your own opinion, and you don't care about anyone else's, either, why did you open up a thread to discuss an opinion you're not willing to defend with people whose opinions you don't care about?

It has a name. Baiting. Which is all I see this as, really. They've done nothing to really contribute to the thread, and instead, have wasted our time. In which case, I'm out, Cheers.

[Not a Bang but a Whimper]

Then what was the point of all of this? If you don't care about your own opinion, and you don't care about anyone else's, either, why did you open up a thread to discuss an opinion you're not willing to defend with people whose opinions you don't care about?

It has a name. Baiting. Which is all I see this as, really. They've done nothing to really contribute to the thread, and instead, have wasted our time. In which case, I'm out, Cheers.

You will be missed.

[Gun Manufacturers]

A bat? Gallo has a lightsaber!

But it's to send a message, not permanently disfigure. Lord Vader only choked people that displeased him, remember?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... jdQqjcsfC8

[Sack Jackpot Winners]

I'm still wondering whom this uprising is against, because it doesn't look like you have an actual target. I mean we aren't talking about pre-Civil Rights hate crime frequency, unless I missed the memo.

Judging from the beginning of their post:

As women, LGBT people, and people of colour get slaughtered in the streets on a daily basis, I'm starting to think it's necessary the left take a no tolerance approach -- by that, I mean by using violence.

Presumably anyone who isn't a woman, a LGBT person and isn't a 'PoC'.

I'm also where these people are getting "slaughtered in the streets on a daily basis". I'm sure it's happening to some degree everywhere, but necessitating a revolution? Am I missing some backwater Hitler killing everyone?

[Dinake]

No, forcibly suppressing opposing viewpoints is potentially ok, as long as it's within proportion(this is why I'm a much bigger fan of Franco than of Pinochet), and the opposing viewpoints are truly a threat.

That you use Franco as an example tells me everything I need to know.

One of the better leaders of the twentieth century.

[Dinake]

No, forcibly suppressing opposing viewpoints is potentially ok, as long as it's within proportion(this is why I'm a much bigger fan of Franco than of Pinochet), and the opposing viewpoints are truly a threat.

>bigger fan of Franco than Pinochet

That meme is getting stale.

[Ralkovian Grand Island]

As women, LGBT people, and people of color get slaughtered in the streets on a daily basis, I'm starting to think it's necessary the left take a no tolerance approach — by that, I mean by using violence.

Is there any inherent virtue in free speech? What argument is there, beyond a religious and occult idea of being "endowed by our creator" with the right to perpetuate injustice? Consider that bigots already defend rape, murder, and harassment — of course they will object to that assertion, because they themselves have a vested interest in protecting themselves as well as criminals (if any overlap exists) — so is the right to violent expression, by association, not cause for alarm?

Or perhaps it is that they are calling for more than mere expression. While, if this expression had no indirect effects, it might be acceptable, it instead causes irreparable harm that we would combat with violence if it occurred directly. When a legislator passes an order, that is not mere expression.

Is it not right, then, to react to the causes and perpetrators of violence with violence? Is the historic bloc is to be replaced, is it not necessary to act on it as it has acted on us?

What do you dare to think, NSG?

I mean sure, go ahead. It seems reasonable. Violence definitely won't inflame and turn public support against you.

[The Lone Alliance]

Point being, the far-right is more organized, armed, and would destroy any kind of liberal violent uprising.

This is why any idea of a leftist uprising is futile.

The right practically fantasies about it happening because it'll give them the excuse to go crazy.

I mean sure, go ahead. It seems reasonable. Violence definitely won't inflame and turn public support against you.

Yeah just ask BLM, their violent ways haven't harmed them in the slightest right?

[Ralkovian Grand Island]

Point being, the far-right is more organized, armed, and would destroy any kind of liberal violent uprising.

This is why any idea of a leftist uprising is futile.

The right practically fantasies about it happening because it'll give them the excuse to go crazy.

I mean sure, go ahead. It seems reasonable. Violence definitely won't inflame and turn public support against you.

Yeah just ask BLM, their violent ways haven't harmed them in the slightest right?

Yeah definitely do what BLM is doing. It's really smart.

Specifically, you should target only white men. It's the only way you can change the country. There's no way it won't backfire.

[Hakons]

I'm a racist, a bigot, a Fascist and people like me are desperately relying on a violent reaction from liberals and their Black Lives Matter friends to kick things off. Guess what, when it goes down, the mainstream lemmings are going to side with us. Can't wait for the day of the rope

Black Lives Matter and Liberals are two different things, at least proper liberals. I hope to think in an intellectual society you are one of the first eliminated

Wanting people that disagree with you to be eliminated is what is wrong with modern liberalism. Liberalism is supposed to be about tolerance for everyone, not just the people you agree with.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Black Lives Matter and Liberals are two different things, at least proper liberals. I hope to think in an intellectual society you are one of the first eliminated

Wanting people that disagree with you to be eliminated is what is wrong with modern liberalism. Liberalism is supposed to be about tolerance for everyone, not just the people you agree with.

Pretty sure that, whatever problems liberalism may or may not have, a rampant desire to purge large sections of the population is not one of them.

[The Imperium of Northern America]

By all means, if you wish to give your enemies Casus Belli to destroy you.

[The East Marches]

>bigger fan of Franco than Pinochet

That meme is getting stale.

Shitty Pinochet posts never get stale. I was hoping a similar page would pop for Franco. I imagine he is just as exploitable for that kind of stuff. Speaking of which, I hope to visit "The Valley of the Fallen" this summer. I will be sure to say hi for you.

[Central Strategic Alliance Treaty]

As women, LGBT people, and people of color get slaughtered in the streets on a daily basis, I'm starting to think it's necessary the left take a no tolerance approach — by that, I mean by using violence.

Is there any inherent virtue in free speech? What argument is there, beyond a religious and occult idea of being "endowed by our creator" with the right to perpetuate injustice? Consider that bigots already defend rape, murder, and harassment — of course they will object to that assertion, because they themselves have a vested interest in protecting themselves as well as criminals (if any overlap exists) — so is the right to violent expression, by association, not cause for alarm?

Or perhaps it is that they are calling for more than mere expression. While, if this expression had no indirect effects, it might be acceptable, it instead causes irreparable harm that we would combat with violence if it occurred directly. When a legislator passes an order, that is not mere expression.

Is it not right, then, to react to the causes and perpetrators of violence with violence? Is the historic bloc is to be replaced, is it not necessary to act on it as it has acted on us?

What do you dare to think, NSG?

Women, LGBT people, and racial minorities are being slaughtered in the streets? Where, may I ask? If this is the United States you are referring to, you are sorely mistaken, I'm afraid. While police forces may sometimes tragically abuse their power due to their own racial prejudices, I would hardly compare that to the massacre you describe. While I can somewhat see where you are coming from for LGBT people in certain cultures, none of which are in the western world, no nation "slaughters" women or even targets them violently. Such an idea is insanity.

If such volume of mass slaughters were occurring, perhaps I would not be so hostile to violent retribution. But nothing of that sort has happened, nor is state-sanctioned in any way. If white heterosexual males were out to murder every woman, homosexual, or non-Caucasian they could find, there would be far, far more blood on the streets besides an occasional, but no less tragic, shooting. I believe you have grossly overestimated the amount of violence against women and minorities.

[Dinake]

That meme is getting stale.

Shitty Pinochet posts never get stale. I was hoping a similar page would pop for Franco. I imagine he is just as exploitable for that kind of stuff. Speaking of which, I hope to visit "The Valley of the Fallen" this summer. I will be sure to say hi for you.

I did say Pinochet made me rather uncomfortable(and the whole getting thrown out an aircraft thing is more an Argentine dirty way thing than Pinochet's. A rape dogs meme would have made more sense.). Franco's brutality was more restrained, and he protected Spain from destructive modernity while he lived. Pity he's still dead.