Antifa listed as a terrorist organisation in New Jersey

[Minzerland II]

Richard Spencer doesn't violently attack people, while antifa does

I'm sorry, but I find that standard unacceptable. We can clutch our pearls at antifa protestors macing and punching white supremacists as much as you wish, but there's no way you're going to convince me that those assaults are somehow more concerning and more worthy of being regarded as a terrorist threat to others than a public figure openly supporting ethnic cleansing.

Do you find assaults on transgender individuals concerning?

[Liriena]

Richard Spencer openly supports ethnic cleansing, yet he gets to walk freely while liberals and right-wingers clutch their pearls at the sight of him getting punched... but antifa protests smashing a few windows and setting trashcans on fire makes them a "terrorist organization" on par with al-Qaeda?

Richard Spencer hasn't committed a crime, that is why he walks free.

Duh. That wasn't my point. The legality or illegality of it doesn't concern me.

[Liriena]

It's funny because, if you read the New Jersey analysis of antifa, it actually paints a pretty flattering picture of antifa:

In December 2016, a group known as the Antifascist Action-Nebraska engaged in a doxing campaign against a prominent member of American Vanguard, a white supremacist organization. The group published his personal information on several social media platforms and posted fliers on the University of Nebraska Omaha campus, calling for his expulsion.

And the same website also notes white supremacism as a continued threat, a threat which antifa explicitly aims to confront.

So... who are the baddies again?

Wearing black and occasionally taking a moment out of the everyday violence, intimidation and vandalism to down other criminals in extrajudicial strikes doesn't make them the goddamn batman.

Well, duh. Batman is a capitalist pig.

[Liriena]

It's funny because, if you read the New Jersey analysis of antifa, it actually paints a pretty flattering picture of antifa:

In December 2016, a group known as the Antifascist Action-Nebraska engaged in a doxing campaign against a prominent member of American Vanguard, a white supremacist organization. The group published his personal information on several social media platforms and posted fliers on the University of Nebraska Omaha campus, calling for his expulsion.

And the same website also notes white supremacism as a continued threat, a threat which antifa explicitly aims to confront.

So... who are the baddies again?

How about both of them?

...yeah, sure. But can we at least try not to lose perspective?

[Liriena]

I'm sorry, but I find that standard unacceptable. We can clutch our pearls at antifa protestors macing and punching white supremacists as much as you wish, but there's no way you're going to convince me that those assaults are somehow more concerning and more worthy of being regarded as a terrorist threat to others than a public figure openly supporting ethnic cleansing.

Do you find assaults on transgender individuals concerning?

Yes. And I can see where this line of inquiry is going.

[Minzerland II]

Richard Spencer hasn't committed a crime, that is why he walks free.

Duh. That wasn't my point. The legality or illegality of it doesn't concern me.

So you're alright with violence against your political opponents?

Okay. Can't wait to have people lined up and shot.

[Nocturnalis]

Duh. That wasn't my point. The legality or illegality of it doesn't concern me.

So you're alright with violence against your political opponents?

Okay. Can't wait to have people lined up and shot.

Saying mean things is worse than beating people up, didn't you know that?!

[Hirota]

If terrorism is defined as "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims" then the addition seems appropriate.

I mean, compared to some they are pretty small fry, but the shoe fits.

[Imperializt Russia]

I fail to see how vandalism is an act of terror, because it isn't. It's a fine and a brief stay at your local jail. Tell me when people start actually dying, then I'll be concerned.

Then what would you call the Night of Broken Glass?

When 91+ people started dying. Or a pogrom, or state terrorism.

[Imperializt Russia]

If terrorism is defined as "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims" then the addition seems appropriate.

I mean, compared to some they are pretty small fry, but the shoe fits.

This ignores the issue of it being a meaninglessly vague definition of terrorism though, doesn't it?

[Liriena]

Duh. That wasn't my point. The legality or illegality of it doesn't concern me.

So you're alright with violence against your political opponents?

Okay. Can't wait to have people lined up and shot.

Actually, no. Not as a matter of principle. If I'll be entirely honest, if it looks like I'm defending antifa, it's not because I actually support smashing a window, setting a trashcan on fire or stabbing a random right-wing protester, but because I agree with the ideal of antifa (confronting and deterring far right activities) and would very much prefer it if people worried about far right violence and intimidation were still able to get together in self-defense and in defense of the common targets of the far right when the state fails to protect them.

Political violence has historically been a necessity, and I fear it may continue to be one even today, but it is far from ideal and I wish resolution could be entirely peaceful.

On the matter of legality, my point would be that the legality of revolutionary actions is ultimately irrelevant to their justification. Revolutionary actions by definition defy the established norms in favor of a justice that is perceived as only reachable outside of those norms.

This argument I made?

I'm sorry, but I find that standard unacceptable. We can clutch our pearls at antifa protestors macing and punching white supremacists as much as you wish, but there's no way you're going to convince me that those assaults are somehow more concerning and more worthy of being regarded as a terrorist threat to others than a public figure openly supporting ethnic cleansing.

It's poorly made at best and fails to reflect how I feel and think, although that may be because how I feel and think on this topic is not something that's entirely set in stone for me. There's a continued inner debate going on. And I'll admit that there's some tribalism on my part going on as well, me siding somewhat with antifa because it's "on my side".

[Hirota]

This ignores the issue of it being a meaninglessly vague definition of terrorism though, doesn't it?

Well, compared to epithets like "far-right" or "alt-right" and other snarl words, it's better than many.

As for "meaningless", if we can't start from even an agreed lowest common denominator baseline on what a word actually means, then talking about it is effectively meaningless.

[Liriena]

So you're alright with violence against your political opponents?

Okay. Can't wait to have people lined up and shot.

Saying mean things is worse than beating people up, didn't you know that?!

I love how you felt the need to conceal the sort of speech I was denouncing beneath such petulant language. Why, did you think that your argument would be weakened if you said "Supporting genocide" instead of "Saying mean things"?

[Liriena]

This ignores the issue of it being a meaninglessly vague definition of terrorism though, doesn't it?

Well, compared to epithets like "far-right" or "alt-right" and other snarl words, it's better than many.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

It took me ten seconds.

[Hirota]

Well, compared to epithets like "far-right" or "alt-right" and other snarl words, it's better than many.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

It took me ten seconds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_use

Wikipedia is not considered a credible source.

Took me fifteen, mainly because of copy and paste.

[Liriena]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

It took me ten seconds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_use

Wikipedia is not considered a credible source.

Took me fifteen, mainly because of copy and paste.

Rather pedantic.

Also, rather disturbing tactic to try and justify an excessively broad use of the word "terrorism" by trying to act like "far-right" and "alt-right" are just meaningless slurs, rather than perfectly legitimate terms used to describe political leanings. It worries me how eager some people are to coax others into erasing any trace of terms with understandably negative connotations related to the far right from their discourse. We started with "racist and sexist have become meaningless", and now even "far right" is a "snarl world"?

[Neo Balka]

How many more Iraqs do you need before you get the memo?

Maybe 5 or 6 more. I dunno, could do 7.

Its never enough for a country that can actually win wars.

[USS Monitor]

On one hand I kinda approve but on the other hand fuck Homeland Security.

This.

[North Saitama]

The problem with Antifa is that, what they define as "far-right" often translates to "anybody on the right wing of the political spectrum". If you even voted for Donald Trump, you are a "fascist" and a "bigot", regardless of your reasons.

And, honestly, I am a strong adherent to the principles of the freedom of expression. In my opinion, your opinion isn't the business of the government, unless you actually cross the line and do legitimate physical harm. An opinion, regardless of how unpopular it is, is still subjective.

Back on Antifa, ultimately, their actions speak louder than the very "fascists" that they fight. Unlike the "white supremacists" that they claim to fight, Antifa regularly crosses the line, and does physical harm to people and property.

[Imperializt Russia]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

It took me ten seconds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_use

Wikipedia is not considered a credible source.

Took me fifteen, mainly because of copy and paste.

"Maybe this thing is too vague"
"no"
*quotemines wiki

No, Wikipedia is not a source. You do not cite Wikipedia.
But Wikipedia is a summary, and very informative when properly cited. Those two articles have 189 citations between them.

[The Bio-Regional Cooperative of States]

I say thank goodness but this also worries me. It can easily become a domino path of more clamping down on rights by feeding off the paranoia of the people.

[Imperializt Russia]

The problem with Antifa is that, what they define as "far-right" often translates to "anybody on the right wing of the political spectrum". If you even voted for Donald Trump, you are a "fascist" and a "bigot", regardless of your reasons.

Yes, legitimising fascist and nationalist rhetoric, and literally empowering it, makes you complicit in fascist and nationalist governance and actions.

All those people that empowered the NSDAP in 1932 due to their "legitimate economic concerns" were complicit in the fascist takeover of Germany a year later.

[Alizeria]

They use violence to promote their political ideology. That's the definition of terrorism. So, yes, they're terrorists and this is perfectly sensible.

[North Saitama]

The problem with Antifa is that, what they define as "far-right" often translates to "anybody on the right wing of the political spectrum". If you even voted for Donald Trump, you are a "fascist" and a "bigot", regardless of your reasons.

Yes, legitimising fascist and nationalist rhetoric, and literally empowering it, makes you complicit in fascist and nationalist governance and actions.

All those people that empowered the NSDAP in 1932 due to their "legitimate economic concerns" were complicit in the fascist takeover of Germany a year later.

You see, though, you are straw-manning everyone that voted for Trump, or even that leans right, by doing this, complete with a dose of Nazi-washing.

[Alizeria]

The problem with Antifa is that, what they define as "far-right" often translates to "anybody on the right wing of the political spectrum". If you even voted for Donald Trump, you are a "fascist" and a "bigot", regardless of your reasons.

Yes, legitimising fascist and nationalist rhetoric, and literally empowering it, makes you complicit in fascist and nationalist governance and actions.

All those people that empowered the NSDAP in 1932 due to their "legitimate economic concerns" were complicit in the fascist takeover of Germany a year later.

Can't tell if this is a real argument or satire.

Yes, legitimising fascist and nationalist rhetoric, and literally empowering it, makes you complicit in fascist and nationalist governance and actions.

If we're talking about Trump, sure he's a nationalist but talking about fascism is irrelevant as he is not that.

All those people that empowered the NSDAP in 1932 due to their "legitimate economic concerns" were complicit in the fascist takeover of Germany a year later.

Completely irrelevant and borderline fallacious. Also, fascists never took over Germany, National Socialism and Fascism are two completely different ideologies.