Charlottesville: Where Do We Go From Here?

[Thermodolia]

Am I going to make what claim? I was just throwing in my 2 cents.



I think it's more just an American thing tbh. Lots of us are pretty big on loyalty and all that.

I've heard 'snitches get stiches' (god I hate that phrase) since at least middle-school in fucking Texas.
I'd say it's a pretty common thing.

Heard it here in Georgia since forever.

[Liriena]

Cornel West & Rev. Traci Blackmon: Clergy in Charlottesville Were Trapped by Torch-Wielding Nazis

CORNEL WEST: Absolutely. You had a number of the courageous students, of all colors, at the University of Virginia who were protesting against the neofascists themselves. The neofascists had their own ammunition. And this is very important to keep in mind, because the police, for the most part, pulled back. The next day, for example, those 20 of us who were standing, many of them clergy, we would have been crushed like cockroaches if it were not for the anarchists and the antifascists who approached, over 300, 350 antifascists. We just had 20. And we’re singing "This Little light of Mine," you know what I mean? So that the—

AMY GOODMAN: "Antifa" meaning antifascist.

CORNEL WEST: The antifascists, and then, crucial, the anarchists, because they saved our lives, actually. We would have been completely crushed, and I’ll never forget that. Meaning what? Meaning that you had the police holding back, on the one hand, so we couldn’t even get arrested. We were there to get arrested. We couldn’t get arrested, because the police had pulled back, and just allowing fellow citizens to go at each other, you see, and with all of the consequences that would follow therefrom.

Apparently, the oh-so-evil anti-fascist terrorists protected innocent people from violence. What a twist.

[Torrocca]

Cornel West & Rev. Traci Blackmon: Clergy in Charlottesville Were Trapped by Torch-Wielding Nazis

CORNEL WEST: Absolutely. You had a number of the courageous students, of all colors, at the University of Virginia who were protesting against the neofascists themselves. The neofascists had their own ammunition. And this is very important to keep in mind, because the police, for the most part, pulled back. The next day, for example, those 20 of us who were standing, many of them clergy, we would have been crushed like cockroaches if it were not for the anarchists and the antifascists who approached, over 300, 350 antifascists. We just had 20. And we’re singing "This Little light of Mine," you know what I mean? So that the—

AMY GOODMAN: "Antifa" meaning antifascist.

CORNEL WEST: The antifascists, and then, crucial, the anarchists, because they saved our lives, actually. We would have been completely crushed, and I’ll never forget that. Meaning what? Meaning that you had the police holding back, on the one hand, so we couldn’t even get arrested. We were there to get arrested. We couldn’t get arrested, because the police had pulled back, and just allowing fellow citizens to go at each other, you see, and with all of the consequences that would follow therefrom.

Apparently, the oh-so-evil anti-fascist terrorists protected innocent people from violence. What a twist.

Hmm, it's almost like they're doing a good thing by opposing Fascism... really makes you think.

[Thermodolia]

same, some of hte arguments put forth are so baity

if being confronted with this make you jump into these irrational conclusions i think more and more the concept of white fragility becomes more real in this thread

>Throwing out racist terms like "white fragility"
>Something else is baity
Okay.

What's even funnier is that poster assumed that I'm white just because I argued that white privilege isn't the cause of all social ills. It's like non-white people can't have their own opinion

[Balkenreich II]

>Throwing out racist terms like "white fragility"
>Something else is baity
Okay.

What's even funnier is that poster assumed that I'm white just because I argued that white privilege isn't the cause of all social ills. It's like non-white people can't have their own opinion

well you are white aint ya?

[Liriena]

>Throwing out racist terms like "white fragility"
>Something else is baity
Okay.

What's even funnier is that poster assumed that I'm white just because I argued that white privilege isn't the cause of all social ills. It's like non-white people can't have their own opinion

I gotta side with you on that one.

[Unified Kekistan]

The Charlottesville incident went horribly. But the fault lies with the counter protesters for initiating violence. The right wingers, some of whom definitely came prepared for a fight evidenced by the fiberglass tower shields, pole arms and at one point the effective use of a phalanx formation. They did not initiate the violence. They were also protesting legally as they, NOT THE COUNTERPROTESTORS, had permits to hold the rally. Things got violent once the recognized domestic terrorist organization antifa arrived to harass the right wingers. That said, among the beligerants on the right wing side, were members of the KKK, various national socialist societies, the alt right, of course, and various militia groups who aimed to prevent antifa, in the case of the Pennsylvania light foot militia and anti communist action, and the government, in the case of the constitutionalist Oathkeepers, from violating the right wings first and ninth amendments, protecting free speech and the right to protest. These groups were clearly present to meet any violence with brutal retaliation. There is footage on YouTube, if you can find it, of some black clad thugs, antifa, jumping the barricades and attacking the right wingers, who soon after stormed forward in retaliation. In regards to the vehicle that ran into a group of protesters, the man is in police custody, and the authorities released a statement that the driver may have been panicked by the counter protesters, who had smashed his window in before he started driving erratically in the video. If so, the death of that lady may have been a tragic incident.

With details out of the way I think it's time I stated my position and opinions, starting with my self identified political affiliation. I am a registered Republican voter, but I identify myself as a centrist, with some left leaning views on healthcare and welfare. From this perspective, I will tell you that the left is almost entirely at fault for the rising of these groups the past two years. Before this political correctness, historical revisionistic nonsense, people like Richard Spencer and David Duke were practically nobodies. The left attempted to silence these people regardless, simply because they disagree with their politics, which is wrong. (that said, David and Spencer are idiots with backwards, 20th, 19th century opinions on race, religion and gender) it is their right to speak their opinions regardless of who is offended, or how wrong they are. Silencing them legitimizes their positions and allows them membership increases. Now, thanks to the left oppressing the right for years, we have radicals slugging it out in the streets. Communists fighting fascists. The left needs to step back, apologize, and talk with these people as equals before we start giving commies and fascists free helicopter rides again.

[Arkinesia]

The Charlottesville incident went horribly. But the fault lies with the counter protesters for initiating violence. The right wingers, some of whom definitely came prepared for a fight evidenced by the fiberglass tower shields, pole arms and at one point the effective use of a phalanx formation. They did not initiate the violence. They were also protesting legally as they, NOT THE COUNTERPROTESTORS, had permits to hold the rally. Things got violent once the recognized domestic terrorist organization antifa arrived to harass the right wingers. That said, among the beligerants on the right wing side, were members of the KKK, various national socialist societies, the alt right, of course, and various militia groups who aimed to prevent antifa, in the case of the Pennsylvania light foot militia and anti communist action, and the government, in the case of the constitutionalist Oathkeepers, from violating the right wings first and ninth amendments, protecting free speech and the right to protest. These groups were clearly present to meet any violence with brutal retaliation. There is footage on YouTube, if you can find it, of some black clad thugs, antifa, jumping the barricades and attacking the right wingers, who soon after stormed forward in retaliation. In regards to the vehicle that ran into a group of protesters, the man is in police custody, and the authorities released a statement that the driver may have been panicked by the counter protesters, who had smashed his window in before he started driving erratically in the video. If so, the death of that lady may have been a tragic incident.

With details out of the way I think it's time I stated my position and opinions, starting with my self identified political affiliation. I am a registered Republican voter, but I identify myself as a centrist, with some left leaning views on healthcare and welfare. From this perspective, I will tell you that the left is almost entirely at fault for the rising of these groups the past two years. Before this political correctness, historical revisionistic nonsense, people like Richard Spencer and David Duke were practically nobodies. The left attempted to silence these people regardless, simply because they disagree with their politics, which is wrong. (that said, David and Spencer are idiots with backwards, 20th, 19th century opinions on race, religion and gender) it is their right to speak their opinions regardless of who is offended, or how wrong they are. Silencing them legitimizes their positions and allows them membership increases. Now, thanks to the left oppressing the right for years, we have radicals slugging it out in the streets. Communists fighting fascists. The left needs to step back, apologize, and talk with these people as equals before we start giving commies and fascists free helicopter rides again.

David Duke was not “practically a nobody.” And I don't see anyone but the right engaging in historical revisionism. Would you care to explain what exactly you mean by that?

[Liriena]

The Charlottesville incident went horribly. But the fault lies with the counter protesters for initiating violence. The right wingers, some of whom definitely came prepared for a fight evidenced by the fiberglass tower shields, pole arms and at one point the effective use of a phalanx formation. They did not initiate the violence.

Lies.

The rest of your cowardly victim-blaming excuses for the racist scum are duly noted.

[Thermodolia]

What's even funnier is that poster assumed that I'm white just because I argued that white privilege isn't the cause of all social ills. It's like non-white people can't have their own opinion

well you are white aint ya?

Technically no. I'm part Native American. Seminole and muskogee to be exact

[Ostroeuropa]

The Charlottesville incident went horribly. But the fault lies with the counter protesters for initiating violence. The right wingers, some of whom definitely came prepared for a fight evidenced by the fiberglass tower shields, pole arms and at one point the effective use of a phalanx formation. They did not initiate the violence.

Lies.

The rest of your cowardly victim-blaming excuses for the racist scum are duly noted.

The fact the fascist side "Kettled" the anti-fascist side makes me think the anti-racists probably initiated violence and the reporters here are lying to serve an agenda or mistook kettling for the initiation of violence.

The problem being that "Kettling" is a sinister tactic in the first place, but we can't call it "Initiating violence" without also banning the police doing it. (Which i would be in favor of.)

Deliberately making people feel trapped and surrounded by enemies to bait them into striking first so you can arrest them or fight back and such. There's little point to Kettling them and then initiating violence unless they aim to cause a massacre.

[Staniel]

The Charlottesville incident went horribly. But the fault lies with the counter protesters for initiating violence. The right wingers, some of whom definitely came prepared for a fight evidenced by the fiberglass tower shields, pole arms and at one point the effective use of a phalanx formation. They did not initiate the violence.

Lies.

The rest of your cowardly victim-blaming excuses for the racist scum are duly noted.

No, it was the counter protestors that started such things.
Again, as evident:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOT3wDR7WZU

[Balkenreich II]

well you are white aint ya?

Technically no. I'm part Native American. Seminole and muskogee to be exact

Close enough.

[Crockerland]

The Charlottesville incident went horribly. But the fault lies with the counter protesters for initiating violence

Yeah, it's their fault for not letting heavily armed actual fucking neo-nazis march through their streets. *nod*

[Liriena]

Lies.

The rest of your cowardly victim-blaming excuses for the racist scum are duly noted.

No, it was the counter protestors that started such things.
Again, as evident:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOT3wDR7WZU

This is not the first time you've posted this video, and my original objections to it remain. It's extremely lacking in context, and doesn't give a clear enough view of the events to definitively say that the racist scum didn't initiate the violence.

[Liriena]

Lies.

The rest of your cowardly victim-blaming excuses for the racist scum are duly noted.

The fact the fascist side "Kettled" the anti-fascist side makes me think the anti-racists probably initiated violence and the reporters here are lying to serve an agenda or mistook kettling for the initiation of violence.

The problem being that "Kettling" is a sinister tactic in the first place, but we can't call it "Initiating violence" without also banning the police doing it. (Which i would be in favor of.)

Deliberately making people feel trapped and surrounded by enemies to bait them into striking first so you can arrest them or fight back and such. There's little point to Kettling them and then initiating violence unless they aim to cause a massacre.

Sure, you can speculate, but I think the fact that the racist scum were looking for a fight, and not just "peacefully assembling", is beyond dispute.

[Staniel]

No, it was the counter protestors that started such things.
Again, as evident:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOT3wDR7WZU

This is not the first time you've posted this video, and my original objections to it remain. It's extremely lacking in context, and doesn't give a clear enough view of the events to definitively say that the racist scum didn't initiate the violence.

You are clearly delusional. If you DID indeed see the video, you would clearly realize that the counter-protesters threw the first punches.

[Liriena]

The Charlottesville incident went horribly. But the fault lies with the counter protesters for initiating violence

Yeah, it's their fault for not letting heavily armed actual fucking neo-nazis march through their streets. *nod*

We've hit peak centrism.

[Vassenor]

The fact the fascist side "Kettled" the anti-fascist side makes me think the anti-racists probably initiated violence and the reporters here are lying to serve an agenda or mistook kettling for the initiation of violence.

The problem being that "Kettling" is a sinister tactic in the first place, but we can't call it "Initiating violence" without also banning the police doing it. (Which i would be in favor of.)

Deliberately making people feel trapped and surrounded by enemies to bait them into striking first so you can arrest them or fight back and such. There's little point to Kettling them and then initiating violence unless they aim to cause a massacre.

Sure, you can speculate, but I think the fact that the racist scum were looking for a fight, and not just "peacefully assembling", is beyond dispute.

But showing up with guns and body armour is totally peaceful.

[Ostroeuropa]

The fact the fascist side "Kettled" the anti-fascist side makes me think the anti-racists probably initiated violence and the reporters here are lying to serve an agenda or mistook kettling for the initiation of violence.

The problem being that "Kettling" is a sinister tactic in the first place, but we can't call it "Initiating violence" without also banning the police doing it. (Which i would be in favor of.)

Deliberately making people feel trapped and surrounded by enemies to bait them into striking first so you can arrest them or fight back and such. There's little point to Kettling them and then initiating violence unless they aim to cause a massacre.

Sure, you can speculate, but I think the fact that the racist scum were looking for a fight, and not just "peacefully assembling", is beyond dispute.

I'd agree there. I think both sides turned up wanting to fight, although on the anti-fa side there'd be some expecting to simply protest.
As a breakdown I expect the fascist side comprised of:

People who wanted a violent clash
+
People who wanted to bait the anti-fascists into violence

and the anti-fascist side was comprised of:

People who wanted a violent clash
+
People who wanted to bait the fascists into violence
+
People who wanted to peacefully protest without violent incident.

I'll point out that the 2nd type of person in both groups is engaging in a valid form of protest themselves.

[Liriena]

This is not the first time you've posted this video, and my original objections to it remain. It's extremely lacking in context, and doesn't give a clear enough view of the events to definitively say that the racist scum didn't initiate the violence.

You are clearly delusional. If you DID indeed see the video, you would clearly realize that the counter-protesters threw the first punches.

Except that's not the case. The camera's view of the beginning of the violence is blocked by the journalists. When it finally gets around the journalists, we do see people on the protest and counter-protest fighting, but it's clear to me that that is not the actual beginning of it. Something happened immediately before which we didn't see.

[Ostroeuropa]

Sure, you can speculate, but I think the fact that the racist scum were looking for a fight, and not just "peacefully assembling", is beyond dispute.

But showing up with guns and body armour is totally peaceful.

It is, yes. Violent intent cannot reasonably be assumed given the historical and cultural context of bearing arms in america, especially if the issue of "rights" is the topic at hand.

[Vassenor]

This is not the first time you've posted this video, and my original objections to it remain. It's extremely lacking in context, and doesn't give a clear enough view of the events to definitively say that the racist scum didn't initiate the violence.

You are clearly delusional. If you DID indeed see the video, you would clearly realize that the counter-protesters threw the first punches.

You provide two minutes of people fighting, devoid of context, and claim it supports your argument. That doesn't really work.

[Ostroeuropa]

You are clearly delusional. If you DID indeed see the video, you would clearly realize that the counter-protesters threw the first punches.

Except that's not the case. The camera's view of the beginning of the violence is blocked by the journalists. When it finally gets around the journalists, we do see people on the protest and counter-protest fighting, but it's clear to me that that is not the actual beginning of it. Something happened immediately before which we didn't see.

Strikes me as fairly irrelevant anyway.
It's like arguing over whether the french or british "Initiated" the murders at waterloo.

If you turned up, you knew what was going to happen. Removing anti-fa goons and only allowing or inviting "Good behavior" anti-fascist groups to protest one of these marches would answer the question definitively.

The oath-keepers for instance, don't ALWAYS cause a breakout of violence when they turn up, and argue they never have.
Anti-Fa DOES.

The Klan doesn't always cause violence during protests .
Anti-Fa DOES.

Etc.

[Staniel]

Except that's not the case. The camera's view of the beginning of the violence is blocked by the journalists. When it finally gets around the journalists, we do see people on the protest and counter-protest fighting, but it's clear to me that that is not the actual beginning of it. Something happened immediately before which we didn't see.

Strikes me as fairly irrelevant anyway.
It's like arguing over whether the french or british "Initiated" the murders at waterloo.

If you turned up, you knew what was going to happen. Removing anti-fa goons and only allowing or inviting "Good behavior" anti-fascist groups to protest one of these marches would answer the question definitively.

The oath-keepers for instance, don't ALWAYS cause a breakout of violence when they turn up, and argue they never have.
Anti-Fa DOES.

Thank you.