Antifa Attacks Liberal Over American Flag.

[Alvecia]

"It's an organization without a proper structure so it tots doesn't exist at all despite people revendicating themselves as being part from it!"
Stop with that fucking meme fam, no one's buying it.

Agreed, just because a group has no formal leader doesn't mean that they are not at fault for their actions.

I don't think anyone is arguing that just cause they aren't really an organisation that they literally cannot be faulted. You can still point at a guy who smashed a window and say "he's at fault for smashing that window".

Edit: Just makes it a bit hard to swallow when you then go on about the evils of the Window Smasher Organisation^TM and their grand plot to smash all the windows

[Aellex]

I don't think anyone is arguing that just cause they aren't really an organisation that they literally cannot be faulted. You can still point at a guy who smashed a window and say "he's at fault for smashing that window".

No, but we're just kindly mocking the fact that the very same people who're bitching and whining about dem "Alt-Right" and classifying people left and right as being part of it suddenly become so cautious and literalists when some of their guys are rightly referred to as Antifa.

[Comradeistan]

Agreed, just because a group has no formal leader doesn't mean that they are not at fault for their actions.

I don't think anyone is arguing that just cause they aren't really an organisation that they literally cannot be faulted. You can still point at a guy who smashed a window and say "he's at fault for smashing that window".

Edit: Just makes it a bit hard to swallow when you then go on about the evils of the Window Smasher Organisation^TM and their grand plot to smash all the windows

Your Edit is kind of a straw man, I guess?

We're not really saying that. Antifa is an obvious group (despite lack of proper organization) that does Organize Antifa rallies and has 'members'.

[Phoenicaea]

I wonder who was the only person to vote 'yes' in the poll, and I would gladly hear their reasoning and maybe participate in a miniature debate about it.

nothing is justifiable, that is obvious.
it is an usual thing, elsewhere, there s associations that handle public protest and live from it, not for the aim of it, they use it because of their living.

that way, fo them this is a matter of business, analogy with mafia that handles territory same way they handle protest. you are in their territory, you haven t either advised or paid the fee.

the answer is Yes, rather that No, not because of the reasons of the dirty guys -since there is no clean reason for them. it is because of how the question is showed, which seems a pretext.

so the correct answer is Yes, aggressors have reason. peole who read thinks imediately at an excuse to rant against democratic protest, even if they despise the aggressors. also myself.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Agreed, just because a group has no formal leader doesn't mean that they are not at fault for their actions.

I don't think anyone is arguing that just cause they aren't really an organisation that they literally cannot be faulted. You can still point at a guy who smashed a window and say "he's at fault for smashing that window".

Edit: Just makes it a bit hard to swallow when you then go on about the evils of the Window Smasher Organisation^TM and their grand plot to smash all the windows

1. It's not just one guy.
2. Antifa is organized. They have official channels, and influential people in the movement who act as de facto leaders.
3. This is significantly worse than a smashed window.

Your argument is moot.

[Comradeistan]

I wonder who was the only person to vote 'yes' in the poll, and I would gladly hear their reasoning and maybe participate in a miniature debate about it.

nothing is justifiable, that is obvious. it is an usual thing, elsewhere, there s associations that handle public protest and live from it, not for the aim of it, they use it because of their living.

that way, fo them this is a matter of business, analogy with mafia that handles territory same way they handle protest.

the answer is Yes, rather that No, not because of the reasons of the dirty guys -since there is no clean reason for them. it is because of how the question is showed, which seems a pretext.

so the correct answer is Yes, aggressors have reason. peole who read thinks imediately at an excuse to rant against democratic protest, even if they despise the aggressors. also myself.

Antifa is more like a group of Ripters, and saying that it's ok to beat up someone enough to give them a medical injury is unjust.

In my understanding, you're saying that it's perfectly fine to randomly beat up someone over your beliefs, even if it's false?

[The Philippine Islands of Luzviminda]

1st things we need to adress that this is not justified.
2nd things is antifa is no organized group so the ones defending Antifa kind of has a point but...
In my opinion antifa activists have been commonly using this tactic that may break or at least almost break the law. (Another instance of antifa doing that is a few antifa people decided to encourage stealing guns from people and calling it disarming a fascist)

[Alvecia]

I don't think anyone is arguing that just cause they aren't really an organisation that they literally cannot be faulted. You can still point at a guy who smashed a window and say "he's at fault for smashing that window".

No, but we're just kindly mocking the fact that the very same people who're bitching and whining about dem "Alt-Right" and classifying people left and right as being part of it suddenly become so cautious and literalists when some of their guys are rightly referred to as Antifa.

Well, I can only speak for myself, but fro my perspective the difference between the Alt-Right and "Antifa" is like that of Convseratives and the GOP.
One is a political affiliation, the other is an organisation.

I just dispute whether or not Antifa is closer to the GOP or to Conservatism in it's classification.

[The steel Reich]

i think one of the issues is that there is no defined leadership, the organization is chaotic, while their are defiantly good antifa members, there are also antifa members that are fascistic themselves, people that bully and attack people they don't agree with even if they are not actually fascist,

[Phoenicaea]

^ @Comraidestan, pardon no, that is not what I indended to say. I wished to say the following: often 'dumb' questions about a strange fact regarding a thing is a way for nothing.

most people that says about clashes do it because this a way to vocifer something with no sense, or to praise fascism.

discussion should always be about a topic which has got sense, other things should be let at dinner table debate

obviously not, you shouln t beat or let it done, nor leading associations that behave like this, that occupy public rights as if public rights were theirs.

[Thanatttynia]

Tangentially related but on the whole 'antifa' thing... I think it's very interesting that American far-leftists have chosen to co-opt ('appropriate') the European anti-fascist movement wholesale, down to its specifically Germanic imagery and violent tactics - arguably more justifiable in Europe where the threat of fascism is a lot more present than it is in America.

America already has its own homegrown far-right movement in white supremacy. Fascism is simply not a major force anywhere in America on any comparable scale to Europe. Leads you to believe that these antifa LARPers are so obsessed with a Eurocentric view of political violence in an active attempt to avoid dealing with white supremacy, which might inculpate them more, and also because European things are exoticised and romanticised by white America.

[Ostroeuropa]

Tangentially related but on the whole 'antifa' thing... I think it's very interesting that American far-leftists have chosen to co-opt ('appropriate') the European anti-fascist movement wholesale, down to its specifically Germanic imagery and violent tactics - arguably more justifiable in Europe where the threat of fascism is a lot more present than it is in America.

America already has its own homegrown far-right movement in white supremacy. Fascism is simply not a major force anywhere in America on any comparable scale to Europe. Leads you to believe that these antifa LARPers are so obsessed with a Eurocentric view of political violence in an active attempt to avoid dealing with white supremacy, which might inculpate them more, and also because European things are exoticised and romanticised by white America.

The idea of german leftists thinking they can prevent the rise of fascism by engaging in street violence utterly fucking boggles my mind and makes me think they must not be very historically literate. The crap all these people throw out about violent tactics against the far-right being necessary or working ignores that it was a major component in the far-rights original rise to power. Christ, the Nazi anthem is all about leftist and capitalist violence against them and one of them getting shot and dying as a consequence of communist terrorists.

Street violence is a major component in the "Breakdown of society, LAW AND ORDER!" narrative as well as portraying the left as violently opposed to things like, say, flying the countries flag...

[Thanatttynia]

Tangentially related but on the whole 'antifa' thing... I think it's very interesting that American far-leftists have chosen to co-opt ('appropriate') the European anti-fascist movement wholesale, down to its specifically Germanic imagery and violent tactics - arguably more justifiable in Europe where the threat of fascism is a lot more present than it is in America.

America already has its own homegrown far-right movement in white supremacy. Fascism is simply not a major force anywhere in America on any comparable scale to Europe. Leads you to believe that these antifa LARPers are so obsessed with a Eurocentric view of political violence in an active attempt to avoid dealing with white supremacy, which might inculpate them more, and also because European things are exoticised and romanticised by white America.

The idea of german leftists thinking they can prevent the rise of fascism by engaging in street violence utterly fucking boggles my mind and makes me think they must not be very historically literate. The crap all these people throw out about violent tactics against the far-right being necessary or working ignores that it was a major component in the far-rights original rise to power. Christ, the Nazi anthem is all about leftist and capitalist violence against them and one of them getting shot and dying as a consequence of communist terrorists.

Street violence is a major component in the "Breakdown of society, LAW AND ORDER!" narrative as well as portraying the left as violently opposed to things like, say, flying the countries flag...

I don't disagree. I think violence is very rarely a good idea, especially in politics in an ostensible democracy where your aim is to get people to support you. But I think there is a place for countering violence with violence (i.e. in armed resistance to a fascist government which is in power, or, before that, in defending yourself or vulnerable people from violent fascists - two things which are much more easily foreseeable in Europe than in America.)

My point was more that I think trying to literally 'fight back' against an imaginary American fascism is unnecessary and self-defeating, especially when looked at in the absence of meaningful self-reflection about American racism, than it was about 'fighting back' being that useful in Europe. Fascism is a hero/death cult, making almost all physical opposition self-defeating, which is one reason its so hard to fight back against it (and a reason the onus is on us to actively prevent its rise.)

[Ifreann]

Tangentially related but on the whole 'antifa' thing... I think it's very interesting that American far-leftists have chosen to co-opt ('appropriate') the European anti-fascist movement wholesale, down to its specifically Germanic imagery and violent tactics - arguably more justifiable in Europe where the threat of fascism is a lot more present than it is in America.

America already has its own homegrown far-right movement in white supremacy. Fascism is simply not a major force anywhere in America on any comparable scale to Europe. Leads you to believe that these antifa LARPers are so obsessed with a Eurocentric view of political violence in an active attempt to avoid dealing with white supremacy, which might inculpate them more, and also because European things are exoticised and romanticised by white America.

The idea of german leftists thinking they can prevent the rise of fascism by engaging in street violence utterly fucking boggles my mind and makes me think they must not be very historically literate. The crap all these people throw out about violent tactics against the far-right being necessary or working ignores that it was a major component in the far-rights original rise to power. Christ, the Nazi anthem is all about leftist and capitalist violence against them and one of them getting shot and dying as a consequence of communist terrorists.

Street violence is a major component in the "Breakdown of society, LAW AND ORDER!" narrative as well as portraying the left as violently opposed to things like, say, flying the countries flag...

Fight Nazis and they'll cry oppression, sure. But if you leave them be they'll crow that cowardly leftists flee the sight of them. The basic tenets of their position are contradictory, so anything you do is playing into their hands, especially when you realise that they are completely willing to lie.


When everything you do is propaganda fuel, including doing nothing, what do you do?

[Ostroeuropa]

The idea of german leftists thinking they can prevent the rise of fascism by engaging in street violence utterly fucking boggles my mind and makes me think they must not be very historically literate. The crap all these people throw out about violent tactics against the far-right being necessary or working ignores that it was a major component in the far-rights original rise to power. Christ, the Nazi anthem is all about leftist and capitalist violence against them and one of them getting shot and dying as a consequence of communist terrorists.

Street violence is a major component in the "Breakdown of society, LAW AND ORDER!" narrative as well as portraying the left as violently opposed to things like, say, flying the countries flag...

Fight Nazis and they'll cry oppression, sure. But if you leave them be they'll crow that cowardly leftists flee the sight of them. The basic tenets of their position are contradictory, so anything you do is playing into their hands, especially when you realise that they are completely willing to lie.


When everything you do is propaganda fuel, including doing nothing, what do you do?

Remove the factors driving people into their hands and leave them with nothing but nonsense. If they have to go around with nothing but dogwhistles about the biological superiority of whites and so on people will ignore them. It's the legitimate grievances swelling their ranks.

[Harelia]

The problem ultimately comes down to the fact that a group of leftist psycho's are playing WWII make-believe in the streets and using black bloc tactics in order to justify committing violent crimes against anyone they don't like. Saying Antifa is tolerant would be like saying not breathing is the entire point of lungs. Supporters of Antifa are generally romanticized lunatics that have some delusion of grandeur about America being a gigantic police state run by a secret society of bureaucratic fat-cats. Which is, to be honest, a notion so far fetched it borders raw comedy. That is, unless Soros is up to something we don't know about....

[Twilight Zone Music]

[Harelia]

The idea of german leftists thinking they can prevent the rise of fascism by engaging in street violence utterly fucking boggles my mind and makes me think they must not be very historically literate. The crap all these people throw out about violent tactics against the far-right being necessary or working ignores that it was a major component in the far-rights original rise to power. Christ, the Nazi anthem is all about leftist and capitalist violence against them and one of them getting shot and dying as a consequence of communist terrorists.

Street violence is a major component in the "Breakdown of society, LAW AND ORDER!" narrative as well as portraying the left as violently opposed to things like, say, flying the countries flag...

I don't disagree. I think violence is very rarely a good idea, especially in politics in an ostensible democracy where your aim is to get people to support you. But I think there is a place for countering violence with violence (i.e. in armed resistance to a fascist government which is in power, or, before that, in defending yourself or vulnerable people from violent fascists - two things which are much more easily foreseeable in Europe than in America.)

My point was more that I think trying to literally 'fight back' against an imaginary American fascism is unnecessary and self-defeating, especially when looked at in the absence of meaningful self-reflection about American racism, than it was about 'fighting back' being that useful in Europe. Fascism is a hero/death cult, making almost all physical opposition self-defeating, which is one reason its so hard to fight back against it (and a reason the onus is on us to actively prevent its rise.)

When it comes down to it, controlled violence is reasonable. Violence against a legitimate threat is reasonable. We didn't just drop two atomic bombs on Japan because some yokel was like "Hey, wanna see a magic trick?"

I mean back in the war there was a LEGITIMATE threat of fascist militant power rolling through the European nations like an absolute truck. A man was leading a full force regime to drag people from their homes and send them off to a Nazi black site. Nations were getting annexed or decimated by a continually moving army and lots of other people were becoming affected. To say that there's a legitimate threat in the US of Nazi's comparable to that of World War II is just madness. At most we have some hillbilly neckbeard balls deep in a pig waving a Nazi flag yelling "ErH GeRd KeEl JuUz!"

Like seriously...What are they going to do? I get not allowing hate speech to have a platform but why can't we go back to how things were with the KKK and the Westboro Baptist Church? Why can't we just laugh at these people, call them morons, and not go around throwing molotovs and bike locks and causing property damage? What happened to the good old days, man...?

[Fahran]

I'm getting a little annoyed with the way every idiot that isn't right wing is called "antifa" despite that organisation not actually existing.

They call themselves Antifa generally. Given that one of the central tenants of the movement has always been violent opposition to fascism, you're bound to have a few people who call themselves Antifa hitting people for carrying "fascist" symbols or advocating for "fascism." That's what happens when you legitimize political violence in a society that is already trending towards equality and where representation and rights are already enshrined de jure.

[Taliostia]

Antifa make Donald Trump and his supporters look good in comparison. Trump is a hero against the mob!

[Ifreann]

Fight Nazis and they'll cry oppression, sure. But if you leave them be they'll crow that cowardly leftists flee the sight of them. The basic tenets of their position are contradictory, so anything you do is playing into their hands, especially when you realise that they are completely willing to lie.


When everything you do is propaganda fuel, including doing nothing, what do you do?

Remove the factors driving people into their hands and leave them with nothing but nonsense. If they have to go around with nothing but dogwhistles about the biological superiority of whites and so on people will ignore them. It's the legitimate grievances swelling their ranks.

It really isn't. Unless you think that the existence of non-white people in Europe or North America is a legitimate grievance.

[Harelia]

I'm getting a little annoyed with the way every idiot that isn't right wing is called "antifa" despite that organisation not actually existing.

They call themselves Antifa generally. Given that one of the central tenants of the movement has always been violent opposition to fascism, you're bound to have a few people who call themselves Antifa hitting people for carrying "fascist" symbols or advocating for "fascism." That's what happens when you legitimize political violence in a society that is already trending towards equality and where representation and rights are already enshrined de jure.

Technically it is an organized group. They generally convene online and have 'event organizers' like Scott Crow that helps coordinate what basically amounts to a teenage driven leftist 4Chan. There may be no chain of command, but they have people that help organize and stand as commanding officers for the movement.

But that's what happens when you have an open invite ideology. According to them, if you dress in black, wear a mask, and beat people up whilst claiming you fight fascism, you're essentially a 'freedom fighter' in their eyes.

[Alvecia]

Fight Nazis and they'll cry oppression, sure. But if you leave them be they'll crow that cowardly leftists flee the sight of them. The basic tenets of their position are contradictory, so anything you do is playing into their hands, especially when you realise that they are completely willing to lie.


When everything you do is propaganda fuel, including doing nothing, what do you do?

Remove the factors driving people into their hands and leave them with nothing but nonsense. If they have to go around with nothing but dogwhistles about the biological superiority of whites and so on people will ignore them. It's the legitimate grievances swelling their ranks.

If the past few years have taught us anything it’s that people are pretty damn susceptible to nonsense

[Fahran]

So whose the leader of antifa? Where are they based? How do they communicate?

Antifa refers to a multitude of organizations, often arranged in horizontal hierarchies. They have quite a few leaders actually. Micah Rhodes, an activist and alleged rapist, was one of the principal organizers of the recent protests in Portland that involved violence. We don't have the names of leaders of organizations like Rose City Antifa because they wear masks and deliberately hide membership. They're based whereever a local "chapter" pops up because they're a loose association of people united by vague ideological tendencies in much the same way as al-Qaeda or the alt-right. They communicate principally through social media and cellphones - like every other protest-oriented group.

It seems more likely plenty of people are pissed off rather than they're a sophisticated terrorist organisation.

This implies that political violence is spontaneous and unplanned. People showing up with bats wrapped in barbed wire and utilizing complex quasi-paramilitary tactics to enact mob violence does not strike me as spontaneous. Decentralized on a national basis, perhaps, but not spontaneous or non-ordered.

Aren't a lot of terrorist acts committed by people who have loose ideological fealty but aren't actually part of a structured organization?

Yes.

[Harelia]

Antifa make Donald Trump and his supporters look good in comparison. Trump is a hero against the mob!

I dunno if 'hero' is the right word, but he's definitely being put in a better spotlight. I mean I'm not about to sing the mans praises but he's certainly nowhere even remotely close to the worst president we've had. And the fact there's a legion of kids trying to physically assault anyone that associates with him tells me that the comparison between the two can best be summed up as the big orange elementary school teacher vs a hoard of screaming kids getting mad cuz "Stacy said my hair looked stupid."

[The Evergreen Dreamscapes]

how is this thread 20 pages long when literally all that needed to be said was "the american flag is a fascist symbol."