Two Senators want Antifa labled domestic terrorists

[Scomagia]

Considering these senators are playing the tried and tested, "Anti-fascists are the real fascists!!1!" card, I don't think you're going to get a good answer to that first one from them.

Technically speaking, though, you could classify AntiFA as terrorists because they use violence to achieve a political goal, AKA to prevent the surge of Fascism. So, technically, terrorism's a descriptor.



Just because individuals and small groups of people calling themselves AntiFA have attacked people who aren't Fascist doesn't mean most of AntiFA doesn't know what Fascism is, FYI.

But is violence alone enough to classify a group as terrorist?

No. In any case, trying to call Antifa as a whole anything is pretty slippery. Individual Antifa organisations have no connecting bodies and may or may not share ideology, to say nothing of tactics. It's better to call individual organisations as terroristic or criminal organisations, such as Rose City Antifa.

[Cappuccina]

Considering these senators are playing the tried and tested, "Anti-fascists are the real fascists!!1!" card, I don't think you're going to get a good answer to that first one from them.

Technically speaking, though, you could classify AntiFA as terrorists because they use violence to achieve a political goal, AKA to prevent the surge of Fascism. So, technically, terrorism's a descriptor.



Just because individuals and small groups of people calling themselves AntiFA have attacked people who aren't Fascist doesn't mean most of AntiFA doesn't know what Fascism is, FYI.

Would the real Antifa please stand up?

Because it seems like any time one of those idiots hurts someone we get the usual shtick of "nOt ReAl anTiFa(TM)".

If they make us look bad we can just publicly say they're not Antifa!!! (but they still deserve a pat on the back!! )

[Nova Cyberia]

It's like you're not even reading.

Oh I know what you're saying. It's just crap.

The fact that you are patronising enough to assume anyone who contradicts you is just stupidly not understanding speaks volumes however.

Behold: A nonexistent Antifa organization.

[Scomagia]

It's like you're not even reading.

Oh I know what you're saying. It's just crap.

The fact that you are patronising enough to assume anyone who contradicts you is just stupidly not understanding speaks volumes however.

And you're needlessly hostile over your own mistake. How petty.

[Torrocca]

Considering these senators are playing the tried and tested, "Anti-fascists are the real fascists!!1!" card, I don't think you're going to get a good answer to that first one from them.

Technically speaking, though, you could classify AntiFA as terrorists because they use violence to achieve a political goal, AKA to prevent the surge of Fascism. So, technically, terrorism's a descriptor.



Just because individuals and small groups of people calling themselves AntiFA have attacked people who aren't Fascist doesn't mean most of AntiFA doesn't know what Fascism is, FYI.

But is violence alone enough to classify a group as terrorist?

Of course not, certainly not on any realistic terms. Technically, however, going only off the standard definition of terrorism, it could be.

[Nova Cyberia]

Would the real Antifa please stand up?

Because it seems like any time one of those idiots hurts someone we get the usual shtick of "nOt ReAl anTiFa(TM)".

If they make us look bad we can just publicly say they're not Antifa!!! (but they still deserve a pat on the back!! )

Our commie friends are evolving.

They've changed from "not real communism" to "not real Antifa".

[Pacomia]

Antifa is mostly aggressive Anarchists.

They're largely Libertarian Left and hate White Nationalism. In my view, they should be handled when they commit violence but since they're a self-identification instead of organization it would be futile to try too list them as terrorists.

I agree, they can’t really be terrorists, but they’re definitely not a squeaky clean group. They’re still violent borderline anarchists, and they still do a bunch of criminal activities.

[Cedoria]

Why is it pathetic? It's a valid point. Antifa is not an organisation, has no body count, and is objectively verified as both far less violent and less dangerous than comparable hard-right groups who use political violence and direct action.

A point does not become pathetic because it disturbs the parameters of your set worldview.

Your attempted appeal to larger problems is noted.

Antifa groups have engaged in political violence. Political violence is bad. Groups that do such things should be condemned and treated as domestic terrorists. I don't know why you find this disagreeable, other than the fact that you seem to endorse political violence.

Objectively incorrect. Political violence is OFTEN bad. Depending on context, it can be the only possible solution. Was the taking up of arms against Apartheid bad? It was certainly political violence, but what other choice was there? Likewise, many resistance movements in history have made use of political violence to varying degrees. Nobody with even a lick of historical knowledge can say with a straight face such a blanket statement.

Of course I suspect you mean what most people mean when they say that, which is that political violence you personally disapprove of is bad. But I'm not going to belabour that point.

[Scomagia]

Would the real Antifa please stand up?

Because it seems like any time one of those idiots hurts someone we get the usual shtick of "nOt ReAl anTiFa(TM)".

If they make us look bad we can just publicly say they're not Antifa!!! (but they still deserve a pat on the back!! )

Look bad? Like what?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

But is violence alone enough to classify a group as terrorist?

No. In any case, trying to call Antifa as a whole anything is pretty slippery. Individual Antifa organisations have no connecting bodies and may or may not share ideology, to say nothing of tactics. It's better to call individual organisations as terroristic or criminal organisations, such as Rose City Antifa.

That’s why asked if we’re using the term domestic terrorism too broadly nowadays. Because it seems we are.

[Bear Stearns]

We can treat ANTIFA the way we treat street gangs. Even if there is no formalized structure, we can still readily identify its members. Say hello to the RICO act.

On that note, people excuse ANTIFA because it's "anti-fascist" and the default assumption is that fascists are bad. However, the problem is that ANTIFA's definition of a fascist is basically anyone they don't like.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

But is violence alone enough to classify a group as terrorist?

Of course not, certainly not on any realistic terms. Technically, however, going only off the standard definition of terrorism, it could be.

Duly noted. Thanks.

[Torrocca]

Would the real Antifa please stand up?

Because it seems like any time one of those idiots hurts someone we get the usual shtick of "nOt ReAl anTiFa(TM)".

If they make us look bad we can just publicly say they're not Antifa!!! (but they still deserve a pat on the back!! )

It sure is weird how me simply saying that some people who call themselves AntiFA acting like morons doesn't mean the greater sum is equally moronic so easily gets falsely twisted into "hurr commies just say they're not associated with the bad people xD".

[Nova Cyberia]

Your attempted appeal to larger problems is noted.

Antifa groups have engaged in political violence. Political violence is bad. Groups that do such things should be condemned and treated as domestic terrorists. I don't know why you find this disagreeable, other than the fact that you seem to endorse political violence.

Objectively incorrect. Political violence is OFTEN bad. Depending on context, it can be the only possible solution. Was the taking up of arms against Apartheid bad? It was certainly political violence, but what other choice was there? Likewise, many resistance movements in history have made use of political violence to varying degrees. Nobody with even a lick of historical knowledge can say with a straight face such a blanket statement.

Of course I suspect you mean what most people mean when they say that, which is that political violence you personally disapprove of is bad. But I'm not going to belabour that point.

Uh, I'd say marching out into the streets and committing political violence against innocent people is typically pretty bad. We like to try to keep our democracy healthy and vibrant, which is a bit hard to do when a bunch of cowardly middle-class white NEETs are attacking anyone to the right of Lenin.

[Scomagia]

No. In any case, trying to call Antifa as a whole anything is pretty slippery. Individual Antifa organisations have no connecting bodies and may or may not share ideology, to say nothing of tactics. It's better to call individual organisations as terroristic or criminal organisations, such as Rose City Antifa.

That’s why asked if we’re using the term domestic terrorism too broadly nowadays. Because it seems we are.

I'd agree.

[Cedoria]

Oh I know what you're saying. It's just crap.

The fact that you are patronising enough to assume anyone who contradicts you is just stupidly not understanding speaks volumes however.

Behold: A nonexistent Antifa organization.

A group that organises under that banner sure. But is it a listed organisation? Does it have membership lists? Funding structures? Or is it ad-hoc social media organisation that it uses?

There are substantive differences here and the article contains nowhere near enough detail for any info as to whether it functions more along the former lines or the latter. Nor do the links at the bottom. So actually, you haven't shown anything except that groups of local people group together under the banner of Antifa as an umbrella... Which is precisely what I've said.

Show me evidence of a physical, tangible organisational structure that resembles a terrorist organisation and you'd begin to have the ghost of an enforcement capacity, until then this is just pure nonsense.

[Ifreann]

Considering these senators are playing the tried and tested, "Anti-fascists are the real fascists!!1!" card, I don't think you're going to get a good answer to that first one from them.

Technically speaking, though, you could classify AntiFA as terrorists because they use violence to achieve a political goal, AKA to prevent the surge of Fascism. So, technically, terrorism's a descriptor.



Just because individuals and small groups of people calling themselves AntiFA have attacked people who aren't Fascist doesn't mean most of AntiFA doesn't know what Fascism is, FYI.

Would the real Antifa please stand up?

Because it seems like any time one of those idiots hurts someone we get the usual shtick of "nOt ReAl anTiFa(TM)".

Nice try, officer.

[Cedoria]

Objectively incorrect. Political violence is OFTEN bad. Depending on context, it can be the only possible solution. Was the taking up of arms against Apartheid bad? It was certainly political violence, but what other choice was there? Likewise, many resistance movements in history have made use of political violence to varying degrees. Nobody with even a lick of historical knowledge can say with a straight face such a blanket statement.

Of course I suspect you mean what most people mean when they say that, which is that political violence you personally disapprove of is bad. But I'm not going to belabour that point.

Uh, I'd say marching out into the streets and committing political violence against innocent people is typically pretty bad. We like to try to keep our democracy healthy and vibrant, which is a bit hard to do when a bunch of cowardly middle-class white NEETs are attacking anyone to the right of Lenin.

Define innocent people. I've seen the records of at least some of the people Antifa has clashed with. Innocent is not a word applicable.


And 'anyone to the right of Lenin' is factually wrong on it's basis. Most moderate liberal types go their whole daily lives without seeing or hearing a whiff from Antifa You're not trying very hard are you?

[Bear Stearns]

Uh, I'd say marching out into the streets and committing political violence against innocent people is typically pretty bad. We like to try to keep our democracy healthy and vibrant, which is a bit hard to do when a bunch of cowardly middle-class white NEETs are attacking anyone to the right of Lenin.

Define innocent people. I've seen the records of at least some of the people Antifa has clashed with. Innocent is not a word applicable.

Andy Ngo.

[Scomagia]

Uh, I'd say marching out into the streets and committing political violence against innocent people is typically pretty bad. We like to try to keep our democracy healthy and vibrant, which is a bit hard to do when a bunch of cowardly middle-class white NEETs are attacking anyone to the right of Lenin.

Define innocent people. I've seen the records of at least some of the people Antifa has clashed with. Innocent is not a word applicable.


And 'anyone to the right of Lenin' is factually wrong on it's basis. Most moderate liberal types go their whole daily lives without seeing or hearing a whiff from Antifa You're not trying very hard are you?

You saying assault victims had it coming? That's what this looks like.

[Pacomia]

We can treat ANTIFA the way we treat street gangs. Even if there is no formalized structure, we can still readily identify its members. Say hello to the RICO act.

On that note, people excuse ANTIFA because it's "anti-fascist" and the default assumption is that fascists are bad. However, the problem is that ANTIFA's definition of a fascist is basically anyone they don't like.

Couldn’t have put it better myself. They actually sort of fit Mussolini’s three principles of fascism, just replace “state” with “ideology”. Especially principle #3, which basically says “if you disagree with us, you’re wrong”.

[Nova Cyberia]

Behold: A nonexistent Antifa organization.

A group that organises under that banner sure. But is it a listed organisation? Does it have membership lists? Funding structures? Or is it ad-hoc social media organisation that it uses?

There are substantive differences here and the article contains nowhere near enough detail for any info as to whether it functions more along the former lines or the latter. Nor do the links at the bottom. So actually, you haven't shown anything except that groups of local people group together under the banner of Antifa as an umbrella... Which is precisely what I've said.

Show me evidence of a physical, tangible organisational structure that resembles a terrorist organisation and you'd begin to have the ghost of an enforcement capacity, until then this is just pure nonsense.

You could always just go to their website if you want to learn more about them.

But I get it, you like to remain ignorant about the violent thugs you support. It helps you claim ignorance when people inevitably point out they're violent thugs.

[Torrocca]

Uh, I'd say marching out into the streets and committing political violence against innocent people is typically pretty bad. We like to try to keep our democracy healthy and vibrant, which is a bit hard to do when a bunch of cowardly middle-class white NEETs are attacking anyone to the right of Lenin.

Define innocent people. I've seen the records of at least some of the people Antifa has clashed with. Innocent is not a word applicable.


And 'anyone to the right of Lenin' is factually wrong on it's basis. Most moderate liberal types go their whole daily lives without seeing or hearing a whiff from Antifa You're not trying very hard are you?

I certainly love the part about how AntiFA's apparently only made up of "cowardly middle-class white NEETs" lmao.

[Cappuccina]

If they make us look bad we can just publicly say they're not Antifa!!! (but they still deserve a pat on the back!! )

It sure is weird how me simply saying that some people who call themselves AntiFA acting like morons doesn't mean the greater sum is equally moronic so easily gets falsely twisted into "hurr commies just say they're not associated with the bad people xD".

You say "ppl call themselves Antifa" and that there's no Antifa organizations, so who and wtf are Antifa then? How can you state there are so called "Antifa" posers if Antifa has no central authority, who determines who's in or out?

[Torrocca]

It sure is weird how me simply saying that some people who call themselves AntiFA acting like morons doesn't mean the greater sum is equally moronic so easily gets falsely twisted into "hurr commies just say they're not associated with the bad people xD".

You say "ppl call themselves Antifa" and that there's no Antifa organizations, so who and wtf are Antifa then?

AntiFA's whoever opposes Fascism.

How can you state there are so called "Antifa" posers if Antifa has no central authority, who determines who's in or out?

... I never said that? What the fuck?