NationStates

Antifa is a style of clothing.

Strahcoin wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
Protesters can, have, and do move out of the way of emergency vehicles. They don't need police brutality to do that.



I'm an Anarchist, chief. Put two and two together.

1. In an emergency, time is of the essence. Getting a crowd out of the way will take some time, which could be the difference of life and death. Better to get out now than later. Moreover, what about the other vehicles for which protesters don't move out of the way? They have important matters too. And the police in the United States is very lenient compared to that of other, more totalitarian nations.

You seem to not understand what the point of a protest actually is. Protesting isn't about sitting quietly in an officially-designated corner, it's very specifically about causing inconvenience and commotion.

2. Anarchy is bad. A power vacuum would be inevitable in anarchy. A small government is necessary to protect the people.

Nope. Nope. Aaand nope. But that's neither here nor there since this isn't the thread for that debate.

Cedoria wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:Antifa cockroaches are a subset of a subset of a group. I am painting them with a broad brush because violence is their modus operandi. Or, if we're using commie Newspeak, "direct action".

Right, so I'm hearing that when YOU do it with no evidence whatsoever it's perfectly fine. Cool, just so we're clear. I don't think we need to hear much more from you on that.

You're trying to justify assaulting people. I'm not. There is no moral equivalency between us, chief.

And I will call inherently violent people violent.

Cedoria wrote:

Strahcoin wrote:Huh? When did Nova Cyberia defend Neo-Nazis?

Defending a bunch of 'peaceful' protesters agitating for race war and ethnic cleansing. Shocker.

Still waiting on that evidence.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:Right, so I'm hearing that when YOU do it with no evidence whatsoever it's perfectly fine. Cool, just so we're clear. I don't think we need to hear much more from you on that.

You're trying to justify assaulting people. I'm not. There is no moral equivalency between us, chief.

And I will call inherently violent people violent.

And sub-human cockroaches apparently. Charming, Watch that mask brother, it's starting to eat your face.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:Defending a bunch of 'peaceful' protesters agitating for race war and ethnic cleansing. Shocker.

Still waiting on that evidence.

It was published on this very thread not half an hour ago, as I mentioned twice now.

Cedoria wrote:

Strahcoin wrote:Huh? When did Nova Cyberia defend Neo-Nazis?

Defending a bunch of 'peaceful' protesters agitating for race war and ethnic cleansing. Shocker.

I would like to see evidence. A post, perhaps. Quote it in your reply to me, and then I'll judge.

Cedoria wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:You're trying to justify assaulting people. I'm not. There is no moral equivalency between us, chief.

And I will call inherently violent people violent.

And sub-human cockroaches apparently. Charming, Watch that mask brother, it's starting to eat your face

Well, yes. They exist only to hurt others, so they're scum.

Nova Cyberia wrote:Still waiting on that evidence.

It was published on this very thread not half an hour ago, as I mentioned twice now.

Torre's Wikipedia article was not evidence and didn't prove what she claimed it did.

She rarely ever actually reads the articles she posts, so bear that in mind when referencing her stuff.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:And sub-human cockroaches apparently. Charming, Watch that mask brother, it's starting to eat your face

Well, yes. They exist only to hurt others, so they're scum.

It was published on this very thread not half an hour ago, as I mentioned twice now.

Torre's Wikipedia article was not evidence and didn't prove what she claimed it did.

She rarely ever actually reads the articles she posts, so bear that in mind when referencing her stuff.

Someone who is so fair-minded and morally superior should use that word with far more discernment. Once again, your lack of a sense of irony here is laughable.


And you clearly never do. So I'm not sure I ought take your word on the subject. Furthermore one of your own colleagues used Wikipedia as a 'source' prior to this. I don't dissent that it isn't one, but if that's the level you're willing to accept, then there's no reason to disregard this one. Furthermore, the article in question has a link to the original source, which can do precisely that if you want.

I know how this game goes, we provide evidence and you tell us it isn't really. Seen that game a thousand times before, not playing.

Torrocca wrote:

Strahcoin wrote:1. In an emergency, time is of the essence. Getting a crowd out of the way will take some time, which could be the difference of life and death. Better to get out now than later. Moreover, what about the other vehicles for which protesters don't move out of the way? They have important matters too. And the police in the United States is very lenient compared to that of other, more totalitarian nations.

You seem to not understand what the point of a protest actually is. Protesting isn't about sitting quietly in an officially-designated corner, it's very specifically about causing inconvenience and commotion.

2. Anarchy is bad. A power vacuum would be inevitable in anarchy. A small government is necessary to protect the people.

Nope. Nope. Aaand nope. But that's neither here nor there since this isn't the thread for that debate.

1. You don't have to cause inconvenience to uninvolved third parties while protesting. Assembling in a public park, giving out handouts, making speeches/interviews in the media, etc.
2. Well, even if you believe that an anarchic society would be sustainable in the real world (and it very likely won't), you shouldn't attack those who don't. Calling the American police "fascist" without supporting evidence is far from the truth, not to mention impolite (or, as the left likes to call it, "politically incorrect").

I don't like ANTIFA at all. They're thuggish. Generally act in pretty fascist ways, ironically. Not sure if they're terrorists, though.

Either way, I feel like there are bigger issues to worry about.

They need to be proscribed, as their views and antics represent a threat to the security and well being of the nation. Ideally, if I was in power, I'd deploy the National Guard to suppress and arrest their membership, in particular their leadership cadres. Same goes for any third party funders, coupled with the shutting down of all affiliated organizations, websites, social groupings, etc.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:
Righto, because that's definitely NOT painting people you disagree with with an overly broad brush based on the actions of one particular subset of that group because it's more convenient of you to demonise. Totally different from what you were ranting about me doing a minute ago. Got ya. Do you even read how dumb this stuff is to yourself before you post it?

Antifa cockroaches are a subset of a subset of a group. I am painting them with a broad brush because violence is their modus operandi. Or, if we're using commie Newspeak, "direct action".

Hello, resident cockroach white knight (or pink knight, I guess) here. Cockroaches are very difficult to compare to your conception of Antifa, as they are very nonviolent and cannibalize each other only when the other is dead.
You thought I wasn't going to notice this because I haven't yet posted in the thread, didn't you? I have ocelli everywhere.

Two republican senators think antifa are terrorists? I am shocked. Shocked I am.

A good move, if we could apply the label to them and the racialists they oppose in one fell swoop that would be great.

Good. They are domestic terrorists.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:A good move, if we could apply the label to them and the racialists they oppose in one fell swoop that would be great.

Actually yeah I second this.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:A good move, if we could apply the label to them and the racialists they oppose in one fell swoop that would be great.

Ok. As long as we can include the alt-right and a couple Christian groups.

The Black Forrest wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:A good move, if we could apply the label to them and the racialists they oppose in one fell swoop that would be great.

Ok. As long as we can include the alt-right and a couple Christian groups.

I'm game.

Totally Not OEP wrote:They need to be proscribed, as their views and antics represent a threat to the security and well being of the nation. Ideally, if I was in power, I'd deploy the National Guard to suppress and arrest their membership, in particular their leadership cadres. Same goes for any third party funders, coupled with the shutting down of all affiliated organizations, websites, social groupings, etc.

+1 person who doesn't know jack shit about antifa. It isn't a fucking organization, it doesn't have membership rolls or leaders.

If instead you mean anyone who practices or supports antifascist action or speech, then you're really fucking letting your power level show buddy. Try at least pretending you care about freedom of speech like the rest of your buddies.

Wallenburg wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:They need to be proscribed, as their views and antics represent a threat to the security and well being of the nation. Ideally, if I was in power, I'd deploy the National Guard to suppress and arrest their membership, in particular their leadership cadres. Same goes for any third party funders, coupled with the shutting down of all affiliated organizations, websites, social groupings, etc.

+1 person who doesn't know jack shit about antifa. It isn't a fucking organization, it doesn't have membership rolls or leaders.

If instead you mean anyone who practices or supports antifascist action or speech, then you're really fucking letting your power level show buddy. Try at least pretending you care about freedom of speech like the rest of your buddies.

Do you require membership rolls to be a group of people?

Wallenburg wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:They need to be proscribed, as their views and antics represent a threat to the security and well being of the nation. Ideally, if I was in power, I'd deploy the National Guard to suppress and arrest their membership, in particular their leadership cadres. Same goes for any third party funders, coupled with the shutting down of all affiliated organizations, websites, social groupings, etc.

+1 person who doesn't know jack shit about antifa. It isn't a fucking organization, it doesn't have membership rolls or leaders.

If instead you mean anyone who practices or supports antifascist action or speech, then you're really fucking letting your power level show buddy. Try at least pretending you care about freedom of speech like the rest of your buddies.

I don't care about Freedom of Speech. I care about making Antifa a faded memory, with its membership behind bars where it belongs along with its fellow travelers.

Union of Sovereign States and Republics wrote:https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/two-senators-want-antifa-activists-to-be-labeled-domestic-terrorists-heres-what-that-means/ar-AAECtvK?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=spartanntp

Two Republican senators have introduced a nonbinding resolution that would label antifascists — known as antifa — as “domestic terrorists,” doubling down against radical activists who have drawn criticism from conservatives and President Trump.

“Antifa are terrorists, violent masked bullies who ‘fight fascism’ with actual fascism, protected by Liberal privilege,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said in a statement. “Bullies get their way until someone says no. Elected officials must have courage, not cowardice, to prevent terror.”

Hina Shamsi, director of the national security project at the American Civil Liberties Union, told The Washington Post that she opposes labeling groups as domestic terrorists. “It is dangerous and overly broad to use labels that are disconnected [from] actual individual conduct,” she said. “And as we’ve seen how ‘terrorism’ has been used already in this country, any such scheme raises significant due process, equal protection and First Amendment constitutional concerns.”

Designating a group as a domestic terrorist organization expands law enforcement’s ability to investigate it. The label also means that police can not only investigate a specific suspect, but also look into groups that person affiliates with, Neal Katyal, a Georgetown University law professor and former national security adviser, told NPR.

Similar concerns may be the reason the federal government does not make public an official list of domestic terrorist groups, Jerome Bjelopera, a specialist in organized crime and terrorism, wrote in a Congressional Research Service report. The government does include domestic and international terrorists on its terrorist watch list, Bjelopera wrote.

So, as the article says, two republican senators want Antifa declared a terrorist organization.

Personally, I couldn't be more happy about this. Finally taking action against these left-wing versions of the white supremacists is long overdue. While I'm just as anti-supremacist as the next guy, Antifa's not much better, given their blatant lack of respect for the police force, veterans, and anyone who isn't on the left.

Thoughts, NSG?

Antifa is bad but it is not a terrorist organization.

So yeah this is just a transparent attempt to circumvent the first amendment and ban protests against Trump and co.

So Antifa has switched from Effeminate Soyboys to Murderous Supersoldiers already?

Gormwood wrote:So Antifa has switched from Effeminate Soyboys to Murderous Supersoldiers already?

This time the alt-right is exaggerating, that is, lying.

The point is that if Antifa actually becomes "Murderous Supersoldiers" I will actually have some hope in soc libs succeeding in the long run..for any form of order needs arms to defend..

Though they do cause problems, spreading terror among the populace isn't their primary objective. They should probably be covered by an intermediary category or something relating to street gangs.