NationStates

Nova Cyberia wrote:

United States of Devonta wrote:
Have you condemned fascist this hard on NS before, jw?

Like groups that actually have a body count?

Yeah, actually. I have.

This pathetic dance that occurs whenever anybody condemns Antifa groups is hilariously predictable.

"Oh, you think Antifa's bad? Well, Nazis exist so you have to condemn them first before saying anything about our Antifa gud bois."

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.

Scomagia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:Once again, there are NO Antifa organisations. Antifa is NOT an organisation, it's an umbrella label under which people choose to put themselves. There's no group that sits down and organises where, when and how they do stuff, it's just people who show up whenever they get a bunch of proud-boys or Jew-hating Klansmen in the area and they want to tell them to fuck off.

How can you label a non-organisation a terrorist organisation? How do you enforce that law? You can't.

You're lying. There are specific organized groups of Antifa. Antifa ad a whole has no official organization.

And you enforce it exactly like I said. Condemn those organizations which are known to engage in criminal activity.

Yea, your solution seemed pretty fair.

A full ban could be abused easily.

Pacomia wrote:Can we all at least agree that the Antifa is a violent group which has done more harm than good, and should not be exempt from assault or anti-violence laws?

No, because they objectively haven't done more harm than good, especially when compared to their adversaries.

What aspects exactly classify antifa as domestic terrorism? Aren’t we using that term far too broadly these days?

Pacomia wrote:Can we all at least agree that the Antifa is a violent group which has done more harm than good, and should not be exempt from assault or anti-violence laws?

The worst harm they've done is given hard-rightists and their apologists more ammunition to lie about the left. But they'd do that anyway, so it's not like that's solely their fault.

Cedoria wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:Yeah, actually. I have.

This pathetic dance that occurs whenever anybody condemns Antifa groups is hilariously predictable.

"Oh, you think Antifa's bad? Well, Nazis exist so you have to condemn them first before saying anything about our Antifa gud bois."

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.

Torrocca wrote:

Cappuccina wrote:It's pretty obvious, like saying most fascists are racist.

Ah, so you don't actually have verifiable proof backing up that claim. Shame.

One needs only look at Antifa's activities and who they attack. They literally don't know what fascism is. They should just rename themselves "Anti-"anything not communist" action", atleast it'd be an accurate title then.

Cedoria wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:Yeah, actually. I have.

This pathetic dance that occurs whenever anybody condemns Antifa groups is hilariously predictable.

"Oh, you think Antifa's bad? Well, Nazis exist so you have to condemn them first before saying anything about our Antifa gud bois."

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.

Antifa also tries to silence groups that oppose them, because they’re extremists. They just do it by throwing cement at them rather than imprisoning them.

Pacomia wrote:Can we all at least agree that the Antifa is a violent group which has done more harm than good, and should not be exempt from assault or anti-violence laws?

I certainly can. Vigilantism needs to be punished and discouraged.

Torrocca wrote:

Pacomia wrote:Can we all at least agree that the Antifa is a violent group which has done more harm than good, and should not be exempt from assault or anti-violence laws?

No, because they objectively haven't done more harm than good, especially when compared to their adversaries.

What good have they done? This is quite funny.

Torrocca wrote:

Pacomia wrote:Can we all at least agree that the Antifa is a violent group which has done more harm than good, and should not be exempt from assault or anti-violence laws?

No, because they objectively haven't done more harm than good, especially when compared to their adversaries.

1. What good have they done?

2. They certainly have done harm. Remember when those Antifa rioters in Portland threw quick-dry cement at people (both their enemies, their own, AND bystanders)?

Torrocca wrote:

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:Probably because the benefactor of left wing terrorism collapsed relatively recently.

I'm pretty sure thirty years isn't "recently", if you're talking about the USSR.

And I'm also pretty sure they weren't benefactors to any non-ML leftist movements.

Ifreann wrote:Worse!

We've solved Fascism by labeling the trashcan tippers as terrorists! Bake 'em away, toys!

Wear black? Bit of vandalism? Gitmo for all time. You go to a leftist book club? You're affiliating with terrorists.

Scomagia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:Once again, there are NO Antifa organisations. Antifa is NOT an organisation, it's an umbrella label under which people choose to put themselves. There's no group that sits down and organises where, when and how they do stuff, it's just people who show up whenever they get a bunch of proud-boys or Jew-hating Klansmen in the area and they want to tell them to fuck off.

How can you label a non-organisation a terrorist organisation? How do you enforce that law? You can't.

You're lying. There are specific organized groups of Antifa. Antifa ad a whole has no official organization.

And you enforce it exactly like I said. Condemn those organizations which are known to engage in criminal activity.

Incorrect, there are no formal groups of Antifa. Some people get together and group together under an umbrella, but it's not like an Al-Qaeda cell which has outside funding and direction.

Nobody in Antifa has a membership list or controls who identifies with it. Nor do people coordinate across multiple cells or countries, you know, the way terrorists do. At best it's people who organise local counter-marches on social media. Which is something anybody with half a brain and an internet connection can do.

Fact is, Antifa has no linkage that would accurately define it as a terrorist organisation.

Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:What aspects exactly classify antifa as domestic terrorism? Aren’t we using that term far too broadly these days?

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.

Cappuccina wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
Ah, so you don't actually have verifiable proof backing up that claim. Shame.

One needs only look at Antifa's activities and who they attack. They literally don't know what fascism is. They should just rename themselves "Anti-"anything not communist" action", atleast it'd be an accurate title then.

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.

Cedoria wrote:

Pacomia wrote:Can we all at least agree that the Antifa is a violent group which has done more harm than good, and should not be exempt from assault or anti-violence laws?

The worst harm they've done is given hard-rightists and their apologists more ammunition to lie about the left. But they'd do that anyway, so it's not like that's solely their fault.

So, did the attempted murder and terror raising of the ICE terrorism attack slip your mind?

Pacomia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:
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.

Antifa also tries to silence groups that oppose them, because they’re extremists. They just do it by throwing cement at them rather than imprisoning them.

The cement thing was pretty false man. People were seen on videos drinking those shakes lol. And it wouldn't mix well with sugar.

It didn't help they had to release obviously fake incriminating emails to try to continue the lie.

Cedoria wrote:

Scomagia wrote:You're lying. There are specific organized groups of Antifa. Antifa ad a whole has no official organization.

And you enforce it exactly like I said. Condemn those organizations which are known to engage in criminal activity.

Incorrect, there are no formal groups of Antifa. Some people get together and group together under an umbrella, but it's not like an Al-Qaeda cell which has outside funding and direction.

Nobody in Antifa has a membership list or controls who identifies with it. Nor do people coordinate across multiple cells or countries, you know, the way terrorists do. At best it's people who organise local counter-marches on social media. Which is something anybody with half a brain and an internet connection can do.

Fact is, Antifa has no linkage that would accurately define it as a terrorist organisation.

It's like you're not even reading.

Torrocca wrote:

Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:What aspects exactly classify antifa as domestic terrorism? Aren’t we using that term far too broadly these days?

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.

Cappuccina wrote:
One needs only look at Antifa's activities and who they attack. They literally don't know what fascism is. They should just rename themselves "Anti-"anything not communist" action", atleast it'd be an accurate title then.

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?

Pacomia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:
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.

Antifa also tries to silence groups that oppose them, because they’re extremists. They just do it by throwing cement at them rather than imprisoning them.

Antifa is not one group. It's people who agree on one thing and one thing only, opposition to Fascism. How many times do I have to labour this point to get it through to you?

Antifa can't be an extremist group. It doesn't HAVE an ideology other than opposition to Fascism. I've no doubt there are plenty of people you consider to be 'extremists' under it's banner (though these days, opposition to racial supremacy itself is often labelled extremist, so I'm not entirely eager to bend even on that point), but the group itself has no formal organisational parameters.

And it's cute that you think right-wing extremists in the US imprison people instead of being responsible for over two-thirds of violent terrorist attacks on US soil. Cute, but wrong.

Torrocca wrote:

Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:What aspects exactly classify antifa as domestic terrorism? Aren’t we using that term far too broadly these days?

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.

Cappuccina wrote:
One needs only look at Antifa's activities and who they attack. They literally don't know what fascism is. They should just rename themselves "Anti-"anything not communist" action", atleast it'd be an accurate title then.

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)".

Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
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. Obviously.

Scomagia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:The worst harm they've done is given hard-rightists and their apologists more ammunition to lie about the left. But they'd do that anyway, so it's not like that's solely their fault.

So, did the attempted murder and terror raising of the ICE terrorism attack slip your mind?

Evidence from reliable sources would be nice:)

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:
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.

It's really a shame that people use the term "political violence" so thoughtlessly. After all, it was political violence when the founders of your nation took up arms against the hated British. And it was political violence when some slave owners tried the same trick and got their asses handed to them. There's whole worlds of nuanced ethic thought that you're just skating right by, too preoccupied with trying to own the libs to stop and ponder.

Scomagia wrote:

Cedoria wrote:
Incorrect, there are no formal groups of Antifa. Some people get together and group together under an umbrella, but it's not like an Al-Qaeda cell which has outside funding and direction.

Nobody in Antifa has a membership list or controls who identifies with it. Nor do people coordinate across multiple cells or countries, you know, the way terrorists do. At best it's people who organise local counter-marches on social media. Which is something anybody with half a brain and an internet connection can do.

Fact is, Antifa has no linkage that would accurately define it as a terrorist organisation.

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.

Pacomia wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
No, because they objectively haven't done more harm than good, especially when compared to their adversaries.

1. What good have they done?

Besides taking direct action to help after a literal natural disaster? Besides organizing under the idea of feeding the hungry and starving?

2. They certainly have done harm. Remember when those Antifa rioters in Portland threw quick-dry cement at people (both their enemies, their own, AND bystanders)?

Quick-dry cement attacks is a literal fucking meme with no basis in reality.