Right-wing vs. Left-wing Clashes [MOD NOTE POST #1]

For Reals

manual_man wrote: »

You're totally missing the point I made. I'm personally not making comparisons of the bigotry that exists on both sides of the political debate. I find bigotry and hatred in all it's form abhorrent. And I find it astonishing that some people are seemingly very reluctant to simply agree on this point - instead constantly seeking to compare, as if to say "well I believe this type of shít is worse, so let's only worry about that!". It's a childish and dangerous viewpoint to adopt, because if we only focus on one type of bigotry and ignore others, then the ones we ignore will become bigger and more aggressive and intolerant. Evil takes it's shape in many different forms and I think that's something many people are finding difficult to grasp. It's just my wish that people keep their eyes open and seek to tackle hatred in ALL it's forms.

Peace out!

The point is; one group believe in white supremacy, the rest of us don't.
Any violence on either side cannot and does not change that.
May as well talk about people on either side wearing trousers.

Danzy

pitifulgod wrote: »

When you're making a Neo Nazi rally where one of them killed people as a reason to complain about Antifa is frankly bizarre. Only one side of that rally was populated by hateful bigots.

Many I think are looking at this from a bigger picture than just that one day, so naturally, they are going to hear Antifa were there and just think it was a full house of violent control freak thugs.

Though in fairness it does not mean that all that were counter protesting are thugs, most weren't but their legitimate action was hijacked by thugs, doesn't mean that the other said wasn't probably thugs to a man.

Look at this from the broader context.

For Reals

Danzy wrote: »

Many I think are looking at this from a bigger picture than just that one day, so naturally, they are going to hear Antifa were there and just think it was a full house of violent control freak thugs.

Though in fairness it does not mean that all that were counter protesting are thugs, most weren't but their legitimate action was hijacked by thugs, doesn't mean that the other said wasn't probably thugs to a man.

Look at this from the broader context.

This is not about who can and can't be violent, if both are capable, it's some how on par, as you seem to be suggesting.

pitifulgod

Danzy wrote: »

Many I think are looking at this from a bigger picture than just that one day, so naturally, they are going to hear Antifa were there and just think it was a full house of violent control freak thugs.

Though in fairness it does not mean that all that were counter protesting are thugs, most weren't but their legitimate action was hijacked by thugs, doesn't mean that the other said wasn't probably thugs to a man.

Look at this from the broader context.

Out of interest, do you agree with any of the points of those marching on Saturday? If so, would you mind elaborating on which aspects you agree with? As it seems distinctly like certain posters have an incredible amount of bias going on. :rolleyes:

Danzy

For Reals wrote: »

Why are you making excuses for white supremacists?

As I pointed out I said I have no trouble having them hit with iron bars across the head.

They are assholes but there is precious little to suggest that Antifa are not assholes as well.

They each offer nothing but long term pain to society and history has borne that out time after time.

Nothing wrong with thinking that both groups of assholes should be squashed from the face of the earth.

BabyCheeses

Danzy wrote: »

Many I think are looking at this from a bigger picture than just that one day, so naturally, they are going to hear Antifa were there and just think it was a full house of violent control freak thugs.

Though in fairness it does not mean that all that were counter protesting are thugs, most weren't but their legitimate action was hijacked by thugs, doesn't mean that the other said wasn't probably thugs to a man.

Look at this from the broader context.

You should really use different accounts for these kind of things, when your posting on 2 similar threads from a completely different view in each one you become a bit see through.

For Reals

Danzy wrote: »

As I pointed out I said I have no trouble having them hit with iron bars across the head.

They are assholes but there is precious little to suggest that Antifa are not assholes as well.

They each offer nothing but long term pain to society and history has borne that out time after time.

Nothing wrong with thinking that both groups of assholes should be squashed from the face of the earth.

This is not about who can and can't be violent. If both are capable, it's some how on par, as you seem to be suggesting.
You are trying to compare white supremacists with others based on violent behaviour. It doesn't hold water.

Danzy

pitifulgod wrote: »

Out of interest, do you agree with any of the points of those marching on Saturday? If so, would you mind elaborating on which aspects you agree with? As it seems distinctly like certain posters have an incredible amount of bias going on. :rolleyes:

I'm not that familiar with their specific beliefs but I doubt if there would be any I would agree with.

There are general things like collectivism, greater State control in the economy, that I agree with but not with just having it for one part of society and that would be more to my own left wing leanings rather than their interpretation of it. They aren't people I would associate with

Out of that movement who do you most read, are you friends with some, what do you think is their core motivation?

Danzy

For Reals wrote: »

This is not about who can and can't be violent. If both are capable, it's some how on par, as you seem to be suggesting.
You are trying to compare white supremacists with others based on violent behaviour. It doesn't hold water.

I just don't like violent, authoritarian thugs, whether they think they are better or worse than others just increases my dislike for them.


If you want to argue that both Antifa and the Nazis are authoritarian thugs but that the Nazi side was a more immediate threat on the day, then I won't disagree but they are too alike in many ways to proclaim them different

Danzy

I think ye are so absolutist and tribal in thinking that calling our marauding mobs is now viewed as outing myself as a Nazi.

Ye are just as bizarre as those that ye oppose.

For Reals

Danzy wrote: »

I just don't like violent, authoritarian thugs, whether they think they are better or worse than others just increases my dislike for them.


If you want to argue that both Antifa and the Nazis are authoritarian thugs but that the Nazi side was a more immediate threat on the day, then I won't disagree but they are too alike in many ways to proclaim them different

No I don't. That's your agenda.
White supremacists are entirely wrong and should be treated as criminals IMO, based on being white supremacists.

People from any ideology who act violently should be treated for that behaviour. One has nothing to do with the other. There is no equivalency here, only those spouting pro racist spin or those naive enough to believe it.
One group wants to put themselves above others while decent humans do not.

Danzy

For Reals wrote: »

No I don't. That's your agenda.
White supremacists are entirely wrong and should be treated as criminals IMO.

People who act violently should be treated for that behaviour. One has nothing to do with the other. Their is no equivalency here, only those spouting pro racist spin or those naive enough to believe it.
One group wants to put themselves above others while decent humans do not.

They are different and supremacism should be crushed but don't kid yourself if the type that make up Antifa ended up controlling the State that you and me both wouldn't end up against the wall eventually.

Dangerous asshholes can have a just reason to fight other dangerous assholes .

I agree that people who act violently should be sorted out.

pitifulgod

Danzy wrote: »

I just don't like violent, authoritarian thugs, whether they think they are better or worse than others just increases my dislike for them.


If you want to argue that both Antifa and the Nazis are authoritarian thugs but that the Nazi side was a more immediate threat on the day, then I won't disagree but they are too alike in many ways to proclaim them different

Only one are bigot racists, antisemites and all round hateful. They also have an aim of an ethnostate. The other opposes all of the above. That's a substantial difference that really does make all the difference in terms of one being far far far worse. But you and others have ignored these aspects repeatedly.

You've diverted from the act of terror which one of them perpetrated. Their movement's focal point is hate.

hatrickpatrick

For Reals wrote: »

The point is; one group believe in white supremacy, the rest of us don't.

One group believes in white supremacy, the other group believes that whites and males are somehow less equal than everyone else and therefore fair game for hate speech. That's the comparison.

hatrickpatrick

pitifulgod wrote: »

Only one are bigot racists, antisemites and all round hateful.

Again, this is not correct. The extreme left is just as racist and sexist as the extreme right.

Overheal

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Again, this is not correct. The extreme left is just as racist and sexist as the extreme right.

The extreme left is multicultural though?

Professor Moriarty

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Again, this is not correct. The extreme left is just as racist and sexist as the extreme right.

This is amazing news. Can you offer proof of this?

hatrickpatrick

Overheal wrote: »

The extreme left is multicultural though?

And yet it regards tweets such as #KillAllMen as acceptable because "men cannot be victims of sexism", and are therefore fair game for hate speech. It churns out article after article in the media about how straight, white men (or any combination of these three demographic traits) are the root of all evil and are born with original sin for which they must feel shame. It engages in violent rioting in order to prevent speakers who oppose these paradigms from speaking on college campuses, and failing that it pulls fire alarms to prevent any such talks from taking place.

If you hammer, bait and provoke people for long enough, they will radicalise. It's a simple fact of nature. The alt-right and extreme left are mirror images of eachother, but it was the left who started the current culture wars - the alt right is merely a reactionary movement.

hatrickpatrick

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

This is amazing news. Can you offer proof of this?

I'm on my phone at the moment but as soon as I'm on my laptop I'll collate some links to man bashing and white bashing in the mainstream media coming from left wing authors. I won't have to look too far afield either - our very own Una Mullally and Louise O'Neill are seasoned experts in this field.

20Cent

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

One group believes in white supremacy, the other group believes that whites and males are somehow less equal than everyone else and therefore fair game for hate speech. That's the comparison.

What's the evidence for that? Most antifa seem to be white and male as well.

hatrickpatrick

20Cent wrote: »

What's the evidence for that? Most antifa seem to be white and male as well.

I'm not talking just about antifa but the radical identity politics left in general, which has a lot of crossover with antifa. It probably wasn't "antifa" who rioted in Berkely to make sure Milo Yiannapolous' lecture got cancelled on safety grounds, but you can bet that a lot of those same people identify with antifa as well.

Hans Bricks

It's amazing that the hard left wing in America have now given these obese, gun toting neo nazi scumbags & redneck militias an arguably legitimate excuse outside of promoting outright fascism, to congregate in force for protests now. It doesn't strike me as coincidence that it's being ratcheted up in response to Trump's election either.

All this for statues. Statues that have existed for decades & generations in Southern states and are there so long now that a lot of moderate southerners now view them as part of their "heritage". Don't get me wrong, taking them down from the likes of Baltimore and overtly African American districts is common sense. We can argue til we're blue in the face that it was all about slavery, a lot of other people would argue that it was originally a war of secession and state rights vs federal law and Big Brother up in the North East. Either way this whole thing is inevitably going to antagonize the extreme spectrum of white, christian America.

This whole thing has just devolved to a promotional platform served on a plate to Nazi Nazis and those other insufferable basement dwellers ANTIFA. I really think this whole sudden Confederate statue outrage has just been fuelled and overblown by bored, over sensitive left wing radicals who read too much VICE news. It's more a trendy cause du jour for 2017.

pitifulgod

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm on my phone at the moment but as soon as I'm on my laptop I'll collate some links to man bashing and white bashing in the mainstream media coming from left wing authors. I won't have to look too far afield either - our very own Una Mullally and Louise O'Neill are seasoned experts in this field.

Seriously, this is the best argument you can offer to justify counter protesters as equivalents of Neo Nazis? It's a pretty warped and inaccurate view.

hatrickpatrick

pitifulgod wrote: »

Seriously, this is the best argument you can offer to justify counter protesters as equivalents of Neo Nazis? It's a pretty warped and inaccurate view.

So you think that advocating for gender-based violence (by tweeting #KillAllMen for instance) or politically motivated violence (it's ok to punch Richard Spencer because of his beliefs) are somehow less serious offences than advocating racially motivated violence...?

oscarBravo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

One group believes in white supremacy, the other group believes that whites and males are somehow less equal than everyone else and therefore fair game for hate speech. That's the comparison.

Ugh. It's hard to have a serious discussion with someone who insists on talking in caricatures.

Don't bother trawling the Internet for the most extreme examples you can find. We're talking about Charlottesville. Can you show us where the anti-fascists in Charlottesville want to #killallmen?

hatrickpatrick

oscarBravo wrote: »

Ugh. It's hard to have a serious discussion with someone who insists on talking in caricatures.

Don't bother trawling the Internet for the most extreme examples you can find. We're talking about Charlottesville. Can you show us where the anti-fascists in Charlottesville want to #killallmen?

I haven't tried, I will this evening. The thread title is "right vs left wing violence", isn't it a bit of a cheap debating tactic to define the parameters of that discussion as including only an incident of right wing violence, and not allow anyone to reference previous incidents of left wing bias?

If you want the conversation to be a non-debate with a foregone conclusion, fair enough. It's like suggesting that the Irish rugby team is sh!te because they didn't play well in one particular match, but refusing to let anyone counter by referencing other matches in which they did in fact play well.

For Reals

Danzy wrote: »

They are different and supremacism should be crushed but don't kid yourself if the type that make up Antifa ended up controlling the State that you and me both wouldn't end up against the wall eventually.

Dangerous asshholes can have a just reason to fight other dangerous assholes .

I agree that people who act violently should be sorted out.

You are not understanding.
Bad people are bad people; agreed.
Bad people with opposing views do not counter or excuse each other.
Therefore if white supremacists, who are racist by ideology, commit acts of violence, and others with opposing views also commit acts of violence, does not excuse or make acceptable any white supremacist.
Talk of 'both sides' is apologist especially when in relation the charlottesville race rally, we should be talking about the racists and their rally and the ideology.

To be clear, people doing bad things should face consequences. This does not mean we can't talk about the ALT Right white supremacists without trying to make comparisons.
If the only other people there were antifa, and each member a member of a minority and each member spouting race hate against whites and one of them murdered somebody, okay, compare away.

oscarBravo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I haven't tried, I will this evening. The thread title is "right vs left wing violence", isn't it a bit of a cheap debating tactic to define the parameters of that discussion as including only an incident of right wing violence, and not allow anyone to reference previous incidents of left wing bias?

You can call it a cheap debating tactic if you want. Lots of people seem to have their assorted reasons for wanting to talk about anything - anything! - other than the fact that armed frigging Nazis are parading in American cities, but as far as I'm concerned that's the story.

If you want the conversation to be a non-debate with a foregone conclusion, fair enough.

And if you want to try to downplay the fact that armed Nazis are marching in the streets of US cities by constantly rabbiting on about every bad thing that any extreme leftist has ever done, knock yourself out. But unless you can show that the anti-fascist protesters in Charlottesville conform to the stereotype you're portraying, you're just engaging in whataboutery.

Danzy

For Reals wrote: »

You are not understanding.
Bad people are bad people; agreed.
Bad people with opposing views do not counter or excuse each other.
Therefore if white supremacists, who are racist by ideology, commit acts of violence, and others with opposing views also commit acts of violence, does not excuse or make acceptable any white supremacist.
Talk of 'both sides' is apologist especially when in relation the charlottesville race rally, we should be talking about the racists and their rally and the ideology.

To be clear, people doing bad things should face consequences. This does not mean we can't talk about the ALT Right white supremacists without trying to make comparisons.
If the only other people there were antifa, and each member a member of a minority and each member spouting race hate against whites and one of them murdered somebody, okay, compare away.

I have no problem with people who went there to protest against the rally, I have no time for the rally or its participants or their counterparts who also turned up to join the first group.

The people protesting the rally are not all Antifa, most of them are presumably decent people doing their bit, their opponents and enemy are not just on the far side of the Street.

hatrickpatrick

oscarBravo wrote: »

You can call it a cheap debating tactic if you want. Lots of people seem to have their assorted reasons for wanting to talk about anything - anything! - other than the fact that armed frigging Nazis are parading in American cities, but as far as I'm concerned that's the story. And if you want to try to downplay the fact that armed Nazis are marching in the streets of US cities by constantly rabbiting on about every bad thing that any extreme leftist has ever done, knock yourself out. But unless you can show that the anti-fascist protesters in Charlottesville conform to the stereotype you're portraying, you're just engaging in whataboutery.

The thread title is literally "violent right wing vs left wing clashes in the US". How that gives you the impression that we can only discuss one example of violence from one side is entirely beyond me. If someone creates a thread about the Kinahan vs Hutch feud in general, would you accuse anybody referencing violence by the Kinahans as "whataboutery" because th Regency Hotel shooting carried out by the Hutches got more media coverage, or involved higher calibre weaponry, or resulted in more casualties?