Neo-Nazi gets punched in the face while handing out racist fliers at campus

[Enthusiastic Steward]

Wouldn't it be a congregation?

Well yeah, if you want to be boring.

Even more ironic, coming from someone that made a burner account because standard internet anonymity was insufficient.

We're through the looking glass here.

[Deleted]

Nope we're done with 'talking it out' regarding Nazi's.

Time for punching until the message hits home. You're not cool, you're not acceptable, your opinion is a regressive piece of shit that has no place in this world. Good job perpetrator.

[Tijuana]

Most of these riots start off as protests and most stay protests, entire protests have not erupted into riots yet as much as right news media likes to portray it.

And again I'm talking about antifa and black bloc who are consistently condemned by the left and people peacefully protesting for painting them in a bad light. Because as I said, these people are opportunists and just want an excuse to break shit. The lefts huge protests give them the ability and sense of security to do so and then get lost in the crowds.

- - - Updated - - -



That is the joke yeah but ironic since those same people are also the ones complaining about a lack of work

Just tell me about one single Conservative riot, and then maybe I can entertain your prior point.

- - - Updated - - -

Well yeah, if you want to be boring.


We're through the looking glass here.

I mean, if you want to add riot to the vernacular, in that way, why not a riot of liberals. That's who factually riots.

[Dug]

Just tell me about one single Conservative riot, and then maybe I can entertain your prior point.

See but this is the thing. You're claiming that the left is trending more towards "violence" with the riots and occasional nazi punching. Imo riots (which I don't attribute wholly to the left but sure lets go with it) aren't "violent" they're just destructive vandalism. If you're just trying to turn it into a numbers game the right or "conservative" can already be attributed to 15 deaths just off the top of my head with Queuebec and Roof. That's a stupid game to play, right?

While certainly I think the rights rise to power is emboldening some of these sickos I'm not making bold claims that "the right" is increasing in violence.

[Spectral]

Just tell me about one single Conservative riot, and then maybe I can entertain your prior point.

This depends how you'd define "conservative", but I'd put the Freedom Rider attacks in that bucket.

I would broadly agree that rightists are much less likely to engage in mob violence to achieve political goals though. If violence comes from the broadly construed right, it's usually state-sponsored violence - this is much more consistent with being the side that's about law and order.

- - - Updated - - -

See but this is the thing. You're claiming that the left is trending more towards "violence". Imo riots (which I don't attribute wholly to the left but sure lets go with it) aren't "violent" they're just destructive vandalism. If you're just trying to turn it into a numbers game the right or "conservative" can already be attributed to 15 deaths just off the top of my head with Queuebec and Roof. That's a stupid game to play, right?

While certainly I think the rights rise to power is emboldening some of these sickos I'm not making bold claims that "the right" is increasing in violence.

Would the LA Riots be sufficiently violent to not get scare quotes around "violence"?

[Spectral]

I'm sorry, but I'm not here to make salad with you.

I think I got a new sig.

[Dug]

Would the LA Riots be sufficiently violent to not get scare quotes around "violence"?

That was a full on riot though, there's no denying that. I'm asking for an example of a recent protest that had practically everyone in attendance rioting. What we see happen is a peaceful protest and some small group of masked people breaking a star bucks window and lighting a trashcan on fire and then all of the sudden right wing media labels the entire protest a riot.

[Enthusiastic Steward]

I mean, if you want to add riot to the vernacular, in that way, why not a riot of liberals. That's who factually riots.

Its more entertaining to me if its inaccurate, that's why its funny.

Veering back on topic a bit, the thing most interesting to me is I remember having a similar debate some years ago with friends, and the consensus was that Conservatives are more invested in the status quo while Liberals are trying to change it, sometimes aggressively, or feel abandoned by it.
The curious thing this past election cycle is that a lot of Trump's supporters fit that description and (granting Trump and those core supporters who flocked to him don't fit the traditional definition of big 'C' Conservative) but are obviously to the right and you still didn't get riotous behavior.
We can only speculate as to scenarios in which Trump lost, but I still find it interesting. Disenfranchised poor, traditionally more prone to riots, but you got nothing.

[Tijuana]

See but this is the thing. You're claiming that the left is trending more towards "violence" with the riots and occasional nazi punching. Imo riots (which I don't attribute wholly to the left but sure lets go with it) aren't "violent" they're just destructive vandalism. If you're just trying to turn it into a numbers game the right or "conservative" can already be attributed to 15 deaths just off the top of my head with Queuebec and Roof. That's a stupid game to play, right?

While certainly I think the rights rise to power is emboldening some of these sickos I'm not making bold claims that "the right" is increasing in violence.

You are conflating crimes by Conservatives to riots. Look, I'm not going to buy in to your moral equivalency game that pretends like some riots are left wing and some are right wing. They are all left wing. That doesn't mean every Conservative is some great person, or that they don't commit crimes. I'm stating an inconvenient truth, and you are trying to spin your way out of it. But, there is nowhere to spin to, since there are never any riots that involve Conservatives. At least, not in my lifetime.

- - - Updated - - -

This depends how you'd define "conservative", but I'd put the Freedom Rider attacks in that bucket.

I would broadly agree that rightists are much less likely to engage in mob violence to achieve political goals though. If violence comes from the broadly construed right, it's usually state-sponsored violence - this is much more consistent with being the side that's about law and order.

- - - Updated - - -


Would the LA Riots be sufficiently violent to not get scare quotes around "violence"?

Two posts prior, and every post after, I stated riots of Conservatives in my lifetime. My fault for not including that in this post.

- - - Updated - - -

Didn't ask you to read the whole thread, asked whether you have read what you are replying to and started this bickering chain from. As you clearly have not, or are in denial. Proceeding to mass-post these word salads you seem to love so much. I'm sorry, but I'm not here to make salad with you. And I bet neither are you, you're just out to spew hate and have some popcorn while at it. Doing a great job, but watch out so your not making a trap for yourself. That denial of yours are not so proof-proof as you want it to be, good to know your forum eh. There are no winners here.

Just go away dude....

- - - Updated - - -

Its more entertaining to me if its inaccurate, that's why its funny.

Veering back on topic a bit, the thing most interesting to me is I remember having a similar debate some years ago with friends, and the consensus was that Conservatives are more invested in the status quo while Liberals are trying to change it, sometimes aggressively, or feel abandoned by it.
The curious thing this past election cycle is that a lot of Trump's supporters fit that description and (granting Trump and those core supporters who flocked to him don't fit the traditional definition of big 'C' Conservative) but are obviously to the right and you still didn't get riotous behavior.
We can only speculate as to scenarios in which Trump lost, but I still find it interesting. Disenfranchised poor, traditionally more prone to riots, but you got nothing.

Interesting points. I would argue that it's just that Liberalism tends to attract the disenfranchised, due to identity politics. I would also argue that the identity politics itself, fuels anger and unrest from being so divisive. And while I don't want to make any sort of moral superiority argument, I would argue that Christians, most of whom are Conservatives, have a very specific ideal that keeps them from being prone to riots: turning the other cheek.

[Dug]

You are conflating crimes by Conservatives to riots. Look, I'm not going to buy in to your moral equivalency game that pretends like some riots are left wing and some are right wing. They are all left wing. That doesn't mean every Conservative is some great person, or that they don't commit crimes. I'm stating an inconvenient truth, and you are trying to spin your way out of it. But, there is nowhere to spin to, since there are never any riots that involve Conservatives. At least, not in my lifetime.

I'm not claiming that these riots aren't happening at leftist protests. What I'm saying is you're attributing them to the left when the majority of the left is condemning the actions and groups like antifa and black bloc are taking credit for the rioting. Much like majority of the right condemns the actions of Dylan Roof and Alexander Bissonnette. The blame should be placed on the ones rioting and committing the violence.

But if you just want to make a matter of fact statement that these riots are happening at leftist protests then sure but originally your point was that violence in the left was rising. I disagree.

[TITAN308]

I'm not claiming that these riots aren't happening at leftist protests. What I'm saying is you're attributing them to the left when the majority of the left is condemning the actions and groups like antifa and black bloc are taking credit for the rioting. Much like majority of the right condemns the actions of Dylan Roof and Alexander Bissonnette. The blame should be placed on the ones rioting and committing the violence.

So why isn't the left punching them when they encounter them at riots?

Seems a good question considering the content of this thread.

[Dug]

So why isn't the left punching them when they encounter them at riots?

Seems a good question considering the content of this thread.

Because it's not their job nor do they have the authority to stop them. They run the risk of getting arrested themselves trying to stop these people.

[Deleted]

Ironic, coming from the person calling people "pussies" from behind the safety of your made-up internet avatar.

How is it ironic? You have no idea what I do in public life outside of this board.

[Dug]

How is it ironic? You have no idea what I do in public life outside of this board.

Are you a navy seal with over 300 confirmed kills?

[Tijuana]

I'm not claiming that these riots aren't happening at leftist protests. What I'm saying is you're attributing them to the left when the majority of the left is condemning the actions and groups like antifa and black bloc are taking credit for the rioting. Much like majority of the right condemns the actions of Dylan Roof and Alexander Bissonnette. The blame should be placed on the ones rioting and committing the violence.

But if you just want to make a matter of fact statement that these riots are happening at leftist protests then sure but originally your point was that violence in the left was rising. I disagree.

I think you are taking my point well beyond it's intentions but, if I did mean that, I don't disagree with your refutation. Your point about individual criminals is ridiculous though. Criminals gonna crime. They have nothing to do with any definable movement.

- - - Updated - - -

It's what you would have wanted to start the bickering with, but that would have made you appear even worse.

Are feminism rallies riots or demonstrations?

OMG DING DING DING DING!

We FINALLY have a complete thought, in the form of a question! Fantastic!

Any protest that commits crimes against other people, or their property, is a riot.

[downnola]

Are you a navy seal with over 300 confirmed kills?

Are you kidding me you little piece of shit i’ll have you know i graduated top of my politics class and i’ve been involved in privilege checking with over 150 confirmed political demonstrations i’m trained in conflict resolution and i was the most oppressed person in my entire upper middle class high school you are nothing to me but another cultural appropriator i will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which have never been seen on this side of the 49th parallel mark my words you think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the internet think again fucker, as we speak i’m checking with my anarcho-communist analyst brigade for your location so you better be prepared to deal with some molotov cocktails and angry feminists flying through your window yOU’RE FUCKING DEAD CHERRY! i can be anywhere at any time and i can kill you in over seven hundred ways and that’s just with me boring you to death while i talk about privilege not only am i extensively trained in hotline management but i have access to an entire arsenal of sociological articles to prove my point and i will use them to wipe your fucking face off the earth you little shit if only you had known what oppressed retribution your cultural appropriation would unleash then maybe you would have held your fucking tongue but you couldn’t you’re fucking dead kiddo


[Infracted]

[Dug]

I think you are taking my point well beyond it's intentions but, if I did mean that, I don't disagree with your refutation. Your point about individual criminals is ridiculous though. Criminals gonna crime. They have nothing to do with any definable movement.

Why does that not apply to rioters then? What they are are criminals and as you say criminals gonna crime. Sure they make their claims that they're doing it in opposition of the right wing but the people committing the massacres are also claiming they did it for their own ideologies.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you kidding me you little piece of shit i’ll have you know i graduated top of my politics class and i’ve been involved in privilege checking with over 150 confirmed political demonstrations i’m trained in conflict resolution and i was the most oppressed person in my entire upper middle class high school you are nothing to me but another cultural appropriator i will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which have never been seen on this side of the 49th parallel mark my words you think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the internet think again fucker, as we speak i’m checking with my anarcho-communist analyst brigade for your location so you better be prepared to deal with some molotov cocktails and angry feminists flying through your window yOU’RE FUCKING DEAD CHERRY! i can be anywhere at any time and i can kill you in over seven hundred ways and that’s just with me boring you to death while i talk about privilege not only am i extensively trained in hotline management but i have access to an entire arsenal of sociological articles to prove my point and i will use them to wipe your fucking face off the earth you little shit if only you had known what oppressed retribution your cultural appropriation would unleash then maybe you would have held your fucking tongue but you couldn’t you’re fucking dead kiddo

10/10 I never get tired of the variations on this pasta

[Tijuana]

Why does that not apply to rioters then? What they are are criminals and as you say criminals gonna crime. Sure they make their claims that they're doing it in opposition of the right wing but the people committing the massacres are also claiming they did it for their own ideologies.

- - - Updated - - -



10/10 I never get tired of the variations on this pasta

Uh...hrm. Trying to bend over backwards with you here. Hang on. It's hard to type upside down.

Ok. The difference is that a riot stems from a movement, and a gathering of people. Lone gunmen are generally just crazy people acting out on their own. Both are wrong. Both should be spoken against, in the strongest terms.

Instead of comparing apples to oranges, why not just make apples to apples comparisons? The Tea Party protests are easily the largest political protests since the 1960s. Yet, not one riot. Not a one. No property destroyed. No persons harmed. In fact, the joke was that when they left, the areas were cleaner than when they got there. Ask yourself this: Was it effective? How effective? Then, ask yourself this: Were the Ferguson riots effective? I think there is valuable lesson in that point. When you harm others and destroy property, at a minimum, you lose the people you harmed and whose property you destroyed.

[Deleted]

Are you a navy seal with over 300 confirmed kills?

No - Army Ranger with over 9000!

[Enthusiastic Steward]

Interesting points. I would argue that it's just that Liberalism tends to attract the disenfranchised, due to identity politics.

Except I could turn that around and argue about what happens when Liberalism is the establishment and its identity is grounded in the urban centers. Rural conservatives would in due course feel and become the 'disenfranchised'. Urban Liberalism is (was) the franchise, and Clinton promised more of the same.

And while I don't want to make any sort of moral superiority argument, I would argue that Christians, most of whom are Conservatives, have a very specific ideal that keeps them from being prone to riots: turning the other cheek.

I think you can make a fair case for church in general fostering a stronger sense of community. But I think a broader factor here is simple demographics. Urban centers tend to be more liberal and most ran blue last election. You are least likely to know anyone you encounter on the street and while you may feel an affinity for a city as a whole you are most likely at best going to be invested in your immediate local community; the city is simply too big for anything beyond that. This is doubly compounded if you live in a satellite city or suburb - if you go into the city, or into an entirely different neighborhood/community, you have no direct investment in your immediate surroundings. You are less likely be directly impacted by any negative consequence of violent protest/riotous behavior beyond you yourself getting personally arrested.

By contrast in a more conservative rural town/small city you are more likely to be directly invested in your surroundings, or at least personally connected to someone who is. Any consequence of unrest will likely have immediate tangential, if not direct, consequences to your daily life or that of someone you know well. This is oversimplifying, but I think there's something to be said about gathering in an angry mob in a city well removed from your home where you don't know anybody around you and smashing a window, vs doing the same thing in your hometown while someone across the street goes, "Isn't that the Stevenson boy? Did you see him break that window? I'm telling your mother!" and it also turns out your friend works at the business whose window you just broke.