How are Antifa not Nazis?

[Ghostpanther]

The Nazis also had animal welfare as part of their platform. Gonna start claiming that the Humane Society are Nazis, now?

Of course not. I guess my point is, fascism is a poisonous snake no matter what it's color/shape is. If you try to silence those who oppose you with violence, you are associating with that same snake's tactics.

[Elegiac]

Of course not. I guess my point is, fascism is a poisonous snake no matter what it's color/shape is. If you try to silence those who oppose you with violence, you are associating with that same snake's tactics.

So yeah, cats are dogs because they both have fur. Lol.

[Ghostpanther]

No. Fascism means radical authoritarian nationalism. What you are doing is a formal logical fallacy:

1. If they are fascist, they silence opposition
2. Antifa silence opposition.
3. Therefore, antifa is fascist.

This is no different than:

1. If they are dogs, they will have fur.
2. Cats have fur.
3. Therefore, cats are dogs.

You are trying to limit the definition of fascism to suit your point.

Let's look at the meaning from the Webster's dictionary:


Definition of fascism

1
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Note the first two examples are not a government or anyone who may be in control. They want to be and try to silence those who oppose them so they can be.

[Deleted]

This whole "double standards" "find the irony" stuff the alt right seems to love as arguments is so boring

[Mekh]

Definition of fascism

1
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Note the first two examples are not a government or anyone who may be in control. They want to be and try to silence those who oppose them so they can be.

Fixed your formatting.

[xuros]

Sure, but how many buildings have they bombed? These are just children breaking windows.

They attack police, reporters, anyone who disagrees with them, burn buildings, AND break windows. You seem to have Left a bit out.

[Dezerte]

You are trying to limit the definition of fascism to suit your point.

Let's look at the meaning from the Webster's dictionary:


Definition of fascism

1
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Note the first two examples are not a government or anyone who may be in control. They want to be and try to silence those who oppose them so they can be.

You can't interpret definitions like that - you might as well be saying that all political philosophies/movements are fascist (if you read only the bold).

[Dextroden]

You won't get far with that argument - the right in the US have decided that the Nazis were a left based organization because they had a a social system.

(all while killing actual communists/socialist)

- - - Updated - - -


It was, back in the day Jews were considered sub-human pretty much everywhere in the west even in the US. I would say even worse that people regard Muslims these days, it's just that it has largely been forgotten now.

- - - Updated - - -


Well he pretty much is.

And Antifa pretty much are Nazis.

Inb4 definition rage.

[Zython]

You are trying to limit the definition of fascism to suit your point.

Let's look at the meaning from the Webster's dictionary:


Definition of fascism

1
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Note the first two examples are not a government or anyone who may be in control. They want to be and try to silence those who oppose them so they can be.

He...he never mentioned government in that post. His point is that people are saying all forms of direct political action are inherently fascist, which is not true. You're trying to draw a direct line between Nazis that got us the Holocaust, and anarchists that got us the weekend.

- - - Updated - - -

Want to quote it in context, since he was referencing how to prevent rioting, but hey, Gold star for googling shit quickly to attempt to prove someone wrong.

Ok, and your point is...

That's a revisionists simplists way of looking at it,

How is it revisionist?

and the rule of law means violence? I have no idea where you've decided that truth from.

*Sees what proponants of "rule of law" are doing in the name of it*
Yeah, I'm going to need evidence that this ISN'T true.

- - - Updated - - -

And Antifa pretty much are Nazis.

Inb4 definition rage.

"Definition rage", i.e. pointing out that words have meaning.

- - - Updated - - -

They attack police, reporters, anyone who disagrees with them, burn buildings, AND break windows. You seem to have Left a bit out.

Disagree about what?

[Jaylock]

How about we save the hyperbole for when antifa has killed 1 person, instead of equating broken windows with the systematic genocide of millions and millions of people?

We have real extremist organizations that actually kill people every year, but the alt-right is doing this endless crying about antifa because they want to muddy the waters. Why? Because all of those extremist organizations that actually kill people are on the right, and they don't want to own up to that. So, we sit here while everyone plays delusional little games where we pretend antifa is going to take down the American government next week.

- - - Updated - - -



None of those things are socialism. Marx and Engels came up with communism quite literally as an alternative to socialism.

Please do enlighten us as to what specific right leaning organizations are committing genocide and killing people.. oh that's right you can't because you are spewing left wing propaganda bullshit.

[Dextroden]

He...he never mentioned government in that post. His point is that people are saying all forms of direct political action are inherently fascist, which is not true. You're trying to draw a direct line between Nazis that got us the Holocaust, and anarchists that got us the weekend.

- - - Updated - - -



Ok, and your point is...



How is it revisionist?



*Sees what proponants of "rule of law" are doing in the name of it*
Yeah, I'm going to need evidence that this ISN'T true.

- - - Updated - - -



"Definition rage", i.e. pointing out that words have meaning.

- - - Updated - - -



Disagree about what?

Definitions matter.
Trump is pretty much a Nazi.

You sure you mean that?

[Fencers]

The video linked in the OP is not an explanation of the Antifa movement; it's a video editorial with a specific negative point of view of the Antifa movement.

Whatever the OP is saying after that is made suspect because he is reasoning, and asking us to, from a position with a specific biased notion that supposes a biased conclusion.

Frankly, this is a dumb exercise on an internet forum by some random dude.

[Mekh]

Want to quote it in context, since he was referencing how to prevent rioting, but hey, Gold star for googling shit quickly to attempt to prove someone wrong.

"But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear?...It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity."

— MLK, “The Other America,” 1968


“When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”

— MLK, “Revolution of Values,” 1967


"First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

— MLK, Letter From a Birmingham Jail, 1963

[Mekh]

So a mess of quotes that, once again, show he does not agree with Violent Riots? I have no idea if you are just trying to prove my point or indulge in some MLK trivia, I'm fine with either.

Lets be clear here: Him understanding WHY people do it isn't defense FOR doing it, as much as you would love to contort his words to allow the breaking of banks and looting.

Not going to speak for MLK while MLK's words speak for him. I just hate seeing him reduced to the white-washed mainstream "Hate can't drive out Hate"-version, because even this limited degree of sympathy for rioters would not fit the agenda he's being abused for today in order to silence protest in the "go protest where we don't have to care!"-way.

[Mekh]

At what point did I say not to protest? I am stating, factually, he personally protested WITHOUT violence, and very powerfully at that. The women's march recently? No violence, and powerful. I don't agree with it, but it was a GOOD protest.

Protesting is vital to a well-running democracy, and an important one. I don't agree with violent rioting, however.

To be clear: I don't agree with the Women's march because, in the first world, gender stuff is pretty damn equal, Places like UAE and such need a movement BADLY.

Getting off-topic here, but I am talking about the kind of people who want the right to plow through peaceful protests in the street like this: http://controversialtimes.com/instan...ge-protestors/

MLK and Gandhi became mis-remembered for simply being peaceful, while the fact that their strategy was all about civil disobedience, which very much includes breaking the law peacefully, has been forgotten.

If you have no issue with civil disobedience, we don't have to continue debating.

I've said my part about Antifa riots earlier in this thread: They are stupid, they are dangerous, but as another poster wrote in his rabies/cancer analogy, it's a lot less of a problem than the other side at the moment.

[Mekh]

I've always seen civil disobedience as VERY different to violent rioting. Things like pickets, strikes, stopping traffic (as long as you allow emergency vehicles such as ambos and firetrucks passage), stuff like that is fine, VERY important to protesting, since just walking in a circle with signs does very little. I don't disagree that MLK definitely backed this, and it's effective, but it's not harmful directly. Going to smash windows with bricks, taking around bats and shit and looking to incite violence isn't what I agree with, and that is the point I break off.

In the end, I guess we just had the same thought process but different views at it? I just don't think direct violence is necessary. You can do a lot of damage without physically doing so (Ala formed strikes against seen damage against a workforce).

Nothing in your post I disagree with.

It's just that there's at the moment people who wish to see civil disobedience punished more harshly and to the other side rioting more violently if you're going to be punished anyway comes naturally and the vicious cycle is complete.

[KrazyK923]

Lemme cut through all the bullshit for you. No one on the left talks, cares or even knows about Antifa. It is literally some ultra fringe left wing shit that right-wing media has blown up into a big to-do.

Exactly this.

Nobody on the left knows or cares about antifa. Its just another boogeyman of the right, like the "liberal media" they've whined about on FOX NEWS (A conservative channel that is #1 in ratings) for decades.

[PosPosPos]

Exactly this.

Nobody on the left knows or cares about antifa. Its just another boogeyman of the right, like the "liberal media" they've whined about on FOX NEWS (A conservative channel that is #1 in ratings) for decades.

The far right wouldn't be the far right if they didn't blame every single thing they do themselves on the left.

[KrazyK923]

The far right wouldn't be the far right if they didn't blame every single thing they do themselves on the left.

True enough. I suppose its the same as the far left blaming everything on the patriarchy and/or some other similarly-nefarious-and-also-somehow-worldwide-organization.

Both groups are peddling the exact same conspiracy.

[PosPosPos]

True enough. I suppose its the same as the far left blaming everything on the patriarchy and/or some other similarly-nefarious-and-also-somehow-worldwide-organization.

Both groups are peddling the exact same conspiracy.

Yeah, the only difference is that Antifa, if it even exists in the first place, probably consists of a very tiny part of the left.

On the other hand, the far right is very numerous. You can tell them by the number of votes for nationalist/fascist populist candidates.