Anti-antifa = fa

[Barnabas]

Again, he was not.
He was backed by corporate cartels/elite.

- - - Updated - - -


MMO-C does love nazis.

Seems to love antifa also. Both are idiots. If you want totalitarianism move to north korea.

[ripped]

Going 'No uh' without an argument is pointless.

Laurcus gave you a history lesson. You ignored him.

[JohnBrown1917]

Seems to love antifa also. Both are idiots. If you want totalitarianism move to north korea.

No matter how much you repeat it, antifa will not become totalitarianism. Stop confusing the black bloc with all of antifa, and putting them on the same level as the nazis is just pathetic. Nazis have killed more even in the last decade than Antifa has since WWII.. Well, unless you want to count ISIS, does ISIS count? Are they bad for using violence on them?

- - - Updated - - -

Laurcus gave you a history lesson. You ignored him.

...what lesson? Repeating himself? Not having a counter-argument to mine? You know you can't be a socialist and have the support of the corporate elite at the same time, right?

[Draco-Onis]

National Socialist German Workers' Party (1921–45) Yeah they were. Hitler was a big time socialist. I find it funny that all of these nut jobs bitching about those skinhead nut jobs WHILE they promote socialism dont even realize that Hitler (those skinhead nut job's hero) was also a socialist.

Birds of a feather...

I know the name is confusing but their policies were always far right and they quickly were renamed the Nazi party. Hitler strongly rejected capitalism, socialism and communism, you should simply read up on it beyond simply just the name.

[Barnabas]

No matter how much you repeat it, antifa will not become totalitarianism. Stop confusing the black bloc with all of antifa, and putting them on the same level as the nazis is just pathetic. Nazis have killed more even in the last decade than Antifa has since WWII.. Well, unless you want to count ISIS, does ISIS count? Are they bad for using violence on them?

- - - Updated - - -


...what lesson? Repeating himself? Not having a counter-argument to mine? You know you can't be a socialist and have the support of the corporate elite at the same time, right?

Sure they won't. In order for a socialist type economy to replace capitalism it will take a great totalitarian effort to achieve that. If they aren't willing to fight for that then they serve absolutely no purpose except fueling racism. Either way they are wasting their time and everyone else's with this nonsense. Like I said move to north korea if you want socialism. Take the nazis with you too.

[Shazdk]

The problem people have with both sides is the lack of nuance. Everyone in antifa isn't in favor of burning things down. Everybody on the right isn't a Nazi. That's all there is to it.

I just want equal coverage and the light to be shined on ANYONE who promotes political violence or violence of any sort, whether you support leftist, Nazi, or <insert cause name here>. And no, violence isn't justified when someone waves a sign at you or says some intolerant stuff on the street. Speech isn't violence. If someone directly incites another person to commit violence or other crimes, that is a crime. Simply espousing intemperate views isn't a crime, and if you want to make it a crime, you're more than welcome to move to the UK, where that's already the case.

Deplatforming someone who has views different to yours only allows them to point to that and use it as ammunition (figuratively speaking, don't go crazy) against you when these individuals try to attract a following. Allowing for debate and discourse will let the merit of your ideas defeat theirs in an open forum. If you believe in the moral righteousness / intrinsic worth of your ideas, why are you afraid to let them be tested head-to-head against ideas that you consider to be of lesser moral or philosophical worth? The VAST majority of people who in favor of things like free speech rallies are not racists, Nazis, or some intolerant boogiemen who're out to murder you. I fully support things like free speech rallies, and I was a Clinton voter.

If your argument is that giving people a platform is legitimizing their views, then too damn bad. Unless someone is directly threatening you or someone else in a credible manner, they can say whatever they want. If you want to start a nonprofit dedicated toward building supermajority coalitions in national and state legislatures to amend the Consitution to fit your view of how the country should be, go for it. Until then, that's the way it is!

[Doctor Amadeus]

Who the heck are these lefty paramilitary's called the "John Brown Gun Club" protecting Antifa protesters ?

Jeepers, no wonder there are 200,000 signatures saying Antifa should be a terrorist organization.

Civil War anytime soon USA ??

So group called lefties gets armed now it's Civil War huh LOL

- - - Updated - - -

I was joking. My channel is just for gaming. I think this whole thing is silly. I detest identity politics and moral relativism. It's what the democrat party has devolved into. What happened to the progressives? Did they get sick of this nonsense that doesn't progress anything in this country?

I don't know I don't speak for anybody but me, but for me progressives eliminating Nazi's and white supremacist would be a great start. #NotSorry

[OrcsRLame]

No matter how much you repeat it, antifa will not become totalitarianism. Stop confusing the black bloc with all of antifa, and putting them on the same level as the nazis is just pathetic. Nazis have killed more even in the last decade than Antifa has since WWII.. Well, unless you want to count ISIS, does ISIS count? Are they bad for using violence on them?

- - - Updated - - -


...what lesson? Repeating himself? Not having a counter-argument to mine? You know you can't be a socialist and have the support of the corporate elite at the same time, right?

I have two questions that I would like some no nonsense answers to.

1. Why can't you be a socialist and have the support of the corporate elite at the same time?
2. What matters more, how a group self identifies or how a group is identified by others?

- - - Updated - - -

So group called lefties gets armed now it's Civil War huh LOL





I don't know I don't speak for anybody but me, but for me progressives eliminating Nazi's and white supremacist would be a great start. #NotSorry

I think it was like last week when I said this culture war will likely turn to civil war at some point, and like 7 people laughed at me and told me I'm sensationalizing things for the benefit of the Nazis and that I'm retarded and no one should listen to me.

Somehow this feels strangely like playing Mass Effect 2. Ya see the Reapers coming and nobody believes you until Earth gets invaded.

[Doctor Amadeus]

1. Why can't you be a socialist and have the support of the corporate elite at the same time?

I am an authoritarian left, considered militant left, regressive left and or Neo Liberal. I say that only to give you where I am coming from.

Socialism is simply a ideology that says that accumulated wealth should be shared, Corporate elites are typically into the belief of a free market and Capitalism. These two ideas are in conflict with one another, but not always.

There are some instances where socialism might work with both. I believe it can, some might refer to that as democratic socialism.

But the Answer is because in general you have two opposite positions who's core ideologies or parts of their ideologies such as Corporate elites is in direct conflict, with Socialism.

2. What matters more, how a group self identifies or how a group is identified by others?

Both traditionally, but right now neither, because deffinitions have been blurred sometimes intentionally and through the nature of change and confusion. Right now action is more important where someone stands, who they support what they contribute towards, mind, body, and money (Resources).

I think it was like last week when I said this culture war will likely turn to civil war at some point, and like 7 people laughed at me and told me I'm sensationalizing things for the benefit of the Nazis and that I'm retarded and no one should listen to me.

Somehow this feels strangely like playing Mass Effect 2. Ya see the Reapers coming and nobody believes you until Earth gets invaded.

I wouldn't laugh at that, but I don't think that is where we are now, do this if you would research talk radio, or actually rent the movie Talk Radio directed by Oliver Stone, we been here before in the U.S in terms of Civil conflicts as it pertains to ideology.


Now whether it be one instance of this resulting in nothing, vs another where it did, I am not sure it's possible to exactly predict where society goes now, but I don't think you are way off.

[OrcsRLame]

I am an authoritarian left, considered militant left, regressive left and or Neo Liberal. I say that only to give you where I am coming from.

Socialism is simply a ideology that says that accumulated wealth should be shared, Corporate elites are typically into the belief of a free market and Capitalism. These two ideas are in conflict with one another, but not always.

There are some instances where socialism might work with both. I believe it can, some might refer to that as democratic socialism.

But the Answer is because in general you have two opposite positions who's core ideologies or parts of their ideologies such as Corporate elites is in direct conflict, with Socialism.




Both traditionally, but right now neither, because deffinitions have been blurred sometimes intentionally and through the nature of change and confusion. Right now action is more important where someone stands, who they support what they contribute towards, mind, body, and money (Resources).




I wouldn't laugh at that, but I don't think that is where we are now, do this if you would research talk radio, or actually rent the movie Talk Radio directed by Oliver Stone, we been here before in the U.S in terms of Civil conflicts as it pertains to ideology.


Now whether it be one instance of this resulting in nothing, vs another where it did, I am not sure it's possible to exactly predict where society goes now, but I don't think you are way off.

On the topic of socialism vs corporate elites, I think that you're mostly right, but I would throw in an addendum. Corporate elite is a demographic. Socialism is a political ideology. I see no reason why a corporate elite person cannot be fully in favor of socialism and against all the free market stuff that they support. I see it kind of like the stereotype of the self hating Jew. The wealthy businessman acting against their own interests.

Concerning definitions, I agree completely. I think in Wiemar Germany the left-right dichotomy broke down pretty hard, and I think the same thing is happening in America today. I still maintain that America will not get nearly as bad, because we have not had another WW1. Feeding 41 million men into a meat grinder is bound to fuck up society in horrific and unimaginable ways, and I don't think our radicals will match that level of destruction and brutality without a similar crucible. But I digress.

I think Civil War is coming but it won't be 160 million Americans vs 160 million Americans. It will be ~100k people total shooting each other in the streets in specific battleground states. Large enough to un-ironically call it a second American Civil War, small enough that it won't be apocalyptic.


Also, one other thing. You may be regressive or neo-liberal or whatever. In fact, I used to dislike you quite a bit. I don't know if you've changed or if I have or if it's just the topic, but I find you to be one of the easier people around here to talk to, and I appreciate that. There's so many people around here that are obviously arguing for points, like they want you to agree with them or shut up, and I don't think you're like that at all. You seem genuinely interested in finding the truth through dialogue, even if you have closely held beliefs that you cling to.

[Doctor Amadeus]

On the topic of socialism vs corporate elites, I think that you're mostly right, but I would throw in an addendum. Corporate elite is a demographic. Socialism is a political ideology. I see no reason why a corporate elite person cannot be fully in favor of socialism and against all the free market stuff that they support. I see it kind of like the stereotype of the self hating Jew. The wealthy businessman acting against their own interests.

Think of it like brain surgery to remove a tumor, or heart surgery to fix a valve, is there just one stroke, once you cut in, sew it all back up and that is it, or is their nuance, If the valve needs to be replaced, or the tumor has to be separated from the brain. That much is clear black and white what needs to happen.

But how do you do that.

Now apply that to society entire civilizations made of of billions of people with as much difference and moving parts. That is what we are working with, and thus far we have approached these problems like a low intellect cousin a Kitchen knife and a few napkins.


Now that I explained the problem here is the solution.

1. Everybody needs to understand what the problem is even if they aren't operating.
2. Those involved the patient and those responsible for fixing the problem the government and corporate elite capable need to have the intellect to even start.
3. We need to come up with a plan and what everybody needs to do especially those tasked with fixing it.
4. Then decided what it is we need to do, and then what we want to do.
5. We need to understand the risks if we don't the risks if we don't and accept them and adapt if their is loss

Socialism is a treatment for some problems but not the solution to everything, the same can be said of capitalism and markets that drive innovation and progress.

Concerning definitions, I agree completely. I think in Wiemar Germany the left-right dichotomy broke down pretty hard, and I think the same thing is happening in America today. I still maintain that America will not get nearly as bad, because we have not had another WW1. Feeding 41 million men into a meat grinder is bound to fuck up society in horrific and unimaginable ways, and I don't think our radicals will match that level of destruction and brutality without a similar crucible. But I digress.

I think Civil War is coming but it won't be 160 million Americans vs 160 million Americans. It will be ~100k people total shooting each other in the streets in specific battleground states. Large enough to un-ironically call it a second American Civil War, small enough that it won't be apocalyptic.

Germany realized Socialism worked, they just decided it wasn't for but a few along with others. I think however you do have a pretty reasonable and logical idea based on the past and the understanding of the elements involved right now.

But it isn't magic, isolate what the choices are and what is behind those choices, and you can know what's coming within reasonable margins.

Also, one other thing. You may be regressive or neo-liberal or whatever. In fact, I used to dislike you quite a bit. I don't know if you've changed or if I have or if it's just the topic, but I find you to be one of the easier people around here to talk to, and I appreciate that. There's so many people around here that are obviously arguing for points, like they want you to agree with them or shut up, and I don't think you're like that at all. You seem genuinely interested in finding the truth through dialogue, even if you have closely held beliefs that you cling to.

If you dislikes me for the right reasons great, if you like me for the right reasons great. But underline I have to be who I am which hasn't changed.

But changing for no reason is not me, I have always sought the reasons behind what is just in front of me, and the only thing I accept is that I don't know, so if I mean to find out, then making up my mind on the wrong things, just hurts me in the long run.

Someone hates me, I rather know why, then someone who pretends they don't. Labels aren't important to me, because they are easy, talk is easy, being tested, weathering ideology when it matters that is important.

If I lie sooner or later in a matter of time you will figure that out more than likely, and what is worse if I lie to you or anyone else then on some level I have to lie to myself, live that lie long enough and I will destroy myself. Because what happens when a person reaches a point where they don't know who they are, what they believe or why and worse they can't even trust themselves. Because they put up so much for everybody else.

Life is fluid and labels can change, but for those who lack understanding or seeking better questions or whats behind the answers, none of this matters anyways.

If I change I have to know the reason. Because I had to develop a real reason along with logic to develop in the first place.

You seem to have a natural curiosity which is evident you are pretty intelligent. I like that you come across as sincere.

So whether I like or dislike you is irrelevant. I enjoy the opportunity to compare notes.

[Fudal]

Well I would say if that was what you got from what I said on your own you could certainly draw your own conclusions from that.

My simple point is about what happened, I didn't say it was flawed or it could have been done a better way, but what I am saying is don't try to play it for more than it is.



This statement here clearly shows you have no idea of what the fuck you are talking about, you can say their tactics didn't work you could even say you disagree, but to try to equate the Black Panther movement with Violence, is complete and utter ignorant or disingenuous bullshit.



Again complete horse shit nobody said that, and by that I mean there was and has never been an over all fucking consensus, legitimate or otherwise.

The fact that you are trying to defend the black Panther Party and their actions or rewriting history by saying they were not a violent group is laughable .

Black Panther Party

"The Black Panther Party (BPP) is a black extremist organization founded in Oakland, California in 1966. It advocated the use of violence and guerilla tactics to overthrow the U.S. government. In 1969, the FBI’s Charlotte Field Office opened an investigative file on the BPP to track its militant activities, income, and expenses. This release consists of Charlotte's file on BPP activities from 1969 to 1976." https://vault.fbi.gov/Black%20Panther%20Party%20

[Doctor Amadeus]

The fact that you are trying to defend the black Panther Party and their actions or rewriting history by saying they were not a violent group is laughable .

Black Panther Party

"The Black Panther Party (BPP) is a black extremist organization founded in Oakland, California in 1966. It advocated the use of violence and guerilla tactics to overthrow the U.S. government. In 1969, the FBI’s Charlotte Field Office opened an investigative file on the BPP to track its militant activities, income, and expenses. This release consists of Charlotte's file on BPP activities from 1969 to 1976." https://vault.fbi.gov/Black%20Panther%20Party%20

Yep which was and is today complete and utter bullshit, they were targeted by a racist white supremacist FBI head, and supported by the majority white segregationist who openly murdered and killed black people, and not much unlike today, they were vilified while white supremacist not so much.

[Fudal]

Yep which was and is today complete and utter bullshit, they were targeted by a racist white supremacist FBI head, and supported by the majority white segregationist who openly murdered and killed black people, and not much unlike today, they were vilified while white supremacist not so much.

I suppose that you will also say that the weathermen were peace loving socialists who only wanted to end racism and protest the unjust war in Vietnam.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground

[Zython]

People still trying to defend a group that supports totalitarianism?

Yeah. It's really amazing how people consider fighting fascism to be a bad thing.

[Gersemi]

and that proves me wrong how?

I'm not trying to prove you wrong.
I'm just saying that we make a big deal out of how much support MLK got with his peaceful movement. Which is great and all, but he was shot dead anyway. We see peaceful figures be assassinated all of the time. Maybe its time to fight fire with fire?

[Doctor Amadeus]

I suppose that you will also say that the weathermen were peace loving socialists who only wanted to end racism and protest the unjust war in Vietnam.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground

I wouldn't say that about the weathermen because that isn't a fact, the weatherman were a different organization that represented a different ideology about a different range of issues.

I don't know the weathermen as well as I am familiar with the Black Panther Party, and they were about defense in the face of white supremacist aggression. The weathermen as near as I remember correctly were a militia group who were specifically opposed to the Vietnam war and Capitalism and did use violence and plans of attack with bombs and what not.

[Zython]

The problem people have with both sides is the lack of nuance. Everyone in antifa isn't in favor of burning things down. Everybody on the right isn't a Nazi. That's all there is to it.

I just want equal coverage and the light to be shined on ANYONE who promotes political violence or violence of any sort, whether you support leftist, Nazi, or <insert cause name here>. And no, violence isn't justified when someone waves a sign at you or says some intolerant stuff on the street. Speech isn't violence. If someone directly incites another person to commit violence or other crimes, that is a crime. Simply espousing intemperate views isn't a crime, and if you want to make it a crime, you're more than welcome to move to the UK, where that's already the case.

Deplatforming someone who has views different to yours only allows them to point to that and use it as ammunition (figuratively speaking, don't go crazy) against you when these individuals try to attract a following. Allowing for debate and discourse will let the merit of your ideas defeat theirs in an open forum. If you believe in the moral righteousness / intrinsic worth of your ideas, why are you afraid to let them be tested head-to-head against ideas that you consider to be of lesser moral or philosophical worth? The VAST majority of people who in favor of things like free speech rallies are not racists, Nazis, or some intolerant boogiemen who're out to murder you. I fully support things like free speech rallies, and I was a Clinton voter.

If your argument is that giving people a platform is legitimizing their views, then too damn bad. Unless someone is directly threatening you or someone else in a credible manner, they can say whatever they want. If you want to start a nonprofit dedicated toward building supermajority coalitions in national and state legislatures to amend the Consitution to fit your view of how the country should be, go for it. Until then, that's the way it is!

Let me ask you a question. Why didn't any of this stuff stop the Nazis the first time around?

[Fudal]

Yeah. It's really amazing how people consider fighting fascism to be a bad thing.

Just ask anyone who grew up in East Germany if they could tell the difference between the Communists and the Nazis ( the flag they saluted and the markings on their uniforms are the only real difference). They are both equally as bad. You can be opposed to Fascism, Communism, and Anarchists all simultaneously. You are not required to agree with one group in order to oppose the others. If you are initiating violence in order to suppress the rights of someone that you disagree with when they are acting lawfully then you are wrong, end of discussion

[Dastreus]

Where's the post where OP gets infracted and banned? I want a laugh from seeing a Fascist-supporter punished.