That is quite wrong. Both media and law enforcement spend a lot of time talking about individual acts of violence committed based on particular ideologies, including investigating organizations of individuals who seem likely to commit such crimes. Read the GAO Report linked earlier.
So I don’t think your distinction is meaningful at all.
You’re welcome.
Yeah, it’s going to turn into a real shit sandwich one of these days. Here are some in Arizona from a little while back.
I don’t know how many times you can have groups of combative individuals meet up and beat each other with sticks, fists, and pepper spray, while their allies on both sides stand by with rifles held at the ready, before someone decides it’s go time and opens fire, but I get the impression we might have the misfortune of finding out.
ETA: or maybe we’ve already hit that point, I seem to remember some protester shooting a counterprotester in Washington or something. I can’t recall the details at the moment.
ETA2: and of course there was the Dallas shooting spree, but that wasn’t really exchanging fire between two protest groups
And therein lies part of the problem. An Anti-facist is someone who opposes fascism. There really is no more ideology than that.
The article that you linked talked about the “Redneck Revolt”, and that members of it have joined the counter-protest and were armed and patrolling. I suspect that the picture that is shown in that photo is of this group.
Not that this group is not part of the anti-fascists, as that is what there are there to do, to stand against the encroachment of fascism into our country, but they aren’t anti-fa, in that there really isn’t an anti-fa group to go join and have meetings and stuff like there is for their own group.
“Organizations of individuals” is just a longer and more confusing way of saying “organizations”. As opposed to just plain old “individuals”.
Yes, I agree. Thanks for the editing tip. Please feel free to change my post accordingly in your mind.
I already did.
Which is why your post was moot. Because you compared incidents committed by plain old individuals on the one side to incidents committed by “organizations of individuals” (=organizations) on the other.
Uh, no. I have very little fondness for the Antifa crowd, and fascism isn’t a well defined or particularly useful term anyway, but this is not the way any serious analyst (whatever their political conviction) would define fascism.
Black separatists are almost by definition much less influential and therefore much less dangerous than white supremacists. There are five white people in this country for every one black person, and only one of these two groups has ties to the president.
Organizations are composed of individuals. All actions are committed by individuals. You refuse to explain or take questions about what you mean by an organization committing an action because you realize that you have no coherent definition that will capture the crimes you want while excluding the ones you don’t.
I’m really trying to understand this paragraph, but it’s not just making sense to me. “Not that this group is not part of the anti-fascists … but they aren’t anti-fa…”??? 
I get that “antifa” is a looser-affiliated movement, more like BLM than, for example, the NRA which has official lists of dues-paying members, elections for leadership, etc., but it seems crazy to me to pretend that the Redneck Revolt / John Brown Gun Club group isn’t an Antifa group. They very clearly are. Check out their website or Facebook page. They’ve got a section titled “FIGHT BACK AGAINST FASCISM” and another one called “ANTI-FASCIST NEWS”. The event in Arizona back in March, where the photo came from, is described, by them, as “… in solidarity with Anti-Fascist Action Phoenix.”
Somewhat oddly, I find I am not as concerned about this development. I hugely oppose open or concealed carry. But I have been amazed and thrilled at the lack of shootings related to increased carry. Good on the carriers.
I suspect a significant aspect of (at least some) carriers is to provoke. I hope the liberal carriers are able to restrain themselves from getting provoked and shooting.
I’m glad it is easy to do the math; that means that anyone can correct my silly error!
So to clear things up, we can now all agree that right-wing groups are responsible for 67 incidents that cost 24 lives. And left-wing groups are responsible for 14 incidents that cost 12 lives.
And notwithstanding Fotheringay-Phipps’s “nuh-uh fact don’t count!” dismissals of actual facts, we can now all agree that he is simply wrong in his bizarre assertion that right-winger groups have become comparatively peaceful.
No. The dangerous Alt-Right outnumbers Antifa by hundreds to one.
Not sure of the future though, as last weekend was a big recruitment aid for Antifa, and perhaps the neo-Nazis as well.
What percent of protesters had knives or guns? How about counter-protesters? I expect more to be armed next riot(s).
Out of curiosity – look at this event. Basically, a lone person causes the evacuation of a science building, and as people congregate outside, then crashes his car into the crowd. He exits the car with a knife and starts an attack.
The perpetrator is killed by police, but investigations find that he was inspired by ISIL and Al Qaeda propaganda, but there appears to be no evidence that he communicated with them.
Based on your restrictive criteria, quoted above, this incident should not be considered an act of Islamic terrorism, because the individual did not act as part of a group? Am I getting this right?
I would say it’s an act of Islamic terror but not the work of an Islamic terror organization.
[The relevant authorities also approach things along that same line of thought, and generally make that distinction when appropriate.]
You may be thinking of the Black Bloc, who are sometimes called “antifa” but who mainly show up at peaceful (left wing) protests and turn them violent. Thus the public and the press turn agains the protestors.
Thus they are actually worse than the Alt-right, who are of course inbred gibbering morons, but mostly are non-violent.
How did you determine the ratio? It’s not like each side has a sign-in sheet that we can count up. How do you know It’s not just tens-to-one or worse, thousands-to-one?
So we agree acts of individuals, insofar as they are inspired by a particular ideology, can be described as “Islamic terrorism,” “right-wing terrorism,” or “left-wing terrorism.”
What difference does it make as to whether a terrorist conspired with others to conduct the attack? If a Klanner shoots a black person, why do you think that is substantively different than two or more Klanners conspiring to kill the same black person? Personally, I see no difference. The Klan murdered someone.
I pointed to news reports that the violent, hooded types (of various flavors) constituted a “small fraction” of overall anti-alt-right protesters. Specifically, at the Berkeley protest in February, the general estimate was maybe one in ten was an agitator in the protests against Milo whatshisface.
On the other hand, I look at the C’ville protests, and I just cannot imagine that “normal” pro-statue protesters, that is people not affiliated with the various racist groups that organized the protest, constitute anything but a tiny, tiny percentage of those who turned out. Do you disagree?
Even allowing for your dubious lumping of groups, 24 deaths vs 12 deaths is close enough for me to consider them to be comparable in levels of violence.
