Sure, there have been some on “my side” of the protests that I can call out. I don’t like the violence, on either side. But pretending that leftists were the problem in charlottesville doesn’t really make you look like you are debating seriously here.
I’ll call out my side when they use violence to oppose nazis and white supremacists, and I suppose you can call out the nazis and white supremacists when they use violence as well.
The only difference is, is that I also will call out nazis and white supremacists for being nazis and white supremacists, even when they preach their hate peacefully.
Good question - I’m continually dismayed that so many try to make excuses for white supremacist violence and terrorism (like that it’s a response to left wing violence).
Depends on definaition of terrorism. If it is actually murdering for a cuase, that’s fairly limited. If it is threatening or participating in violence for a cuase, that’s a bit more widespread.
Story is not fully out yet, and it is hard to say exactly how it played out, but if it is true on the surface, that these people came in to the restaurant and insulted an interracial couple for no reason other then their existing as an interracial couple, and then started a fight because she wouldn’t take their friendly advice to leave him, would you consider that terrorism, or just racist assholes?
I don’t ask as a gotcha, I ask because I’m divided on it myself, and because it will help to quantify what actually counts as terrorism in your view.
Hmmm … that doesn’t really seem like the same thing at all. You said “white supremacists regularly use terrorism”. Not just that they, and others, talk about it, start making plans for it, but that they actually do “use terrorism”, and not just infrequently, but “regularly”. I can think of a couple of examples that I think would fall under the headline of “white supremacists use terrorism”: the Charlottesville vehicle ramming attack. Okay, scratch that, I can think of one this year. A couple of years ago was Dylan Roof’s killing spree. Going back even further, there was the Sikh temple massacre in Wisconsin, maybe 5 years ago. Am I missing some major incidents that you think fall under the headline “white supremacist terrorism”, not just this year but in recent years (to expand the scope a bit)? Not “investigated by the FBI” (because - thanks to the HRC email investigation - we’re all well aware that an FBI investigation doesn’t indicate wrong-doing) but actual, completed uses of “terrorism” by white supremacists?
If only there were some way of changing a President, some sort of election every few years. That might do it. But that’s pie in the sky of course, Trump and Pence being dictators for life.
According to a chart in your cite 43% of those 150 incidents are judged to be “white supremacist”. Unfortunately, that cite appears to have the same defect as the “1,000 FBI investigations” one: in the chart down below, it says “Note: Incidents include terrorist acts, attempted acts, plots and conspiracies.”
Please don’t misunderstand: people plotting terrorist attacks are assholes, they’re just not the same thing as your original claim, which I understood to apply to actual attacks, not plots that may never materialize.
I don’t know. I suppose you could call it that by some definitions, but I certainly don’t think the “white supremacist” label applies there. It was motivated by antagonism towards the federal government, not racial animus.
It wasn’t an attempt at a gotcha, it was an attempt to understand a statement that came from a poster that I generally consider well-grounded and not prone to hyperbole but was, nevertheless, quite at odds with my own recollection of recent events. I wanted to understand it better.
ETA: apologies if it came off feeling like a gotcha.
No problem. I go for gotchas too sometimes, even when I recognize it’s just silly point scoring.
Not that I’ll excuse you for your sin of supporting Trump (and thus, IMO, aiding white supremacism is a small but real way), but going for a gotcha isn’t the worst thing in the world.
Damn, I was gonna come in and say something snarky, but ya’ll are being so nice to each other.
In reference to the OP, I am on the fence about the actual social good of protesting in general, but I am 99% sure this event is just a way for people to make themselves feel better. There were similar protests immediately following the election, that Republicans seemed to believe were an attempt by liberals to change the election’s outcome, but were (at least for those I know involved) more about communicating to minorities in the US as well as the global community at large that they stood firmly against racist fearmongering and all the shit that came with Trump’s administration. This was viewed as especially critical because it was a major psychological blow to a lot of racial and sexual minorities who were terrified that violence would escalate against them. (Whether those fears were or are founded is a good subject for debate in another thread.) My point is, the protests had nothing to do with changing the outcome, they were intended to act as a message of solidarity for those people who felt left behind and for people to reassure one another that the world was not going to hell in a handbasket on their watch.
I can’t speak to this particular protest, the premise seems a bit silly to me. Trump will either go, or he won’t. I doubt a protest will impact anything one way or another. Honestly, I wish people would get out of the streets and start writing letters to their representatives. Especially those in Republican states who have been complicit or silent about the serious flaws of our current administration. I guess liberals in liberal states don’t have much better to do than protest.
Over at Crooks and Liars, they are suggesting that there’s something kinda fishy going on here. It would appear that the massive lefty protests themselves aren’t nearly so publicly known or important as the tighty righty reaction to them. (Alarming examples abound at the given cite. Persons averse to liberal cooties are advised to proceed with shields up, full power. Cognitive energy can remain at its usual setting.)
How much does “antifas” actually exist, and how much is a boogy-person dreamed up to scare the tighty righty extreme? Dunno. Don’t know anybody who identifies with “antifas”, not even amonst the most addled “Bernie Bros”. Didn’t hear anything about this thing that all lefties know about until friend Hurr told me.
Which I find decidedly odd. Been a lefty since I was old enough to know better, and yet he’s the one with his finger on the pulse of the left? Wha?
Suspicious, but not convinced that: this whole magilla is nothing more than a few leftward malcontents who fitfully dream of massive protests of Trump, as an entity, rather than protesting a policy or prospective law. And that the InfoWars wing of the reactionary right is blowing this up into some sort of monster, so they got something to slay.
Now, of course, it could just be the Shit Disturbers, who have no set political persuasion other than a feverish desire to see ugly shit happen.
Question to the audience: those of you are leftward of Calvin Coolidge…when did you hear about this? Did you hear it from an lefty source that you respect, personal or otherwise?
I had never heard of Antifa until HD started posting threads about them. Ditto on this protest.
My liberal friends are busy talking about whether they’re obligated to burn all of Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s books because someone blogged about him raping her. Also what to do about Kevin Spacey? Okay, a handful are interested in the Russia investigation, but they’re Canadian.