They’re basically SJWs man. Do you really think Antifa stands for Capitalism? Do you think they care about the rule of law? They think America is an evil place that needs to be dismantled. They also have a deep hatred of white people (no, not just white supremacists) I know; I’ve hung out in their groups on FB and other places. They’re pretty much the diametric opposite of the Fascists. But neither extreme is healthy.
This is akin to the Weimar Republic stage of Germany.
It was probably a drunk Brit looking for some payback on uncle Sam.
Oh, not the Crawford County antifa. Those three guys are an existential threat to statues everywhere. Next thing you know they will be putting the Second Amendment in an orange jumpsuit and making a video of its beheading, and the Breitbart aficionados on this board will totally lose their shit.
Just wait: we are going to start hearing about antifa being the ISIL of thenUnited States. Because nobody ever has engaged in vandalism in the United States of America unless it was a plot to scare the crap out of Republicans.
I have to agree with most folks here. Founding slaver statues are unlikely to be attacked like the confederate slaver statues.
The attacks against the confederate statues are more about the sheer horror that someone would not want to stay in the US than about the subjugation of people on a mass scale. The founders did the exact same thing as the confederates, but they won. America loves a winner. Hell, Lincoln enslaved thousands to fight his war and he has a temple. A damn temple in the United States, imagine that.
Octopus wrote: “Yeah, like those guys. BTW, has it been established which side initiated the mob violence at that event? Because you realize the natural progression of normalized political violence is more political violence?”
Sides don’t do anything, individuals do. If I’m protesting a Klanazi rally and feel the need to stomp one of the despicable fuckers in their despicable face, the cops are fully justified in arresting me. The other Klanazis are not even slightly justified in attacking the person standing next to me. Probably a total stranger.
Reddy Mercury wrote: “They’re basically SJWs man.” How long do you think you can derisively dismiss people as Social Justice Warriors before people step forward who are prepared to act the part?
Is that a threat? “Call us SJWs, and we’ll tear down every statue and everything you hold dear”?
Good luck with that concept when two hostile mobs choose to engage.
Always easier to make weird assumptions about those who disagree with you than attempt to actually try and understand their point.
Name calling? You’re putting me on, right? The guys marching, sig-heiling, and waving swastika banners- calling a nazi a nazi is name calling? OK then.
It’s nice to see that this thread has shed its strawman slippery slope nonsense and has become what it was truly meant to be: about how much octopus prefers nazis to liberals and non-nazis.
So when you find yourself incapable of addressing the topic you resort to the default tactic of name calling? Do you honestly think your accusations are accurate?
I am a history nut. My sister would throw away pictures of people in our family she felt needed to be erased. She would cut others of photographs so that future generations wouldn’t know they existed. I suppose my own reactionary nature with regard to these issues comes from seeing how history can be violated in the wrong hands. I do not trust history to be in the hands of the Neo-Nazis, the Confederate sympathizers, SJWs, or Antifa. I feel each has an agenda beyond mere preservation of history.
The Confedrates wish to alter history by presenting the Confederates as valiant heroes; this is wrong and inaccurate. It is a distortion. The Neo-Nazis wish to venerate people they feel are exemplars of the “master race” and wish to repaint the Nazis as valiant heroes against “the Global Elites.” This is also wrong, and inaccurate. They use violence and fear to achieve these goals.
Antifa wants to deconstruct America completely and start anew; and the SJWs wish to impose their moral sentiments on who we are allowed to celebrate and who we are supposed to despise, and they use social intimidation tactics (doxxing, getting people fired from their jobs, etc) to entrench their narrative.
History should be left in the hands of qualified, objective observers and preservers. Ideally such people would take a gray view of morality and be able to separate the good aspects of a historical figure from the ill.
I honestly think you argued that those poor poor innocent Nazis were being beat up by those mean old liberals. Won’t somebody think of the Nazis?
And what’s the topic again?
Is it that a single instance of some statue being vandalized is merely the first instance of a wave of statue decapitations that will sweep across the country destroying all art?
Is it that removing statues honoring the confederate rebellion and slavery we will be possessed by mind worms and forced down the slippery slope of removing all statues of everyone who ever did anything bad?
Is it that by recognizing that these confederate statues suck and removing them, they will be granted unholy powers and rise up again to dominate our hearts and minds for decades to come?
Is it that you think that changing anything at all is a sign of weakness (if liberals want it)?
I have pretty pat responses to all of these points, but I’ll wait to clarify which of them you wish to continue to discuss.
Knock it off. Do not personalize your arguments in this fashion. If you feel you must, the BBQ Pit is right around the corner.
[/moderating]
Reddy Mercury wrote: “Is that a threat?” No, just an observation.
Octopus wrote:“Good luck with that concept when two hostile mobs choose to engage.”
Again, mobs don’t choose anything, individuals do. Also, I should add, that in the above instance Mister Schicklegruber’s buddies are within their rights to restrain me until the cops can effect an arrest. Restrain me, not beat me senseless or run me over with their car.
So no cite then?
Missed the edit window:
My asking for a cite is about your post, and the claim you made; don’t try and deflect any more please.
The claim you made was pretty specific: “Antifa is less about “anti-fascism” and more about pro-Social Anarchism.” You’ve offered nothing, not even anecdotal evidence in support of that; instead we are supposed to believe it is true because you “know” stuff, because you’ve “hung out in their groups on FB and other places.” What other places? What FB groups?
Also, if they are the “diametric opposite” of the Fascists, then they don’t think that “America is an evil place that needs to be dismantled” because that’s what Steve Bannon and the Koch brothers and the Nazis think. Also, that means the Anti-Fascists don’t want to stuff people into ovens and kill them because of their ancestry; I’m okay with that.
What is about being the “diametric opposite” of Nazis and Fascists that you find so objectionable?
Wait… you hold these statues dear? They are poignant and emotionally powerful for you?
Also, that was a really sneaky way that you used a pronoun to imply both that E-Dub is a social justice warrior and that what he wrote included not just some kind of threat, but a threat to “tear down everything you hold dear”.
No more of a threat than a recitation of Newton’s Third Law of Motion would be.
Sorry about your family situation, but your analogy makes no sense. Legally taking down a statue, or even illegally and reprehensibly vandalizing a statue, is not “violating history”. We still know who all the people in the statues were (in fact, the controversy about statue removal has probably made our society far more aware of the relevant history than we were previously), and all the historical information about them still exists.
Legally removing statues that communities don’t want on display anymore is no more “violating history” than Trump redecorating the Obama Oval Office. You may think the decision is unnecessary and stupid and in flagrantly bad taste, but it’s not depriving “future generations” of historical information.