I’m going to Godwinize the thread, but I don’t think Godwinizing is a bad thing. Nazis took power yesterday. Violence is still not justified?
I understand that there’s a slippery slope here, but violence is sometimes justified.
Who is antifa? I don’t like fascism, am I antifa? As far as I know, there is no organization, no leadership under that name. So some people counter-protest against Nazis, sometimes violence ensues. Is that all you got?
I agree, but the debate in this thread is about when. I am of the opinion that it’s not justified when people are merely saying things that you don’t like. Do you agree?
The Nazis took power yesterday and all you can think of to do is throw bombs today? What were you doing the day before yesterday? And the day before that? And the day before that?
Yes, it is, because the states you’re talking about are accountable to the people in elections.
If you don’t like the government, vote to change it. If you don’t like that Those People get a vote as well… I don’t think I should have to convince you that that is a fascist ideology in a nutshell, eh?
Unfortunately.
How do you know what the people bashing heads at conservative rallies or assemblies eat?
I disagree with restricting oneself to US history in order to understand the world. I also disagree with lumping together of two separate concepts in order to inflate numbers. Slavery was worldwide. You can still buy slaves today in some parts of the world. To blame slavery on so-called white supremacy when slavery has existed for thousands of years, at least, isn’t accurate.
Concerning the body count? Again I don’t think it’s right to look at US body count only. I think that you need to look at the global body count to see the danger of an ideology.
Knowing that both of these authoritarian political movements have resulted in millions dead, why wouldn’t punching one be as justified as punching the other. Even if it is a dumb college ‘kid’ wearing a hammer and sickle shirt?
I agree with that. The only thing I think you need to be really concerned about are the unintended consequences. Normalizing violence in politics is not going to end in a world the antifa want.
But we’re talking about America in this thread. Slavery in America was based on white supremacism. So were the vast majority of the many other American atrocities and mass crimes through history. And what do you mean by “so-called”? Are you denying the existence of white supremacism?
Snipping the rest since I’m not advocating for any violence. I have no moral problem with the idea of Nazis being punched on principle, but allowing such behavior aside from self-defense would likely result in a lot of non-Nazis being harmed (humans being imperfect and all, both in ability to identify Nazis, and in the likelihood that such violence could lead to a brawl that could hurt bystanders), and thus should be opposed in almost all circumstances.
No. We aren’t only talking about the USA in this thread. That’s an unreasonable restriction. It’s perfectly fair to talk about which political adherents are to be subjected to beatings based upon the history of their movements. I find it distasteful that the 10’s of millions of dead from the horrors of communism somehow don’t matter because they happened “over there.”
Slavery wasn’t based on white supremacism. Slavery existed since before ancient history. You mean to tell me that Africans who sold their fellow Africans were white supremacists in a time when that concept did not exist? Did the concept of white supremacism develop after slavery? Why yes. Is it the same thing as fascism or Nazis? No. Those are different sets of people. Conflating the two in an attempt to link the numbers enslaved due to historical acceptance and legality of slavery with those killed by Nazis within the borders of the US in order to avoid a comparison to a far left murderous ideology to be a fallacious method.
What’s so hard about recognizing communism for the monumental evil it is and was instead of fixating on one country. And how do you reconcile your two opposing statements about not advocating violence yet having no moral problem with the principle of it?
So should people be beat for the views they hold is the question that people need to answer.
Do you self-identify as antifa? Seems to me the characterization of antifa is kind of similar to incels - certainly not an organization, more of a movement, and associated with violence both through self-identified members perpetrating violence, and media perpetuating the idea that they should be associated. The main difference is the motivation and target of the violence.
I tend to be of the opinion that the level of Nazi-ism that we are seeing today has not reached levels where a violent response is necessary, or desirable, so I don’t approve of antifa violence in practice. Whether it is actually counter-productive (ie. violence actually increases sympathy for the white supremacists being attached), I’m not so sure about.
The OP explicitly mentioned America (as well as white nationalism). If you want to talk about other countries, I’d be happy to join you in another thread.
No, this thread is just fine. Especially with the title “antifa violence.” Antifa is not just the US and the concept of inflicting beatings and other extrajudicial violence is important enough that it can be discussed, on topic, here. Or you can continue to dodge to avoid having to answer the “hard” questions.
What hard questions? I haven’t advocated violence against anyone. I’ve explicitly advocated against violence (aside from self-defense).
IMO, you’ve shown awfully little concern about white supremacism in the US. If you agree with me that it’s done, by far, the greatest harm to Americans – far more than any other philosophy or political ideology – then you ought to be concerned that it seems to be showing a resurgence. Not just in overt displays like Charlottesville, but the far more concerning more subtle acts of white supremacism perpetrated and advocated by Trump, his team, and many of his supporters in office.
Well my question was originally directed at DrFidelius who did say he’d be punching. You then started quibbling over the question.
Yeah, I don’t feel the need to virtue signal when the question is about antifa and violence directed at who antifa considers unworthy of due process or civil liberties. Antifa violence being legitimized is the interesting and on topic question. Why are you employing a Pit tactic and attempting to smear the person instead of debating the question?
But, just to please you, I’ll say white supremacism, just like any other form of racial or ethnic supremacism, is a dangerous concept. 
It’s not about virtue signaling – it’s about recognizing a clear and present danger to Americans and making sure we’re keeping our eye on the ball… meaning continuing to recognize that this danger remains, and is more significant than any other danger to Americans, and must be addressed until it’s no longer a significant force.
I’m curious what “many other American atrocities and mass crimes through history” you were thinking of when you made this statement?
As an aside, I wonder if you’d feel comfortable sharing your thoughts on the topic in this thread.
“more significant than any other danger to Americans”? Based on what?
Again, I’m on the anarcho-communist/anarcho-syndicalist spectrum. I don’t think there should be a state, people should be organized into local communes run on something akin to consensus democracy (which is different from majoritarian democracy). There should probably be no markets. Workers should control their means of production. I simply don’t believe states (especially large states) in general represent the will of the people, and at best, are useful while they exist for protecting certain things like minorities or the environment.
Just me, as far as I know. I just don’t get into debates about it, because it is meaningless to do so.