We don’t need to imagine them, we read them a year ago.
Yeah, given some of the other Antifa headlines, it’s not hard to imagine.
WaPo: Black-clad antifa members attack peaceful right-wing demonstrators in Berkeley
NY Mag: Antifa Beats Up Trump Supporters, Fuels Right-Wingers
ETA: Bonus tweet by Jake Tapper:
In North America, many of the first people brought as servants from Africa were indentured servants. Throughout the seventeenth century, laws were passed restricting the freedoms of black servants and slaves, treating black indentured servants more harshly than white indentured servants, etc., until 1705 when Virginia effectively made them all slaves, even enslaving some who had already gained freedom. And all of that was based on their being black. Increasingly, throughout the South, laws were passed that continued to encroach on the ability of black people to exercise any rights, all based on their descent from Africans or the color of their skin.
Yes, slavery has been a human phenomenon for centuries, but the notion that slavery in the U.S. was not based on a belief in white supremacy has no basis in fact.
While Anti-Fascist Action is a newer group giving rise to the new short hand name of antifa, there’s significant history under other names. Anti-Racist Action used to be the major nationwide umbrella organization that was associated with violence. The names have changed. A lot of the players have changed due to age. The tradition and the violence is an older story. There’s a four decade long history of white supremacists and their opponents using violence against each other in the US. We’re just on one of the upswings with new branding.
A Mother Jones article after the Spencer incident, The Long History of “Nazi Punching”.
Interesting article, but outside of WW2 period, Antifa, under any name, has still, punched exactly **ONE **Nazi.
So, besides being violent, they are failures at being violent to their expressed foes.
In 2012 eighteen people associated with ARA and/or HARM (Hoosier Anti-Racist Movement) went into a Chicago restaurant to assault white supremacists holding a meet and greet lunch. It’s true they didn’t punch. They carried out their premeditated assault with “baseball bats, police batons, hammers, and nunchucks.”
Hey it’s not punching. It’s more violent than what Spencer got.
It’s weird to me that this would bother someone who voted for a man who promised to torture prisoners and have their families murdered.
It probably would be if you can’t distinguish between foreigners captured on the battlefield in the act of supporting a murderous regime and fellow citizens exercising their First Amendment rights in ways we find distasteful here in our own communities.
I’m not an American.
And I wouldn’t assume they were captured on a battlefield or caught in the act of supporting anything on the word of the US government. I didn’t last time, why start now? Not that such being the case would justify torturing them or murdering their families.
While I don’t find either point unreasonable, it does make me curious how far this skepticism extends. The American government, via its intelligence agencies, has said that the Russians have interfered in our elections. Do you believe them in that instance? Why or why not?
Whataboutism. :rolleyes:
Sure, because Trump isn’t using those claims to make his followers clap and drool.
Just pointing out the hypocrisy of supporting gross human rights violations but clutching one’s pearls over scuffles.
Perhaps we could get back to the OP? If you want to continue your hijack, perhaps start a new thread? Thanks.
I will say this: I strongly disapprove of any group visiting violence upon random people in a crowd. Exactly how “random” the victim was in this case may be debatable, though.
So, of the six men he violently assaulted, one had his picture taken with some violent alt-right guys. Pretty tenuous, and that’s one of six.
No, not at all tenuous. Those DIY/RiseAbove assholes are exactly the reason “Antifa” “exists”. A person who has his big-grin picture taken with those pond scum might as well be one of them.
As for the others, there seems to be a dearth of information about the other attacks, so calling them “random” amounts to making shit up.
Might, but that investigative reporter was unable to find that he was. I think that he was just a “fun” loving idiot out for a day.
But isn’t this “victim blaming”? He certainly didn’t limit his attack to those wearing alt-right gear and he admitted his attack on that guy was “unprovoked”.
He just send some random guy to the hospital.
I did not say that he “might be”, I said that he “might as well be”. The difference between those two things is not very subtle. What I am saying is that if you nuzzle assholes, expect to be treated like an asshole, even if that is not what you literally are.
Once more, Stiles was consorting with the nazi side: that makes him decidedly non-random. You should read this book, paying special attention to (iirc) chapters 22-23. Then tell me whether the Alt-White deserve to be treated with respect or to summarily have the shit kicked out of them.
(To be clear, I firmly disapprove of violence as a means, primarily because public backlash tends to weaken the position of the violent.)