Really? The entire Civil Rights movement was disruptive. And I’m sure the Southern whites were terrorized by the thought of Negroes who thought they were as good as good white folk running free.
A demonstration that doesn’t disrupt SOMETHING isn’t actually a demonstration. It’s a polite, completely voluntary educational opportunity. And generally pretty ineffective. There’s a REASON that unions picket an employer they’re striking against instead of just not going to work. They’re DISRUPTING business (ideally) to force the employer to negotiate.
I’m sure protest movements and such that just politely ask for their goals to be achieved by the comfortable majority are out there, but I haven’t heard of many of them.
I don’t see anything wrong with self defense. I don’t think a lawful assembly or speech is sufficient provocation in and of itself for self defense. I don’t think the exercise of legal rights is provocation that can trigger self defense.
Do I have a problem with gangsters, mafia types, cartels, terrorists, and other forms of organized crime? Yes. And the intelligence and law enforcement agencies should be able to investigate and prosecute those. I think the intelligence agencies, military, and bounty hunters should also be able to deal with those we are at war with in lethal fashion so I am far from a peacenik or a pacifist.
But concerning folks legally in the US exercising civil rights I don’t have any patience for violent intimidation. Especially since we have a functioning democracy. If one doesn’t like policy we can vote to change it. Then watch an appointed judge overturn the vote… but that’s one reason, and a good one, for why we have Trump.
Here’s the deal though, if we could be certain that vigilantism could be controlled and act in a perfect manner than I wouldn’t have a problem with all the wanna be antifa Batmans running around. But we can’t. And history has demonstrated and time and again that underground partisan and sectarian violence if successful leads to the absolute worst, most paranoid, and most ruthless seizing power.
What’s that quote usually attributed to Stalin? “A single death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic” Something like that? Yes, personal anecdotes are sad. Weird, fringe political movements of dangerous nuts can end in many personal tragedies. However, the acceptance of political violence as a legitimate means to influence policy and behavior and the exercise of civil rights in a functioning democracy has the danger of adding to the list of statistics.
But there is a difference between chaining yourself to a car and marching with a sign. The level of disruption matters. If I go out and burn down abandoned buildings in the name of civil rights I’m definitely drawing attention to a worthy cause. But not in the right way.
Again, assuming the video in the OP is what is claimed (which I find really hard to believe), are you okay with people literally stepping out in front of cars to block them? Random vehicles at freeway ramps? I don’t care what your cause is, that’s unacceptable. If a group of people did that and forced people to go to choose between running someone over or being stopped for an indeterminate time they should get cuffed and taken away, and cited at least. If they were doing that in the name of a political movement those leaders should disavow those protestors and their tactics.
So IOW you don’t commute by car in a major urban area. Because every now and then, there’s an accident that blocks traffic and has exactly that sort of effect on one’s commute.
Then the only aspect of this missing from the occasional difficulties with my morning commute is the absence of objectives.
And if there’s little difference between a traffic blockage without objectives, and one with objectives, then the latter damn sure isn’t going to intimidate or coerce anyone, and therefore fails to be terrorism.
Only if downtown Seattle or Tacoma aren’t major urban areas. Accidents can really suck, and every now and then a really bad one can add significant time to my drive. But there’s nobody causing accidents on purpose in order to push political change. Your false equivalence is like saying that murder isn’t a bit deal because people die all the time from natural causes, accidents, and illnesses. When bad things happen on purpose, that is rightfully treated differently.
So by your definition a terrorist action that fails to achieve its goal isn’t terrorism? Note that terrorism is intending to intimidate people. It doesn’t have to succeed.
Stochastic terrorism is one of those neologisms that basically everyone really should try to understand, because it is the basic way that the modern far right “gives missions”. Most of the time, it’s not typical, structured missions. Rather, it’s a massive online culture that teaches you that you’re right to feel desperate and afraid and hopeless, that those who go out guns blazing are heroes and martyrs (literally “saints”), and that nothing can or will get better for you. They encourage you to “take the black pill” and accept that nothing will ever get better, and that your only option is to kill yourself, and maybe take a few normies with you if you get the chance.
It’s why places like 8chan can spawn multiple terrorists despite having no organization. The modern path to far-right terrorism and radicalization is entirely stochastic. For anyone looking for a primer. Ian Danskin made an incredible video on the subject, “How to radicalize a normie”, and I cannot recommend it highly enough.
The modern mainstream media fucking sucks about this. If you’re active on the left, one thing you’ll quickly learn is that while claims of a “liberal” bias are vastly overstated by those on the right, they really hate anyone on the left. That includes antifa. They will gutlessly and witlessly swallow any bullshit they hear from known far-right agitators about antifa. There’s only so much PR work you can do when the cards are stacked against you like this. I wish I knew what to do about this as well, but it’s really bad. Like, at a far-right rally in Portland not long ago, the police spread a baseless rumor that the protesters were mixing cement in with the vegan milkshakes that they were handing out. It was nonsense… But it made the rounds, and the mainstream media is far more likely to trust right-wing grifters quoting the police than actual members of antifa.
“I’m sorry, I should have checked my sources better before spreading propaganda.”
Try it, it’s so much easier than doubling down on stupid bullshit!
Let’s go to the quarry and throw stuff down there! Who the fuck do you think governs society, dumbass? All government comes with the implicit threat of violence.
You are a special kind of special. You do realize there is a big difference between extrajudicial mob violence and violence as a mechanism that the governed have chosen to use as a tool? Please tell me you are not equating a democratic state with checks and balances and due process and written law with terrorists, thugs, and vigilantes?
No, but if no reasonable person would be intimidated by an action, you can’t argue it’s a form of terrorism. So simply blocking traffic, even with an objective, is not terrorism.
You could argue blocking traffic while carrying a weapon in a way that looks like you’re ready to use it could be terrorism, though. (It would, of course, depend on whether there is a cause.)
Antifa, in concept, is supposed to be people who carry weapons for protection, and who will respond to violence with violence, but are otherwise peaceful. They are there to make it clear to fascists that they will not come out unscathed if they try their typical terrorist tactics. Their goal is to be like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers.
Who, regardless of what revisionist history you may have heard, were also very important in the fight for Civil Rights. It wasn’t King and his followers alone.
A milder form of this is what I mentioned in post #51: constant propaganda encouraging people to single out very specific minor hassles of life, such as traffic problems associated with civil protest, as intolerable affronts deserving of violent retaliation.
People who are otherwise very clear on the concept that stupid or annoying behavior on the part of someone else is not an excuse for gratuitous violence are being egged on to spread the attitude that angrily driving into road-blocking protestors is funny and satisfying and a reasonable response to being inconvenienced in your use of the roads.
That’s not a normal attitude for reasonable people. That attitude’s being deliberately cultivated to increase popular hostility and aversion to civil protest, and to intimidate potential protestors with implied threats of likely violent assault.
I appreciate that, since you’re not yourself Jewish or Black or gay or Roma you might not have twigged this yet, but WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK WAVING A NAZI FLAG IS ? It’s violent intimidation and a direct murder threat in and of itself. It’s saying “I want you dead. I’ll try to kill you whenever I have the opportunity”. And not just “when we take the Hill”, either. A swastika spray painted on a wall means “we’re in your neighbourhood, and we’ll strike when we think we can get away with it. You are not safe here”.
Read the links I posted upthread. The unite the right guys parked a handful of men with guns in front of the local synagogue, all day long. They also came howling at the doors of the local black church yelling epithets and threats. You think that’s just some fine folks peacably exercising their civil rights ? Do you think the Jews praying inside were paranoid to be afraid for their lives, especially when the police were nowhere in sight despite direct calls for their protection ?
And don’t give us your “if by whiskey” arguments.
It’s been making the rounds, but yeah, seconded. Great vid.
I would also recommend PhilosophyTube’s The Philosophy of Antifa to anyone interested in learning about these guys from a source slightly less biased, or (if he knows that thing about the razor blades sometimes hidden behind nazi stickers and posters) slightly more antifa-adjacent than corporate media. I can’t say I see Ollie as the baseball bat swinging type :p, but I’d wager he knows where the good punk bars are in his area :D.
Tru dat, but when we’re in a traffic backup due to an accident, we go ‘grumble grumble, gonna have to sit here stuck in traffic again,’ and that’s the extent of it.
Being in a traffic backup due to protesters blocking traffic affects you differently…how??
How about when merely annoying and irritating stuff happens on purpose? Is there a point in reacting to it differently?
No, I’m saying that if there’s no particular reason to believe the intent is to intimidate and coerce, rather than merely raise awareness of their cause, it isn’t terrorism. And if they’re doing stuff that isn’t inherently intimidating, there’s no reason to assume that’s their intent, and every reason to assume it’s not. You’re assuming intent to coerce and intimidate. That’s not inherently true here.
Speaking of assuming, could you link to that definition you quoted? I bet the law or reg containing the government definition defines ‘force’ somewhere too. Here you’re assuming that ‘standing in the street’ qualifies as ‘force’ with respect to the definition of terrorism. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but you haven’t shown that you’re right to do so either.
Yeah, that’s another excellent video. The main issue with both is that they’re pretty long. Mostly because they’re chock-full of valuable information and it’s hard to condense it down further, but… still. It’s one of those annoying things.
I mean on the one hand yes, on the other hand, it’s still much shorter and digestibler than a book on the Kantian Imperative (and probably a little less racist at that ). People either give a shit or they don’t ; but I for one am likely to look down on someone who’d rather keep on spouting uninformed shit or demand Spark Notes than spare an hour of their life to, y’know, learning stuff, broadening their horizons… being honestly curious about the world(s) they inhabit.
Use’em as the pizza-driven filler between overly enthusiastic fucks with your paramour(s), I don’t care. It can’t be worse than Dancing with the Stars.
I mean it *really *can’t possibly be.
It bears reminding that if you find the protesters sympathetic to your politics/beliefs/cause, then you are far less likely to find yourself so irritated with the delay and disruption to your day that you probably won’t feel the urge to nose your vehicle into the demonstrator as a way of showing your disapproval.
I’m assuming that odds are against my being the car at the front of the traffic backup.
If I’m two blocks back, it’s all the same to me. They could be protesting against abortion or against guns, and I might have no idea which it was, or whether it was an accident or construction or what.
The problem is they are carrying the wrong weapons. If they had an AR-15, then they would obviously be good guys, patriotic defenders of freedom, honoring their second amendment rights to defend themselves. But they have sticks for god sakes! Who knows what havoc they could wreak!
Also, even if I was at the front of the line, with protesters standing directly in front of my car, it still wouldn’t matter if they’re protesting against abortion or against guns or what. They’re still human beings. That matters. You don’t treat people as things; that’s what sin is.
I wish I could claim credit for that last sentence, but no. It’s from Terry Pratchett’s Carpe Jugulum. In 49 years as a Christian, it’s easily the most insightful thing I’ve heard about sin. So naturally it was written by an atheist. Bravo for life’s little ironies.
). People either give a shit or they don’t ; but I for one am likely to look down on someone who’d rather keep on spouting uninformed shit or demand Spark Notes than spare an hour of their life to, y’know, learning stuff, broadening their horizons… being honestly curious about the world(s) they inhabit.