I'm not sure Sam's opinion on hate speech is right though. You're more than allowed to give opinions on religion. I think he's pointing out stuff that is demonstrably not hate speech. It does show how clueless most people are about why they hate what they hate though.
I still would have loved to see a bunch of CPers organize a street hockey game right in front of the "rally" as someone had brought up earlier. These fringe elements, that have zero popular support, and want conflict to happen. Unfortunately, they are accomplishing one of their goals, by getting their faces in the media, and letting others know they are out there.
Sadly, the anti-Islam rally (sans the pseudo-Militia) in Winnipeg was not nearly as civil. **sorry problems embedding video**
....or Toronto (where the local militia was present).
I still would have loved to see a bunch of CPers organize a street hockey game right in front of the "rally" as someone had brought up earlier. These fringe elements, that have zero popular support, and want conflict to happen. Unfortunately, they are accomplishing one of their goals, by getting their faces in the media, and letting others know they are out there.
Sadly, the anti-Islam rally (sans the pseudo-Militia) in Winnipeg was not nearly as civil. **sorry problems embedding video**
....or Toronto (where the local militia was present).
I never understood why the (sane) people out there that disagreed with that cancerous rally would even go out there and give them their energy. That's all these edgy neckbeards wanted. Just ignore and avoid them. Obviously there are prejudicial lowlifes out there everywhere, no point giving them any attention.
Groups like this will never ever go away. There will always be lonely or scared or angry people that are drawn to groups like this.
The gullable, the pseudo stupid intellectuals will pop in and out.
Even if you starve it of attention, they will still be there in the shadows.
Going and playing a road hockey game in front of them or confronting them and fighting them is just what they want because the "They hate us because we're right and they're the oppressors is just what you need"
The thing that slows it down in terms of recruiting is it doesn't have access to the college crowd.
If you ignore it, it will slink to the shadows and become really fringe. But also really angry.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
They're anarchistic in apparent goal and fascistic in method - that is to say, thuggishly oppressive of those who don't agree with their dogma. For example:
Antifa are essentially a mob that beats the #### out of people who say things they don't like.
First of all, "thuggishly oppressive of those who don't agree with their dogma" is not a definition of fascism.
Second, examples of Antifa street patrols that go around looking for people to beat up, please?
Quote:
As for the aforementioned goals, the problem is that like most movements in the past ten years they can't coherently express their position on anything. Whether it's the tea party or OWS, left or right, getting together a group to "do something" seems to have no philosophy or end game to it anymore. They simply want to hurt people who they perceive as evil and consider themselves to be morally justified in doing so. Hence, they are absolutely dangerous.
Generally speaking, if you don't get what some people are doing and why, it's probably because you're clueless about what they think and want, not because they have no idea what they're doing. In other words, it sounds to me like you're just projecting your ignorance on others instead of accepting that you actually just don't know much about any of the people you're talking about.
(I'm not saying their goals would make sense to you even if you knew them, but that's a different thing.)
Quote:
And of course, after recoiling at comparisons to an ideologically dedicated pro-Israel poster you've now followed up by defending a blight on society. I can't say I'm totally surprised, but for ####'s sake... This is like Northcrunk or someone coming in here and defending Richard Spencer and company.
So, saying that I consider Antifa and anarchists less bad than fascists and that I think they're not really anything alike is now defending them? Okey dokey. God forbid that we should actually differentiate between different groups, instead of just lumping them all together because we don't like any of them.
For a person who makes such a fuss about getting the facts right, you once again get upset when somebody wants to point out factual mistakes.
First asks me to do his research for him, then tells me I'm "clueless" and "ignorant".
Carries water for a violent mob, justifies their behaviour, says they have some good ideas about society, and then says he was just "differentiating between groups".
You can't make this stuff up. You are essentially the mirror image of Southerners who try to explain Klan membership and Confederate pride as "tradition".
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
First asks me to do his research for him, then tells me I'm "clueless" and "ignorant".
Carries water for a violent mob, justifies their behaviour, says they have some good ideas about society, and then says he was just "differentiating between groups".
You can't make this stuff up. You are essentially the mirror image of Southerners who try to explain Klan membership and Confederate pride as "tradition".
First asks me to do his research for him, then tells me I'm "clueless" and "ignorant".
I'm pretty sure you're aware of the principle of the burden of proof lying with the person who makes the claim, but hey.
I noticed you're trying to ignore the criticism about you using a blatantly incorrect definition of fascism, so I guess you just accept that you don't really know what fascism is and thus are literally too ignorant to compare anyone to them. Let alone anarchists which you probably know even less about.
Quote:
Carries water for a violent mob, justifies their behaviour, says they have some good ideas about society, and then says he was just "differentiating between groups".
Carries water? I didn't realize we're in Oilers dressing room now
If you actually read what I said, I said they have "interesting and worthwhile" ideas. You should understand that is not the same as agreeing with their ideas. There is a difference between saying someone has valid observations about society, and agreeing with their ideas what should be done about society.
I also specifically said that you have to be ridiculously privileged to think anarchism is a good idea, but hey, why actually bother to read what someone says when it's so much nicer to create your own fantasy version of what was said and attack that.
Quote:
You can't make this stuff up. You are essentially the mirror image of Southerners who try to explain Klan membership and Confederate pride as "tradition".
Charming.
Also, boy that's a terrible analogy. Unless of course what you're trying to say is that you don't understand the significance of local culture when it comes to Klan membership and use of Confederate flag, in which case I guess you're right. Of course tradition and culture play into Southern racism in general. Racism has everything to do with culture anyway. It doesn't make racism okay, but the facts don't just go away by ignoring them.
BTW:
You have several times railed against liberals incorrectly and hyperbolically using the word "fascist" to describe people they don't like. I'm not surprised to notice you don't actually stand by that principle at all, but it is a little sad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordonBlue
well written overall but this comment I feel is wrong. It may have once been true, but the times have been changing.
I'd say it's very much the opposite. Anarchists were once a significant political force and a major part of the working class revolutionary movements (meaning: anarchists used to have armies and terrorist groups with bombs and stuff, that they literally killed people).
These days they're a bunch of privileged kids harassing the police, breaking some windows and beating up fascists. A nuisance, but very far removed from having any actual political or social significance, and not really dangerous unless you're being openly fascist.
Which I think should be illegal anyway.
Oh, and before someone asks:
Would I support a law that made fascist groups AND anarchist groups illegal? Sure. I just think the former are a lot, lot more dangerous than the latter.
I also think fascists have interesting and worthwhile things to say about society. For example, fascist commentary on the inherent weaknesses of a democratic society is pretty interesting stuff. The general ideas are just so mainstream these days that people don't even realize it's largely fascist rhetoric. So really barely worth mentioning.
Last edited by Itse; 06-26-2017 at 12:16 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
I noticed you're trying to ignore the criticism about you using a blatantly incorrect definition of fascism, so I guess you just accept that you don't really know what fascism is and thus are literally too ignorant to compare anyone to them. Let alone anarchists which you probably know even less about.
Yeah, I can't imagine why I don't want to get into a drawn out substantive conversation with you about anything and explain my perspective in more detail, given the way you've tried to engage me so far. I can't think of a single reason why I wouldn't think that was a worthwhile way to spend my time. Not a one.
As for the burden of proof, I'm not actually burdened by a pressing desire to prove anything to you, especially given your attitude. I don't see you as worth the time or effort to have the conversation with, for the reasons demonstrated by the above quote, among others (including the way you started off). I also don't see it as worth my time to provide examples of something that seems to me to be totally uncontroversial. So if you don't believe me, go figure it out yourself.
I don't particularly care if you actually do or not. Not only do you not have any qualifications or apparent capabilities that I think are worth engaging with, you haven't come to this conversation showing anything resembling good faith, hence my dismissal of your posts. I also don't think, given your posting history and previous unsolicited private messages, that there's any more chance that you'll amend your perspective than I do that Nage Waza's going to suddenly decide tomorrow that Israel's got it all wrong and should be subjected to strict sanctions. So if I'm not getting anything interesting or useful out of the exchange, and I'm not likely to do you any favours either, what's the point in continuing it? Have you accuse me of ignorance and a lack of understanding of basic points a few more times? No thanks. You go do you.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
I've never understood that objection. That post took me about 40 seconds. Is that a long time to tell someone I don't want to deal with their schtick and so they should buzz off?
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
I've never understood that objection. That post took me about 40 seconds. Is that a long time to tell someone I don't want to deal with their schtick and so they should buzz off?
Well, as a common target of disdain, I'll tell you most people just stop responding when they're really frustrated with me.
Eh, I think most people just ignore you to begin with.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
