So that guy featured in that Vice/HBO video found out there's warrants for his arrest for or illegal use of gases, and injury by caustic agent or explosive (felonies).
So he posted a video where he's crying and scared he's going to be killed. At one point he says they're trying to be peaceful (which is why he threatens to kill people in the Vice video I guess) but their enemies will not stop, what options do they have left. Hmm.. maybe stop being a white supremacist? Admits he's been in prison before, why am I not surprised?
And I guess this guy was on Colbert, he was part of a group that harassed parking meter attendants and plugged meters before they got there for freedom. And harassed the city employees mercilessly and uploaded it to youtube to prove they were badasses. They harassed one who was former military so much he quit after a year of it.
Starts at about 1:40
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Ezra's reply. I don't know much about him other than he likes to sue people, he invented the Rebel (which is a Canadian Breitbart?)and seems like he's kind of ######y- Not even sure its worth watching but it would be great if Canadian Breitbart is brought down if they are confirmed to be full of S*&t and on the take.
Are you quite finished being a comic book character yet?
I guess not. I honestly don't see the difference. Both fighting forces were politcally aimed at abhorrent things but the actual soldiers were regular young men. There was to be some modicum of respect there, and I just can't agree with the standard that any action against monuments of any type is justified, historical significance and legality be damned.
The fact that these people are then lauding themselves as heroes, or comparing antifa to WW2 soldiers just irks me more.
It's been interesting to notice that after that crying video, some on the alt-right have been starting to claim he's an FBI plant. You know, because obviously. Much better than to admit one of your leaders might, you know, be afraid and cry. It's just not very supreme for a white supremacist guy.
These guys are just so pathetic.
And yes, if you ever want to see pathetic examples of toxic gender BS, the same Christopher Cantell is a good source. Unsurprisingly enough, the white supremacist movement is super worried about the feminist scourge in a very rapey way.
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
The Civil War *was* about states' rights - the right of the states to the institution of slavery. Similarly, these statues *are* historical remembrances - of the antebellum age where anyone white was superior to anyone black.
Neither statement legitimizes veneration of the past when complete and not deceptively shorn of their negative components. This technique of "true" but incomplete declarative statements is a favorite of ideologues of all kinds. The plain, simple truth should immediately arouse the deepest suspicion.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
I guess not. I honestly don't see the difference. Both fighting forces were politcally aimed at abhorrent things but the actual soldiers were regular young men. There was to be some modicum of respect there, and I just can't agree with the standard that any action against monuments of any type is justified, historical significance and legality be damned.
The fact that these people are then lauding themselves as heroes, or comparing antifa to WW2 soldiers just irks me more.
I haven't heard the statue destroyers calling themselves heroes, nor anyone here for that matter. As for the statues, most of them were erected after WWI and after Birth Of A Nation came out and caused a reflowering of the KKK and white nationalism. They are a symbol of hate and a commemoration of a repugnant, murderous, inhuman and traitorous regime, much like all the confederate flags that started flying in southern state capitals during the Civil Rights movement in the 60s. It's about hate and always has been. No modicum of respect need be afforded these symbols. I wouldn't call these activists heroes, but I'm perfectly ok with their lawbreaking.
Don't take my word for it, just listen to the words of the great great grandchildren of Stonewall Jackson!
If there's one thing that's overturned power structures and systems of oppression in the past, it's definitely been acting obediently and deferential to the laws and authority figures perpetuating them.
The problem is folks like the sovereign citizen movement also sincerely believe they're the victims of state oppression. You can't have a society governed by the rule of law, except for those individuals who feel they're oppressed by the state.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
I haven't heard the statue destroyers calling themselves heroes, nor anyone here for that matter. As for the statues, most of them were erected after WWI and after Birth Of A Nation came out and caused a reflowering of the KKK and white nationalism. They are a symbol of hate and a commemoration of a repugnant, murderous, inhuman and traitorous regime, much like all the confederate flags that started flying in southern state capitals during the Civil Rights movement in the 60s. It's about hate and always has been. No modicum of respect need be afforded these symbols. I wouldn't call these activists heroes, but I'm perfectly ok with their lawbreaking.
Don't take my word for it, just listen to the words of the great great grandchildren of Stonewall Jackson!
I mean, no one explicitly used the words hero but these people don't deserve admiration that has been expressed for breaking the law and tying up the court system.
And I agree, Birth of a Nation came out in 1915 and the second iteration of the Klan occurred shortly after, so that factored in on some statues surely but they should be exmained case by case. There's worse examples of Confederate statues, there's one of Nathan Bedford Forrest in Tennessee that has no reason for existing.
I guess what I'm taking issue with is I care about the legality, if Durham had voted to get rid of that statue I'd be all for it. The standard of indiscriminately destroying any and all Confederate anything is a dangerous one. Also Minnie calling them schmucks isn't right, some poor 17 year old conscript from Virginia with no slaves getting his head blown off isn't my idea of a schmuck.
The Civil War *was* about states' rights - the right of the states to the institution of slavery. Similarly, these statues *are* historical remembrances - of the antebellum age where anyone white was superior to anyone black.
Neither statement legitimizes veneration of the past when complete and not deceptively shorn of their negative components. This technique of "true" but incomplete declarative statements is a favorite of ideologues of all kinds. The plain, simple truth should immediately arouse the deepest suspicion.
I mean, no one explicitly used the words hero but these people don't deserve admiration that has been expressed for breaking the law and tying up the court system.
And I agree, Birth of a Nation came out in 1915 and the second iteration of the Klan occurred shortly after, so that factored in on some statues surely but they should be exmained case by case. There's worse examples of Confederate statues, there's one of Nathan Bedford Forrest in Tennessee that has no reason for existing.
I guess what I'm taking issue with is I care about the legality, if Durham had voted to get rid of that statue I'd be all for it. The standard of indiscriminately destroying any and all Confederate anything is a dangerous one. Also Minnie calling them schmucks isn't right, some poor 17 year old conscript from Virginia with no slaves getting his head blown off isn't my idea of a schmuck.
So maybe they should put up a plaque for him somewhere, maybe they could put it in one of the spots currently occupied by a statue of one of the men responsible for him being conscripted in the first place.
Lots of people are bringing up WW2 to counter fascism. But let's keep in mind what happened in the interwar period. Many countries polarized into the extreme right and the extreme left. Fascism and Communists. Fighting in the streets, gunning each other down, collapsing into civil war. Russia, Germany, Italy, Spain.
Some liberal democracies resisted this polarization. Democracy survived in Great Britain, the Netherlands, the U.S., etc. because the center held, and liberal values prevailed against the simplistic dogma and inflammatory hatreds of the left and right. Abandoning liberalism to combat the far right is not a winning tactic.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
