the alt-right

yeah given the opportunity and after carefully weighing my chances in a given scenario i've got no prob fucking one of these dudes up

Just want to clarify, in response to Z S, I wasn't exactly endorsing violence against white supremacists. I was claiming that bigoted speech contains the seed of social violence within it, and violence seems inevitable to me at an event like that in Charlottesville.

Social violence meaning bigger than any one individual's rage or will to act.

In an unequal society, bigoted speech always has that potential.

It's why we don't condemn the black kid who punches the white kid who calls him "n-----" for example. Social violence.

I dont have any problem w punching nazis but dont do the crime if u cant do the time.

By "we" I mean reasonable people, not US law enforcement.

Also disappointed at leftists going after the ACLU for defending Nazis right to march cuz duh this is what the ACLU has always done and they are correct "hate speech" short of specific incitement to violence is 100% legal

White supremacists pleased with Trump's comments on Charlottesville:

Daily Stormer: "We are now at war" & "Trump comments were good...no condemnation at all" https://t.co/Avl6RSvOR1 pic.twitter.com/A0LpGZEHTE

— Garance Franke-Ruta (@thegarance) August 13, 2017

“Non-violence doesn’t work for everything,” Cobb says. “You use self-defense with the Klan." Even while noting her respect for King, playwright and activist Lorraine Hansberry wrote too about embracing “every single means of struggle,” arguing that the Movement had to “harass, debate, petition, give money to court struggles, sit-in, lie-down, strike, boycott, sing hymns, pray on steps, and shoot from their windows when the racists come cruising through their communities.” It’s a good description of a diversity of tactics, and of the Movement in practice."

https://psmag.com/news/tactical-lessons-from-the-civil-rights-movement

Non-violence only works when you're appealing to a populace/power base that is capable of shame (ie the British, Rockefeller Republicans etc)

Even under the terms of the first amendment/free speech, I still don't get why hate groups are allowed to march/assemble. I mean, they're innately violent, aren't they? Aren't they the human equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theatre? I just don't see how even an argument can be made that they are peaceful, or even *can* be peaceful, especially since they attract counter-protestors, which inevitably leads to violence. Public safety concerns alone should put the kibosh on them.

Non-violence only works when you're appealing to a populace/power base that is capable of shame (ie the British, Rockefeller Republicans etc)

― Οὖτις

so what is the political application of violence? i see two possible ends to violence: one, to compel people to sit down at the table and talk with you on mutually agreeable terms, or two, to compel acquiescence to your beliefs. any form of political violence that doesn't further those ends is stupid and counterproductive.

Well, not for political groups who consider violence an end unto itself, like white supremacists do. For those who want fewer types of other people, violence is totally productive.

Aren't they the human equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theatre?

FYI, this phrase comes from a Supreme Court case that criminalized putting anti-draft leaflets in people's mailboxes - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States

so what is the political application of violence

Lol u left out self-defense.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/346360-lexington-mayor-announces-removal-of-confederate-statues-in

^ What u all make of this - seems like a fitting punishment

Well like - obviously not punishment enough for the ones who kill people by driving into them, but I mean as a civic response

Lol u left out self-defense.

― Οὖτις

i don't think when you hit back somebody who hits you that's primarily a political act.

That's an odd take. Black Panthers would disagree.

well there are a lot of things i don't necessarily agree with the black panthers about.

but ok, i'll modify my initial statement to refer specifically to the _strategic_ political application of violence. even if one views all violence as primarily political in nature, we can classify some forms of political violence as tactical and some forms of political violence as strategic, no?

Some violence is primarily situational anger, infused with all kind of political motivations, real or bullshitted.

Ok sure
Xp

Already seeing shit on FB about how the driver was "really a lefty" and how "Liberals are the really violent ones".

Come Nuclear Bomb, Come.

the narrative that we ran over one of our own originated w/ in the Nazi group organizing the protest, but even they recently backed away from it when the person was IDed

something i've never understood is how these assholes rationalize that the daughter of their god emperor is jewish

These militia people are freaks. I don't think the left needs to use violence against them to defeat them. Their ideology holds little mass appeal and their aesthetic even less. I know people mock the "go high" rhetoric but in their case that's the thing to do.

They are a minority of Trump supporters who are a minority of the country. History is not on their side.

If they attack you or whatever fight back but no one should seek out a fight with degenerates.

Antifa stunts will just draw more of them out and strengthen them. They thrive on hatred.

a minority of the country whose population still is in the millions, sure

they don't thrive on hatred, they thrive on any incident they can spin into proving the other side is just as bad, if not worse. they also thrive on "not being resisted"

Protest them nonviolently in overwhelming numbers. Also focus not on them but on defeating Republicans and pushing Demorats left.

i don't remember who it was back in January (oh, more innocent times) that said alt-right/nazi groups might fear organizing more if they felt like they might get clocked in the face, and while I am generally a pacifist there is some truth to that.

neo-nazi groups are not going to starve for members regardless of what antifa do or don't do.

xpost sure, then alt-righters when frustrated that nobody is taking their bait then run down one of the protesters with a car and say an antifa did it

Antifa stunts will just draw more of them out and strengthen them. They thrive on hatred.

Oh, bullshit. We've had Klan rallies and Neo-Nazi rallies for a century - they don't need counter-protesters to be themselves.

I disagree. I think they want to brawl in the streets because they are barbarians. The left wants something else -- a better world.

They want to kill black people.

realize I'm incapable of thinking of this rationally atm but it's just depressing that after 8 years of moderately progressive gains, we're having to deal w/ the predictable consequences when those who feel "slighted" by those gains inexplicably get the biggest Breitbart puppet in modern history in the White House as their mascot.

xpost horseshoe otm

recent White supremacist/separatist groups have become non-violent, not because they necessarily have evolved, but because they know recruiting becomes easier as it's easier to get on-the-fence racists who have resisted due to the violence/terrorist actions of the movement's past.

that doesn't mean if law enforcement was to regress 50-60 years and turn a blind eye to some of their activities that they wouldn't revert to past barbarities. their move away from violence has little to do w/ their innate desires

something i've never understood is how these assholes rationalize that the daughter of their god emperor is jewish

― reggie (qualmsley), Sunday, August 13, 2017 12:53 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

contradictions/cognitive dissonance isn't a thing for Trumpers. they start with conclusions and work backwards to make everything else fit, and the puzzle pieces that don't fit just get left out.

The avowed white nationalists probably see Trump more as a useful tool to advance their agenda than an actual guru or whatever too.

I think Bannon said that once. Trump was a "blunt instrument"

yeah he's not a 'leader', but a guy that symbolizes "hey, it's ok for us to be ourselves again now"

If they attack you or whatever fight back but no one should seek out a fight with degenerates.

― Treeship

oh god, here i am being tone police again, but look, if we're going to use dehumanizing rhetoric can we at least come up with our own dehumanizing rhetoric and not borrow it from the nazis?

What would you call them?

I wasn't using that term in a literal sense obviously. There is nothing "wrong" with them except their hearts and minds are filled with poison.

And they are beneath contempt and tender minded music nerds shouldn't be seeking out fights with them.

It just seems weird to me that the use of violence is the question of the hour. I'll sign out now.

The use of violence is the question of the next four to eight years. And your answer is wrong.

i don't remember who it was back in January (oh, more innocent times) that said alt-right/nazi groups might fear organizing more if they felt like they might get clocked in the face, and while I am generally a pacifist there is some truth to that.

neo-nazi groups are not going to starve for members regardless of what antifa do or don't do.

seems obvious to me that any violence (other than pure self-defense) from "the Left" weakens "our" position. it's frustrating to give those who are all too eager to play the "many sides" card (which is major BS of course) any fodder.

obv if white supremacists escalate and become more and more organized and violent, something needs to be done. by the State. if the State is unwilling or fails to quash, then...

^^^^

Fired

UPDATE: Cole White, the first person I exposed, no longer has a job 💁‍♂️ #GoodNightColeWhite #ExposeTheAltRight #Charlottesville pic.twitter.com/sqxSXboKw6

— Yes, You're Racist (@YesYoureRacist) August 13, 2017

State failed to stop vehicular murder yesterday fyi

Xp