Change.org Petition Wants ANTIFA Declared a ‘Terrorist Organization’ - Polidicks

[QUOTE=KillRay;51795366]That was someone's personal account and did not represent an entire movement. I can make an account called "delaware trump supporters" and threaten to kill Elon musk but that doesn't mean I represent all trump supporters in Delaware Its an unverified twitter [editline]8th February 2017[/editline] [url]https://archive.fo/Tqf91[/url][/QUOTE] Dang 44 followers and joined Twitter last month... Must be a commanding central authority.

[QUOTE=papaya;51794936]when did 'nazis are bad people' become something up for debate??[/QUOTE] so you think it's acceptable to just randomly assault and murder 'bad people'? You're a fucking fascist dude

[QUOTE=Coyoteze;51794597]Have you ever tried arguing logically the injustices in racial and sexual discrimination with an alt-righter? I'll give you a hint: They're not, generally, very receptive to calm rationale.[/QUOTE] Do you have any self awareness at all. You don't seem very receptive yourself. Maybe they don't seem receptive to you because you come in with unchangeable opinions to begin with considering you believe in them so much that violence is ok.

[QUOTE=geel9;51795404]so you think it's acceptable to just randomly assault and murder 'bad people'? You're a fucking fascist dude[/QUOTE] I've never condoned murder against them but hey keep putting words in my mouth

[QUOTE=KillRay;51795366]That was someone's personal account and did not represent an entire movement. I can make an account called "delaware trump supporters" and threaten to kill Elon musk but that doesn't mean I represent all trump supporters in Delaware Its an unverified twitter [editline]8th February 2017[/editline] [url]https://archive.fo/Tqf91[/url][/QUOTE] Even then, ANTIFA as whole right now has been cunts assaulting others and using violence as an excuse to get what they want. It's kinda petty seeing people defend it with the excuse of it not representing the entire movement when the large majority of it is mainly people using violence for a political reason. Every single time I see antiFA in the news it's always about someone being violent pieces of shit. I'm so tired of seeing people actually defend this kind of behavior with an excuse that "it's not an entire movement" despite a large majority of themselves identifying as ANTIFA is shown on the news as being violent pieces of shit. [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/5rk4is/antifa_shut_down_milo_at_uc_berkeley/[/url] Seeing this thread is so sad because you can see all these people cheering on to violence in the comments, it's such a shitty thing to do and it'll backfire horribly.

For those still defending the violence I leave you this. [URL="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_of_Lead_(Italy)"]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_of_Lead_(Italy)[/URL]

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51795384]oh look an american forgot Mccarthyism[/QUOTE] Zillamaster is clearly being sarcastic to illustrate a point about justifying these behaviors and groups.

[QUOTE=papaya;51795448]I've never condoned murder against them but hey keep putting words in my mouth[/QUOTE] It all leads to the same thing. When (not if) randomly assaulting those who you identify as "nazis" doesn't work, what are you going to do? $500 says the violence will escalate.

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51795461]Even then, ANTIFA as whole right now has been cunts assaulting others and using violence as an excuse to get what they want. It's kinda petty seeing people defend it with the excuse of it not representing the entire movement when the large majority of it is mainly people using violence for a political reason. Every single time I see antiFA in the news it's always about someone being violent pieces of shit. I'm so tired of seeing people actually defend this kind of behavior with an excuse that "it's not an entire movement" despite a large majority of themselves identifying as ANTIFA is shown on the news as being violent pieces of shit. [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/5rk4is/antifa_shut_down_milo_at_uc_berkeley/[/url] Seeing this thread is so sad because you can see all these people cheering on to violence in the comments, it's such a shitty thing to do and it'll backfire horribly.[/QUOTE] Extremists don't represent a whole movement just because you want it to

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51795461]Even then, ANTIFA as whole right now has been cunts assaulting others and using violence as an excuse to get what they want. It's kinda petty seeing people defend it with the excuse of it not representing the entire movement when the large majority of it is mainly people using violence for a political reason. Every single time I see antiFA in the news it's always about someone being violent pieces of shit. I'm so tired of seeing people actually defend this kind of behavior with an excuse that "it's not an entire movement" despite a large majority of themselves identifying as ANTIFA is shown on the news as being violent pieces of shit. [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/5rk4is/antifa_shut_down_milo_at_uc_berkeley/[/url] Seeing this thread is so sad because you can see all these people cheering on to violence in the comments, it's such a shitty thing to do and it'll backfire horribly.[/QUOTE] This is meaningless and hilariously delusional conjecture. [I]Obviously[/I] the proportion of violence to peaceful protest shown on the news is an accurate metric for determining the proportion of violent to peaceful protestors within a demographic.

Can't talk about peaceful antifa protests because a) not news b) blend into all other protests

[QUOTE=KillRay;51795480]Extremists don't represent a whole movement just because you want it to[/QUOTE] Except all I see on Antifa's sides are extremists, that represents a pretty large part of the group. And pretty much everywhere I read about antifa checks out with them being extremists, you can say that the extremists don't represent a whole movement, but you can't prove that a large part of it is not an extremist in the first place.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;51795466]Zillamaster is clearly being sarcastic to illustrate a point about justifying these behaviors and groups.[/QUOTE] he wasn't. how is that sarcasm. he said that because people argue that antifa has the right to exist, other people should organize to counter communists. and it's really weird he brought up communism from nowhere, guess it's an american reflex

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51795497]Except all I see on Antifa's sides are extremists, that represents a pretty large part of the group. And pretty much everywhere I read about antifa checks out with them being extremists, you can say that the extremists don't represent a whole movement, but you can't prove that a large part of it is not an extremist in the first place.[/QUOTE] speak with statistics, not anecdotes thanks. also violence solves nothing.

[QUOTE=Kigen;51795131]Is Sargon of Akkad wrong? If so, please by all means, provide the evidence. I imagine the reason you didn't was because you didn't have anything to refute him on. You just don't like Sargon of Akkad so you like to equate him to Alex Jones for some reason.[/QUOTE] That's not his point. If you want information about a group of people you don't go to a manipulative fearmongering dickhead like Sargon or Alex Jones and assume that it's useful information just because you didn't notice anything "off" about it. Even if it is true, you can be damn sure that information is going to be available somewhere that has a shred of integrity.

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51795497]Except all I see on Antifa's sides are extremists, that represents a pretty large part of the group. And pretty much everywhere I read about antifa checks out with them being extremists, you can say that the extremists don't represent a whole movement, but you can't prove that a large part of it is not an extremist in the first place.[/QUOTE] My only exposure to antifas has been the peaceful organizers in my city whos most violent and disruptive act has been drawing hammer and sickles out of condensation on car windows on a foggy day. Clearly, antifa is, as a whole, peaceful because my experiences say so. It's not on us to "prove that a large part of it is not extremist", that burden of proof is on you.

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51795497]Except all I see on Antifa's sides are extremists, that represents a pretty large part of the group. And pretty much everywhere I read about antifa checks out with them being extremists, you can say that the extremists don't represent a whole movement, but you can't prove that a large part of it is not an extremist in the first place.[/QUOTE] Sources and stats bud im tired of your strawmen every thread

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51795498]he wasn't. how is that sarcasm. he said that because people argue that antifa has the right to exist, other people should organize to counter communists. and it's really weird he brought up communism from nowhere, guess it's an american reflex[/QUOTE] Given that she was opposing Antifa earlier in the thread for its violent tendencies, do you earnestly believe she would then seriously ask for the existence of a similar group to one she opposes? It was clearly sarcastic, making a point about justifying the existence of antifa.

[QUOTE=KillRay;51795534]Sources and stats bud im tired of your strawmen every thread[/QUOTE] Careful about this path, if you ask for sources they'll just post a couple of youtube videos and call it a day. I've been down that road too many times I wouldn't expect actual conclusive statistics (because they dont exist)

I've been mentally ripping myself to shreds over this issue (and clearly, based on this thread, I'm not alone). As a leftist, freedom of speech is a core belief that is absolutely [B][U][I]essential[/I][/U][/B] to a functioning democratic society. That said, as anyone who knows their history can tell you, democratic institutions are not impervious to toxic ideological takeovers (Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy) by people and organizations who use and abuse said institutions to their advantage, and then dismantle them. The democratic institutions of Weimar Germany were not strong enough to keep the Nazis from seizing control of the government. Like Papaya said, Fascists are [B]not[/B] pro-free speech, by definition. They will use our cherished 1st Amendment all day long to spread their hateful and dangerous ideology, and then demolish it if given the opportunity. If you're truly someone who values the sanctity of freedom of speech, then you should be [B][I]fucking wary[/I][/B] of fascists at all times, if history is being used as a precedent. All that said, I do not condone violence (pepper spraying the Trump supporter, even punching Richard Spencer), but I am sympathetic to the plight of antifa. Every year on Holocaust Remembrance day we say "never again," but what is the best way to make sure that it never happens again? Violence? No. Giving fascists a platform to spread and potentially recruit people to their anti-democratic, hateful cause (which is also ironically anti-free speech)? Also no. You see the dichotomy? You can be so pro-free speech that it literally fucking kills you and the country that you know. This is why the U.S. courts have precedents on "fighting words" and the like. Idk about you all, but I wouldn't want UC Berkeley or any other public university giving a platform to radical Jihadists (not saying Milo is equivalent to a Jihadist, either, I'm saying where do we draw the arbitrary "acceptable free speech line?"). I'm with Duck, fascism up until this point has not been able to be discoursed from existence. I guess I'm more anti-fascist than pro-free speech. Fuck.

Hahaha, destroying property and hurting innocent people will show those nasty alt-right Trump supporters the errors of their ways and not help to strengthen their convictions and make other gravitate towards their side instead of ours. Sure got them.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;51795539]Given that she was opposing Antifa earlier in the thread for its violent tendencies, do you earnestly believe she would then seriously ask for the existence of a similar group to one she opposes? It was clearly sarcastic, making a point about justifying the existence of antifa.[/QUOTE] it is exactly that which we find funny. trying to make a point by first equating fascism to communism which is total bullshit and after forgetting that such a thing REALLY existed in the US, pointing out the irony of trying to be sarcastic on that subject. we are not retards we knew she didn't really want for an ''anticom'' to be created, but we find stupid that she tries to use an argument by absurd just to forget that ''anticom'' existed and was state sponsored. thanks for trying to explain to us what Zilla said, we needed it

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51795498]he wasn't. how is that sarcasm. he said that because people argue that antifa has the right to exist, other people should organize to counter communists. and it's really weird he brought up communism from nowhere, guess it's an american reflex[/QUOTE] If you honestly think I legit want more anally retentive, violent 20 year olds running around you're clearly misinterpreting what I mean. We should see fascism and communism as a threat to American society, but outright violence does not a free country make.

[QUOTE=Amakir;51795564]Hahaha, destroying property and hurting innocent people will show those nasty alt-right Trump supporters the errors of their ways and not help to strengthen their convictions and make other gravitate towards their side instead of ours. Sure got them.[/QUOTE] if all it takes is a smashed shop window for you to turn racist then, well. its the same rubbish argument as 'sjws MADE me vote for trump by calling me a cracker and saying black lives matter!!'

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51795572]it is exactly that which we find funny. trying to make a point by first equating fascism to communism which is total bullshit and after forgetting that such a thing REALLY existed in the US, pointing out the irony of trying to be sarcastic on that subject. we are not retards we knew she didn't really want for an ''anticom'' to be created, but we find stupid that she tries to use an argument by absurd just to forget that ''anticom'' existed and was state sponsored. thanks for trying to explain to us what Zilla said, we needed it[/QUOTE] I did not call you retards. Nor do I condone mcarthyism. Don't put words in my mouth

[QUOTE=HappyCompy;51795560]I've been mentally ripping myself to shreds over this issue (and clearly, based on this thread, I'm not alone). As a leftist, freedom of speech is a core belief that is absolutely [B][U][I]essential[/I][/U][/B] to a functioning democratic society. That said, as anyone who knows their history can tell you, democratic institutions are not impervious to toxic ideological takeovers (Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy) by people and organizations who use and abuse said institutions to their advantage, and then dismantle them. The democratic institutions of Weimar Germany were not strong enough to keep the Nazis from seizing control of the government. Like Papaya said, Fascists are [B]not[/B] pro-free speech, by definition. They will use our cherished 1st Amendment all day long to spread their hateful and dangerous ideology, and then demolish it if given the opportunity. If you're truly someone who values the sanctity of freedom of speech, then you should be [B][I]fucking wary[/I][/B] of fascists at all times, if history is being used as a precedent. All that said, I do not condone violence (pepper spraying the Trump supporter, even punching Richard Spencer), but I am sympathetic to the plight of antifa. Every year on Holocaust Remembrance day we say "never again," but what is the best way to make sure that it never happens again? Violence? No. Giving fascists a platform to spread and potentially recruit people to their anti-democratic, hateful cause (which is also ironically anti-free speech)? Also no. You see the dichotomy? You can be so pro-free speech that it literally fucking kills you and the country that you know. This is why the U.S. courts have precedents on "fighting words" and the like. Idk about you all, but I wouldn't want UC Berkeley or any other public university giving a platform to radical Jihadists (not saying Milo is equivalent to a Jihadist, either, I'm saying where do we draw the arbitrary "acceptable free speech line?"). I'm with Duck, fascism up until this point has not been able to be discoursed from existence. I guess I'm more anti-fascist than pro-free speech. Fuck.[/QUOTE] Yeah, it really is a more complicated, difficult, and morally taxing question than some people are giving it credit for. There is no easy answer to the dilemma of stopping the spread of fascism before its too late. I suppose, given our cultural and societal values, all we can really do is have faith that people will not submit to nor elect the fascist usurpers and architects of our own demise. Although, I'm really not too optimistic on that front.

[QUOTE=HappyCompy;51795560]I've been mentally ripping myself to shreds over this issue (and clearly, based on this thread, I'm not alone). As a leftist, freedom of speech is a core belief that is absolutely [B][U][I]essential[/I][/U][/B] to a functioning democratic society. That said, as anyone who knows their history can tell you, democratic institutions are not impervious to toxic ideological takeovers (Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy) by people and organizations who use and abuse said institutions to their advantage, and then dismantle them. The democratic institutions of Weimar Germany were not strong enough to keep the Nazis from seizing control of the government. Like Papaya said, Fascists are [B]not[/B] pro-free speech, by definition. They will use our cherished 1st Amendment all day long to spread their hateful and dangerous ideology, and then demolish it if given the opportunity. If you're truly someone who values the sanctity of freedom of speech, then you should be [B][I]fucking wary[/I][/B] of fascists at all times. All that said, I do not condone violence (pepper spraying the Trump supporter, even punching Richard Spencer), but I am sympathetic to the plight of antifa. Every year on Holocaust Remembrance day we say "never again," but what is the best way to make sure that it never happens again? Violence? No. Giving fascists a platform to spread and potentially recruit people to their anti-democratic, hateful cause (which is also ironically anti-free speech)? Also no. You see the dichotomy? You can be so pro-free speech that it literally fucking kills you and the country that you know. This is why the U.S. courts have precedents on "fighting words" and the like. Idk about you all, but I wouldn't want UC Berkeley or any other public university giving a platform to radical Jihadists (not saying Milo is equivalent to a Jihadist, either, I'm saying where do we draw the arbitrary "acceptable free speech line?"). I'm with Duck, fascism up until this point has not been able to be discoursed from existence. I guess I'm more anti-fascist than pro-free speech. Fuck.[/QUOTE] That's the key point, people believe you can debate fascism out of existence, but because of how fascism is, it's inherent violence and other traits make it impossible to debate, because it makes no sense in the first place. When the argument is "we need more equality" vs "war and violence are good and someitmes desirable because it creates a strong country" there's not much you can debate, you are effectively debating with a madman.

[QUOTE=papaya;51795448]I've never condoned murder against them but hey keep putting words in my mouth[/QUOTE] You've openly condoned assaulting people and destroying public property to prove a point.

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51795572]it is exactly that which we find funny. trying to make a point by first equating fascism to communism which is total bullshit and after forgetting that such a thing REALLY existed in the US, pointing out the irony of trying to be sarcastic on that subject. we are not retards we knew she didn't really want for an ''anticom'' to be created, but we find stupid that she tries to use an argument by absurd just to forget that ''anticom'' existed and was state sponsored. thanks for trying to explain to us what Zilla said, we needed it[/QUOTE] Except you did say she wasn't being sarcastic, which is exactly what she was doing. You did assume she wanted an actual anti-communist organization, and that she somehow forgot McCarthyism when there was no indication of that. The communist aspect wasn't actually important to her point other than establishing a competing ideology and basis for opposing it.

Antifa is no better than the early SA in many regards. Violence and property destruction, wanton mayhem and a passion for shutting opposing views down, regardless of their position. If you disagree, you are an enemy in their eyes. Antifa is a terrorist organization.