White Supremacist Nazis to Rally in Florida| Rick Scott Declares State of Emergency - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=_Axel;52801329]If you want to have an actual point then show us statistical evidence, because the real stats show that it's the extreme right, not left, that is responsible for most of the political violence, despite your hilarious claim that there's "no political equivalent for the right".[/QUOTE] [url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2017/08/21/which-ideology-has-inspired-the-most-murders-in-terrorist-attacks-on-u-s-soil/#3b05c41c1e74]According to Forbes[/url], while right-wing terrorists have accounted for more fatalities over the past twenty years (in particular due to the OKC bombing), since the start of 2016 left-wing terror attacks have accounted for 13 deaths to right-wingers' 5 (including Charlottesville). So historically, right-wing activism has been more violent (and even that is dwarfed by Islamic terrorism), but in the last two years the fatalities as a consequence of partisan violence have been overwhelmingly inflicted by the left.

[QUOTE=catbarf;52801616][url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2017/08/21/which-ideology-has-inspired-the-most-murders-in-terrorist-attacks-on-u-s-soil/#3b05c41c1e74]According to Forbes[/url], while right-wing terrorists have accounted for more fatalities over the past twenty years (in particular due to the OKC bombing), since the start of 2016 left-wing terror attacks have accounted for 13 deaths to right-wingers' 5 (including Charlottesville). So historically, right-wing activism has been more violent (and even that is dwarfed by Islamic terrorism), but in the last two years the fatalities as a consequence of partisan violence have been overwhelmingly inflicted by the left.[/QUOTE] If 51 to 23 is to be considered parity, then so should 13 to 5. I wouldn't say 13 to 5 is "overwhelming" either, that's the same order of magnitude. The original point was that the extreme right is "peaceful" anyway. If antifa is to be considered violent, then so is the extreme right.

[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;52801539]aye fuck off ya racist you realize that this is exactly the sort of statement that digs the white supremacists deeper into their belief that they're being attacked, yeah?[/QUOTE] I am white, ya git. And i'm sick of standing next to and being represented by other white Americans who refuse to condemn hateful behavior that begets violence against nonwhites. I'm trying to tell the folks that look like me that it's only a mild inconvenience that comes from sometimes being labeled as potentially dangerous, by people who have been vulnerable to real danger from those that look like us, and our mild inconvenience is not on the same level as the suffering of the victims of white supremacy. Our mild inconvenience is not worth defending white supremacists who will continue to commit violent acts as long as we aren't condemning them.

[QUOTE=DChapsfield;52801534]Poor normal right wing people, being endangered by the possibility that they could have to defend themselves from the label of white supremacist. Surely this is the plight that matters the most in this scenario, and not the wellbeing of the people of color, non-hetero folks, trans people, genderqueer people, and pretty much +30% of the population that is actually threatened by white supremacy. The people and their allies who have been publicly harassed, assaulted, beaten, and had a car driven into and through them. I'm sorry for the heavy sarcasm, but white people can afford to be mislabeled once in a while in their lives. Because in the meantime, bars have been set for public behavior by white supremacists that endanger the physical safety and lives of the groups I listed. That's the most pressing issue here.[/QUOTE] This is the kind of retardation that got trump elected. Who are you to decide what white people can afford? [QUOTE=_Axel;52801597] Did I ever say that? I just find their tactics pathetic, and so are the alt right's attempts to portray themselves as peaceful ideologists.[/quote] That's fine, but you still have no choice but to afford them their freedoms until they stop trying to portray themselves that way. [quote]If you cut out 1995 ie the 168 deaths from the Oklahoma bombing, you get more than double the amount of people killed by the right wing compared to the left wing.[/quote] Spread out over 25 years, this doesn't actually tell us who is stronger or more threatening than who. Keep in mind 20 years was enough for us to go from the left wing terrorism of the 60s/70s to militia movements and the oklahoma bombing. Again, I think it's a significant fact that over half of the deaths from left wing terrorism in the last 25 years occurred since the beginning of Trump's campaign. This would suggest populist coming to power in the government and the democrats losing all sorts of power in the government, possibly mixed with mainstream culture leaning left (culminating in lots of apologetics for antifa, excusing 'punching nazis', claiming far right & far left have no equivalency) and millenials doing economically bad, is motivating extremism. For the first time in our history, we have antifa running around (there were attempts to import it in the 2000s, but it had to reformulate itself to 'anti-racist action'). This is significant. Honestly, so far, what I see is the left finding itself in a post-obama political crisis with some loud voices claiming the president and the populism of middle america is an existential threat to minorities, and a plurality is organizing along those lines. I see the right meme-ing about helicopter rides and spawning the occasional mentally ill nut like dylan roof or the charlottesville guy. In fact, that's kind of the political line, that the alt right pathetically hides on the internet rather than do anything. [quote]Your original point was that [I]there's no right wing equivalent to antifa[/I] and then you admit without flinching that right wing terrorism killed 5 people since the beginning of 2016.[/quote] There's no equivalent organization to antifa, no. [quote]Right, so I suppose the 5 people killed by right wing terrorists you cited don't exist anymore.[/quote] I didn't say the terrorism doesn't exist, however it does need to be decided whether the far right are basement dwellers or the latest incarnation of the brownshirts that need to be fought. As of right now, it appears we lean towards the former and there's an awful lot of demand for the latter, owing to a political crisis and need to express anger [quote]Speculation? You're the one arguing that [I]ethnic cleansing can be fucking peaceful.[/I] You're the one who should back up such an asinine claim. How the fuck can ethnic cleansing be peaceful? No. As far as logic goes, people advocating for "ethnic cleansing" are not peaceful. You're the one who has to prove they are. Uh, no? I don't have to prove violence against them is justified, since I never claimed that. I was calling you out for calling them "peaceful" "unlike antifa", remember?[/QUOTE] I don't have to prove anything. The original point was that Spencer promoted nazi-style ethnic cleansing and mass murder, and this is what warrants various assaults by mobs given power through a label. I pointed out this was false, the claim of an existential threat was faulty and the resulting pre-emptive 'self-defense' violence is unjust and there is no basis to strip this dude of any liberal freedoms. Further, I pointed out that the need to do this is ultimately owing to a need to express anger towards trump, which is emotional and irrational, and there is far too much collateral damage overlap in the same crowd between 'is it okay to punch a nazi?' and 'is trump the orange mussolini?'. The year up to charlottesville, with assaults on trump supporters, the firebombing of a GOP office and scrawling of 'nazi republicans' on it, and the battles in berkeley, reflects an atmosphere where left wing extremism is becoming a threat to normal right wing people. [i]There is no equivalency for the left[/i]. Democrats aren't being beat up. Nobody is claiming they are communists that can only be talked to with fists. Now that might be different if Trump lost, as the media speculated extensively on, but we can only guess. Anyone can claim spencer's position of voluntary separation is retarded, I wouldn't disagree, but we have to take it at face value and judge it as not violent at least for now. Attempts to construe as otherwise necessarily reflects on the left's desire to reclaim power in a period of loss of governmental power and a sort of heightening culture war between (white and generally poorer) red states and (diverse but very unequal) blue states, not carry out justice. It's all about political power. And that's why you see normal conservatives suddenly making an issue out of Wolfenstein 2's 'make america nazi free again' advertisement. They see the writing on the wall and believe the definition of 'nazi' has or will expand to include them, which is a fairly justified belief.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52801597]If what you're trying to prove is a general trend, then yes they are. [/QUOTE] As someone currently studying film, video is extremely easy to edit in a way that is misleading or outright lies to the viewer.

[QUOTE=catbarf;52801616][url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2017/08/21/which-ideology-has-inspired-the-most-murders-in-terrorist-attacks-on-u-s-soil/#3b05c41c1e74]According to Forbes[/url], while right-wing terrorists have accounted for more fatalities over the past twenty years (in particular due to the OKC bombing), since the start of 2016 left-wing terror attacks have accounted for 13 deaths to right-wingers' 5 (including Charlottesville). So historically, right-wing activism has been more violent (and even that is dwarfed by Islamic terrorism), but in the last two years the fatalities as a consequence of partisan violence have been overwhelmingly inflicted by the left.[/QUOTE] That article still links back to the same CATO study. I don't think the past 2 years is an adequate window to determine a trend from, or even a change in historical trends. Dylann Roof killed 9 in the middle of 2015. Are we not to consider his action as recent enough because it falls six months outside of our arbitrary window of time? How about Robert Dear when he shot people at a Planned Parenthood in late November? That's another 3 that were killed. It seems even more arbitrary when we look at when the article was published. Roof's killings happened ~26 months prior, while Dear's happened ~22 months prior. To measure which extremist ideology is more violent or more extreme seems kind of shitty anyway, but to make the claim that recent political violence is [I]overwhelmingly[/I] being committed by one side by skewing stats via arbitrary dates seems especially scummy.

[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;52801507]advocating for violence or murder is never okay, my dude doesn't matter who they are, their beliefs aren't worth punching them over[/QUOTE] [thumb]http://historyconflicts.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/d-day-image.jpg[/thumb] violent antifascists attack peaceful Right Wing protestors, France 1944

[QUOTE=Conscript;52801161]'Schizophrenic lone wolf crashes a car into opposing rally after fights break out, therefore I have the right to label and assault people as I wish in """"""self-defense"""""'[/QUOTE] You say this as though the person who organized the nazi rally wasn't extremely pleased with him doing this, saying [b]on camera[/b] that "a lot more people are going to die before we're through." [quote]You're willfully blind[/quote]

[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;52801876][thumb]http://historyconflicts.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/d-day-image.jpg[/thumb] violent antifascists attack peaceful Right Wing protestors, France 1944[/QUOTE] im glad you at least got a dank dank meme in. Although ww2 is pretty useful since we can bring up how violence against the Nazis in Germany was a large part of what allowed them to take power and getting the left crushed. They were able to paint the left as violent thugs, and slip into government and gain emergency police powers, thanks to the attacks that'd occur at demonstrations. The Nazis very deliberately did this by organization in left-wing areas, and they used Nazi-punching idiots to drum up support. This happened in Italy as well.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52801957]im glad you at least got a dank dank meme in. Although ww2 is pretty useful since we can bring up how violence against the Nazis in Germany was a large part of what allowed them to take power and getting the left crushed. They were able to paint the left as violent thugs, and slip into government and gain emergency police powers, thanks to the attacks that'd occur at demonstrations. The Nazis very deliberately did this by organization in left-wing areas, and they used Nazi-punching idiots to drum up support. This happened in Italy as well.[/QUOTE] Funny considering Hitler himself said the opposite [quote][b]Only one danger could have jeopardized this development[/b] – if our adversaries had understood its principle, established a clear understanding of our ideas, and not offered any resistance. [b]Or, alternatively, if they had from the first day annihilated with the utmost brutality the nucleus of our new movement.[/b][/quote]

[QUOTE=Conscript;52801161]I'm starting to think you're legitimately incapable of thought when it comes to this issue.[/QUOTE] This isn't how you argue.

[QUOTE=catbarf;52801616][url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2017/08/21/which-ideology-has-inspired-the-most-murders-in-terrorist-attacks-on-u-s-soil/#3b05c41c1e74]According to Forbes[/url], while right-wing terrorists have accounted for more fatalities over the past twenty years (in particular due to the OKC bombing), since the start of 2016 left-wing terror attacks have accounted for 13 deaths to right-wingers' 5 (including Charlottesville). So historically, right-wing activism has been more violent (and even that is dwarfed by Islamic terrorism), but in the last two years the fatalities as a consequence of partisan violence have been overwhelmingly inflicted by the left.[/QUOTE] Islamic terrorism is right wing, though. And when you include western far right terror attacks to include the rest of the western world, they dwarf far left terrorism. I mean shit, in the UK they fucking assassinated a member of parliament. They also have increasingly growing political parties and even got white nationalists inside the White House. The far right are WINNING and they still resort to killing people lmao.

[QUOTE=1legmidget;52801838]That article still links back to the same CATO study. I don't think the past 2 years is an adequate window to determine a trend from, or even a change in historical trends. Dylann Roof killed 9 in the middle of 2015. Are we not to consider his action as recent enough because it falls six months outside of our arbitrary window of time? How about Robert Dear when he shot people at a Planned Parenthood in late November? That's another 3 that were killed. It seems even more arbitrary when we look at when the article was published. Roof's killings happened ~26 months prior, while Dear's happened ~22 months prior. To measure which extremist ideology is more violent or more extreme seems kind of shitty anyway, but to make the claim that recent political violence is [I]overwhelmingly[/I] being committed by one side by skewing stats via arbitrary dates seems especially scummy.[/QUOTE] That's fair, and I apologize for citing a clearly biased source. My point was more that judging right-wing terrorism as the overwhelmingly greater threat based on decades-long trends downplays the fact that left-wing violence is sharply on the rise. [QUOTE=Paramud;52801973]Funny considering Hitler himself said the opposite[/QUOTE] So, uh, what about that line you didn't bold, about understanding and not offering resistance? We've already failed utterly at 'from the first day annihilating with the utmost brutality the nucleus of their new movement', and alienating moderate Republicans with wanton violence clearly isn't getting them onboard with annihilating Nazism. What thelurker1234 said wasn't contradicted by the passage you quoted: The Nazis came to power through victimization by vigilante movements, which could only be circumvented if either that vigilantism never occurred or if those vigilantes wiped them out entirely. If you want to extrapolate that to today, the choices are either don't go Nazi-punching, or find the actual neo-Nazis and murder them in cold blood, en masse. Anything in between is playing into their hands. [QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;52802014]Islamic terrorism is right wing, though.[/QUOTE] Islamic fundamentalists flying planes into buildings in retaliation for American involvement in the Middle East is only related to right-wing extremists bombing abortion clinics in the most pedantic and useless sense. In the context of violence in American politics, religious attacks with usually foreign origins aren't relevant.

[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;52801539]aye fuck off ya racist you realize that this is exactly the sort of statement that digs the white supremacists deeper into their belief that they're being attacked, yeah?[/QUOTE] Oh man I didn't know white people were abducted en masse to a completely foreign country to be used as slave labor and subjugated for centuries. Don't you dare suggest the two should fall under that same label. And as if ending the plight of anti-white racism is going to improve the problem with fascists in this country in any capacity. They're going to find a reason to be emboldened no matter what. [QUOTE=catbarf;52801616]So historically, right-wing activism has been more violent (and even that is dwarfed by Islamic terrorism)[/QUOTE] lmao ISIS is one of the best modern day examples of militarized fascism, do you think them being brown means they can't be far right? The Alt right and ISIS are so painfully similar all you'd have to do is drone strike some upper middle class white neighborhoods and you'd start seeing chuds wearing pepe shirts riding around in KIAs waving AR-15s.

punch nazis.

[QUOTE=catbarf;52802139] Islamic fundamentalists flying planes into buildings in retaliation for American involvement in the Middle East is only related to right-wing extremists bombing abortion clinics in the most pedantic and useless sense. In the context of violence in American politics, religious attacks with usually foreign origins aren't relevant.[/QUOTE] Islamic extremist beliefs ARE right-wing ultimately though. Wanting to kill ethnic minorities, homosexuals, heathens, and nonbelievers all fit the bill. On a world wide scale, the far right in all forms are a global menace.

[QUOTE=Paramud;52801973]Funny considering Hitler himself said the opposite[/QUOTE] A quote is not an argument against how history actually played out. That's also incredibly assumptuous as it places fascism as an ideology that is hopelessly attractive to people, almost like a mind virus. Which was how Hitler saw it anyhow, hence he and mussolini's statements.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;52802507]Islamic extremist beliefs ARE right-wing ultimately though. Wanting to kill ethnic minorities, homosexuals, heathens, and nonbelievers all fit the bill. On a world wide scale, the far right in all forms are a global menace.[/QUOTE] I could cite communist regimes as examples of the far left being a global menace. I like to think the problem has more to deal with authoritarianism in general than what end of the spectrum it's on.

[QUOTE=VX-79;52802343]lmao ISIS is one of the best modern day examples of militarized fascism, do you think them being brown means they can't be far right? The Alt right and ISIS are so painfully similar all you'd have to do is drone strike some upper middle class white neighborhoods and you'd start seeing chuds wearing pepe shirts riding around in KIAs waving AR-15s.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;52802507]Islamic extremist beliefs ARE right-wing ultimately though. Wanting to kill ethnic minorities, homosexuals, heathens, and nonbelievers all fit the bill. On a world wide scale, the far right in all forms are a global menace.[/QUOTE] Oh come on, the topic was about right-wing vs left-wing violence [i]in American politics[/i], what ISIS is doing halfway around the globe means fuck-all to this conversation. If you want to say on a global scale that right-wing violence is greater because you want to shoehorn Islamic fundamentalists into Western liberalism's political gradient, sure, you can have that, here are your points, good for you. It has nothing to do with what we're actually talking about.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52801957] violence against the Nazis in Germany was a large part of[/QUOTE] Hold right there. You really think that violence against National Socialists was one of the biggest reasons, why they got into the goverment? Not the fact, that "the late empire" was defeated, not the fact that communists tried to take the country over, not the slavophobia/anti-semitism? The only real reason, why they got in, is because of crisises in Weimar Republic and most importantly lost pride, destruction of dreams of German Colonial Empire, growing communist threat, losing regional power status and humiliation and losing 1/3 of their territory. Also if this really was a large part of what caused the rise of Nazis, then Rosa Luxembourg would take over Germany in 20s. Please elaborate your point as I do not believe agression towards NSDAP played a significant role in their tookover.

[QUOTE=Harbie;52802594]I could cite communist regimes as examples of the far left being a global menace. I like to think the problem has more to deal with authoritarianism in general than what end of the spectrum it's on.[/QUOTE] Shhh if you bring up horseshoe theory then everyone will get mad It's almost like political extremism in general is a bad thing due to the self-isolation and forced suppression of others' opinions and views that come with it

[QUOTE=piddlezmcfuz;52802683] It's almost like political extremism in general is a bad thing due to the self-isolation and forced suppression of others' opinions and views that come with it[/QUOTE] Shut up there are good guys and bad guys and if you're not one of the good guys you're one of the bad guys. /s

[QUOTE=Mifil;52802600]Hold right there. You really think that violence against National Socialists was one of the biggest reasons, why they got into the goverment? Not the fact, that "the late empire" was defeated, not the fact that communists tried to take the country over, not the slavophobia/anti-semitism? The only real reason, why they got in, is because of crisises in Weimar Republic and most importantly lost pride, destruction of dreams of German Colonial Empire, growing communist threat, losing regional power status and humiliation and losing 1/3 of their territory. Also if this really was a large part of what caused the rise of Nazis, then Rosa Luxembourg would take over Germany in 20s. Please elaborate your point as I do not believe agression towards NSDAP played a significant role in their tookover.[/QUOTE] It was a large part of what they used to gain sympathy and triumph over the leftists, is what I was getting at. By holding large events in predominantly leftist areas, violence would erupt and they would blame it on the left. Overtime this would strengthen their position as they became seen as more tolerable and deserving of sympathies than the leftists. Although, of course. While I think it played a role, it wasn't wholly behind fascism's growing popularity at the time. It's not like punching nazis will make america necessarily turn fascist. But what is important for keeping radicals down is what you touched on: [quote], is because of crisises in Weimar Republic and most importantly lost pride, destruction of dreams of German Colonial Empire, growing communist threat, losing regional power status and humiliation and losing 1/3 of their territory.[/quote] The details will vary of course, country by country. But in healthy liberal democracies, fringe weirdos tend to stay fringe weirdos. And anti-nazi demonstrations are fine as well, I'm even generally in favor of many antifas rallies because the majority are peaceful counter demonstrations.

[url]https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/white-nationalist-richard-spencer-s-supporters-charged-post-speech-shooting-n812751[/url] Oh hey would you look at that, nevermind guys we were totally wrong about the alt right all along. How could we have been so blind

[QUOTE=Potus;52804333][url]https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/white-nationalist-richard-spencer-s-supporters-charged-post-speech-shooting-n812751[/url] Oh hey would you look at that, nevermind guys we were totally wrong about the alt right all along. How could we have been so blind[/QUOTE] why did they arrest them and not open a political dialogue where both sides could present their arguments clearly???

[QUOTE=Mifil;52802600]Hold right there. You really think that violence against National Socialists was one of the biggest reasons, why they got into the goverment? Not the fact, that "the late empire" was defeated, not the fact that communists tried to take the country over, not the slavophobia/anti-semitism? The only real reason, why they got in, is because of crisises in Weimar Republic and most importantly lost pride, destruction of dreams of German Colonial Empire, growing communist threat, losing regional power status and humiliation and losing 1/3 of their territory. Also if this really was a large part of what caused the rise of Nazis, then Rosa Luxembourg would take over Germany in 20s. Please elaborate your point as I do not believe agression towards NSDAP played a significant role in their tookover.[/QUOTE] Lets not forget the part where the nazis had to literally cheat to get in a position of power in the first place.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;52800970]I'm going to advocate that nazis be peacefully punched in the face. There I'm not advocating for violence because I put peaceful in front of the scary word.[/QUOTE] Ah, there's my problem. In other news these nazi fucks shot at a bunch of protesters, so really can't say they were being non-violent. [QUOTE=Potus;52804333][url]https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/white-nationalist-richard-spencer-s-supporters-charged-post-speech-shooting-n812751[/url] Oh hey would you look at that, nevermind guys we were totally wrong about the alt right all along. How could we have been so blind[/QUOTE] I just quoted so I didn't have to post the link again.

To be perfectly frank the entire "we're only feeding into their victimization complex!" argument shows a drastic lack of understanding of how fascism works in terms of its proselytism and spread tactics. Fascists [I]don't need you[/I] to develop a victim complex. The entirety of their ideology revolves around establishing themselves as a political underdog and in order to achieve this they will simultaneously undermine their actual political presence and overindulge in self-aggrandizing speeches about how virtuous, courageous and strong they are. If there isn't real proof/evidence of their claims, they will make it up. If there [I]is[/I] proof or evidence of any of their claims (including "we're persecuted", which one could argue is proven by people ostracizing them), they'll [I]still[/I] make up their own version that's more presentable. The solution is not to engage in understanding dialogue because they are not looking for one: any attempt will lead to them trying to either weasel their way out, or mocking the attempt as a whole. The solution is to intercept their tactics and simply be louder than they are, so as to drown out the bullshit. The worst thing you could do regarding fascism, short of agreeing with it, is be complacent.

[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;52792024]Well if we know where they're congregating, drop a bomb. Honestly these people are vermin.[/QUOTE] I can see why you're angry, but your have to remember that at the end of the day, that even though these people are completely wrong in views, they have the same right to live as you do. Most of them were brought up in ignorance and the anger you feel is the same emotion they feel when they're fight for their ignorant beliefs. The difference is; you know and accept the true and they don't because they were poorly educated in their up bringing. [QUOTE=Boaraes;52792083]Yeah just bomb your own citizens, sounds like a really good precedent to set.[/QUOTE]As someone working though anger issues, I know that he doesn't mean it. It's just one of those thing you say like "I'm gonna kill you" and never actually mean. The harshness of his statement just serves to illustrate the extent of his anger.

[QUOTE]"Only white people can support what we call Western civilization." He also has said there should be a "peaceful ethnic cleansing"[/QUOTE] Ask death camp survivors how it went the last time white nationalists did a mass "peaceful ethnic cleansing". Actually you don't even have to ask because we have photos and history books. [IMG]http://cdn1.spiegel.de/images/image-111620-galleryV9-ykjv-111620.jpg[/IMG] The guys who were charged for shooting at protesters at that rally shouted "Heil Hitler". They know what they want, and the photo above is what they want, don't act like it's any different today. If you think "peaceful ethnic cleansing" isn't an oxymoron you're either incredibly naive or xenophobic enough to not care about the people it would affect. Even if you ""just wanted to move people"", you have no fucking right to ask anyone to go anywhere because of their ethnie, it's where they live and they have rights just like you. Moving an ethnic group by force is a hate crime. Defending that worldview with shit arguments WHILE trying to shift the blame on the left and antifa is a new level of being dishonest. Stop defending nazis with bad arguments.