The Alt-Right: We should take them seriously

[Camicon]

8 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

This is literally the first example you'll find if you tried even 1% to search for it.  It has quotes from first-hand witnesses on both sides:

 

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-charlottesville-witnesses-20170815-story.html

Ah, yes, let's see who claims that Antifa was there...

 

Hunter Wallace, Nazi sympathizer and blogger, Marcus Cicero, Nazi sympathizer and blogger, and Matt Parrott, Nazi.

 

Wow. Who could have guessed that the Nazis would look at the people they've declared their enemy and say "it's Antifa!" in an attempt to deflect media  criticism away from themselves?

 

You know what's funny? All the videos linked in that article show the Nazis initiating the violence.

 

Just now, CaptainYesterday said:

This would sting more coming from someone who appears to be pro-Antifa.

 

Antifa was 100% at Charlottsville.

 

This is false.

 

Okay, you got me.  What looks like a couple dozen white supremacists gathered another time and nothing happened.

 

Clearly, this is an epidemic sweeping the nation.  You can't walk outside without tripping over a white supremacist, who will attack you on sight, until a heroic Antifa member shows up to save you.

I don't support Antifa's tactics, but I'm not going to shed a tear when some Nazi prick gets punched in the face.

 

And Antifa was not at Charlottesville. Closest I can find is a 20 member group called "Redneck Revolt" (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/us/who-were-the-counterprotesters-in-charlottesville.html), who don't even claim the Antifa moniker. There is a difference between Antifa the group showing up, and individuals who claim to be anti-fascists.

 

Nice strawmen though. Do you have a field to go put them in? They don't really belong here.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Camicon]

17 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Hilarious coming from the one calling everyone else a Nazi.

Calling Nazis, Nazis. People who aren't Nazis don't march with and support Nazis, while they chant "Blood and Soil" and praise the massacre of black church goers.

 

Quote

If people show up in black outfits with black masks and Communist flags, and cause violence, they're going to get called Antifa.

If people run around pretending they're a T-Rex, someone might call them a T-Rex; doesn't make them a T-Rex. Antifa, unlike Nazism, is not an ideology. Simply running around in black clothes and punching Nazis doesn't make you Antifa, like how voting for Political Party A doesn't make you a member of Political Party A. Antifa is something you have to make a conscious decision to join.

 

Quote

I don't know what videos you're seeing.  I'm seeing violence coming from the mobs with the Confederate flags behind them, and violence coming from the mobs with the Hammer and Sickle behind them.

I'm seeing Nazis charge at protesters, who proceed to defend themselves. It's a nuance that is recognized and validated by most every justice system in the world. That's why, if someone starts punching you, you can punch them back, and only the person who started punching you will be charged with assault.

 

Quote

I don't support white supremacists or Antifa, in any way.  I'd condemn actual, genocide-committing Nazis above Antifa, but what we have right now are two sides playing dress up and engaging in generic street violence, which is why I regard both of them fairly equally.

Except that one side is engaging in generic street violence because they want to establish an American Reich, and one side is engaging in generic street violence to ensure that doesn't happen. That doesn't make what the latter do right, but it does mean the two aren't equivalent.

 

Quote

So we should respect what people identify as except in the cases where you want to call someone a Nazi?

I have no respect for people that choose to associate themselves with an ideology that is necessarily, inherently genocidal. I don't think anyone should.

 

But, to the point you're trying to make, I explained above: Nazism is an ideology, one can be a Nazi without belonging to a Nazi political party. Antifa is not an ideology, one can't be Antifa without joining an Antifa "political party".

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Camicon]

18 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

You're clearly only seeing what you want to see, and you've been brainwashed to believe that America is even 0.01% in danger of some sort of Nazi uprising.  I really don't think any amount of evidence will allow you to see violence from the Left when it occurs.

What, you think I'm worried about America turning into the Fourth Reich? Please. That's a laughable concern.

 

The Weimar Republic barely lasted a decade before Hitler hijacked it. American democracy has more than two-hundred and forty years under its belt. It is far more stable than the Weimar Republic ever was, it would take decades of sharp, steady economic decline, coupled with heretofore unseen government corruption before a fascist takeover would be an actual threat. Or one apocalyptic cataclysm, but then we'd be dealing with larger issues, I think.

 

The Nazi marches in the US are not so much the problem themselves as they are an indicator of the actual problem. Namely, the nationalist, xenophobic, theocratic, bigoted narrative that the Republican party has been pushing for the last decade and a half has been taken up wholeheartedly by the current administration, and it is now well and truly normalizing that kind of rhetoric and hateful behaviour. It encourages hate crimes, and discriminatory practices that would have been laughed at as unthinkable a scant three years ago.

 

If Antifa starts holding rallies and beating people up in support of a communist revolution, then yeah, I'll protest their actions the same as I am the Nazis now. But they aren't.

[Nevyn]

So how about Antifa here then?:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad-antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/

 

Does that mean you’re ready to protest Antifa now?  I guess that doesn’t qualify since Antifa doesn’t hold rallies. They operate by showing up and turning other rallies violent.  

 

 

 

 

[Camicon]

13 minutes ago, Nevyn said:

So how about Antifa here then?:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad-antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/

 

Does that mean you’re ready to protest Antifa now?  I guess that doesn’t qualify since Antifa doesn’t hold rallies. They operate by showing up and turning other rallies violent.  

I've already said I don't support their tactics, but they aren't advocating for the creation of a totalitarian ethno-state that would see ethnic, racial, sexual and gender minorities killed simply because they don't conform to some arbitrary standard of what an "American" is, like Nazis do.

 

When Antifa steps beyond "beating up Nazis" and into "advocating for a communist revolution that would see millions dead in the streets" then I will condemn them as strongly as I do the Nazis.

[Nevyn]

Neo-Nazis. Those are just one of the groups that you call full Nazi. The KKK and some others have never had anything to do with communism. They may be a hate group but they’re not the flavor you’re looking for. You’re using a blanket term for a lot of individual groups. Prove that every one of the 900 plus groups that the FBI considers hate groups all have full Nazi ideology at their core if anyone ever wants me to take that term seriously or to take them as the serious unified threat that term paints. 

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Nevyn]

Antifa and the far left has about as much chance of starting an uprising as the hate groups on the far right do. They’re all just fear-mongering and muddying the waters for otherwise reasonable people from all sides who get lumped together with one or the other by one or the other. Background radiation may sound awful but its largely just noise. 

[Camicon]

14 minutes ago, Nevyn said:

Neo-Nazis. Those are just one of the groups that you call full Nazi. The KKK and some others have never had anything to do with communism. They may be a hate group but they’re not the flavor you’re looking for. You’re using a blanket term for a lot of individual groups. Prove that every one of the 900 plus groups that the FBI considers hate groups all have full Nazi ideology at their core if anyone ever wants me to take that term seriously or to take them as the serious unified threat that term paints. 

My standard throughout this thread is, and has always been, "marching with Nazis while they chant 'Blood and Soil' and praise racist assholes who massacre black churchgoers makes you a Nazi". As in, "ideologically aligned with Nazis", not as in "member of a Nazi political party". You can be the former without the latter, or even being aware of what a Nazi is.

 

Be a member of the KKK doesn't make you a Nazi. Marching with and supporting Nazis makes you a Nazi.

 

12 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Yeah, Antifa is very much about equality.  They want a totalitarian state that would remove everyone's basic human rights of personal liberty.  So progressive!

 

Honestly, can anyone think of even one time when Communism didn't go amazingly well?

Please, point out some recent times where Antifa marched for a communist revolution of America.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Nevyn]

The problem with that is the groups are only very loosely affiliated. A lot of those groups were just attending the same rally that day. That logic makes every counter-protester there Antifa. Can I slap them all with the Communist label? Can I then call everyone on the left Commies due to association? Thats whats being done to the right. It’s faulty reasoning both ways. 

[Camicon]

12 minutes ago, Nevyn said:

The problem with that is the groups are only very loosely affiliated. A lot of those groups were just attending the same rally that day. That logic makes every counter-protester there Antifa. Can I slap them all with the Communist label? Can I then call everyone on the left Commies due to association? Thats whats being done to the right. It’s faulty reasoning both ways. 

Showing up to protest a Nazi march can be done without associating yourself with the other protesters; a protest against Nazis is not necessarily advocating anything, it is condemning Nazism. Marching with Nazis cannot be done without associating yourself with Nazis, because marching with Nazis necessarily advocates Nazism.

 

18 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Every time they gather and riot with the Hammer and Sickle flag?

You mean every time they show up waving flags and punching Nazis? Yeah, that's not marching in support of a communist revolution of America, that's protesting and punching Nazis. They're not synonymous.

[Nevyn]

No, I get it. Guilt by association. Which brings us full circle to you actually proving that every group there actually supports a German political party from the 30’s and 40’s. 

[Camicon]

3 minutes ago, Nevyn said:

No, I get it. Guilt by association. Which brings us full circle to you actually proving that every group there actually supports a German political party from the 30’s and 40’s. 

"Guilt by association" would be if we accused every protester of being a part of Antifa, because one Antifa member showed up. Accurately identifying people marching alongside and in support of Nazis as Nazis is a simple exercise in demography.

 

And, I don't think you're aware but, one need not fellate Hitler or his party to be a Nazi. Nazism is an ideology, you can be a Nazi without being a member of any Nazi party; the same as you can be a conservative or liberal without belonging to any conservative or liberal political party.

[Nevyn]

The very reason why we have Nazi and Neo-Nazi is to differentiate. Even the Germans make the destinction. 

[Camicon]

11 minutes ago, Nevyn said:

The very reason why we have Nazi and Neo-Nazi is to differentiate. Even the Germans make the destinction. 

It's not a pertinent distinction in this context.

[Nevyn]

Which context are we talking about again? The whole right or just the alt-right? If the distinction isn't that important than why does everyone use it but those who want to incorrectly apply it to a wider political spectrum?

[Camicon]

31 minutes ago, Nevyn said:

Which context are we talking about again? The whole right or just the alt-right? If the distinction isn't that important than why does everyone use it but those who want to incorrectly apply it to a wider political spectrum?

The context of this discussion, that we are in the middle of. When I say "The 'Unite the Right' people marching in Charlottesville are Nazis" there is no confusion that I mean they are ideologically aligned with Nazism. Nobody mistakenly assumes that I am saying they were card-carrying members of Hitler's party. At least, they shouldn't.

 

An instance where distinguishing between Nazis of the early-mid 20th century and Nazis from 1950 onward, by calling the latter "neo-Nazis", is pertinent would be in an academic paper on the evolution of Nazism, for example.

 

But that's not the conversation we're having. There's no confusion between us as to what I mean. That makes the distinction pointless, because there is no substantive ideological difference between "Nazis" and "neo-Nazis", because they subscribe to the same ideology.

This is unlike the distinction between "liberals", which typically refers to people who are socially and economically left-wing", and "classical liberals", which typically refers to people who are socially left-wing and economically right-wing (laissez-faire capitalism, to be precise). "Liberals" and "classical liberals" are ideologically distinct.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Camicon]

2 hours ago, CaptainYesterday said:

You're speaking in tautologies and then using that to make all of your other points true, which they are not.

 

"Everyone marching with swastikas at Charlottesville and saying that they were Nazis were Nazis."  - Sure

 

"And also everyone else there protesting the statue removal were Nazis." - Wait, what?

 

"And also everyone who disagrees with this is a Nazi-sympathizer." - No...

Stop making up shit and pretending like I said it. That is beyond disrespectful. If you want to quote me, this forum has a handy little function to do just that.

[Sally]

On 2/9/2018 at 1:15 PM, God. said:

But a major difference between Alt-Right and Nazism is that the national socialist leaders actually openly sai they wanted to get rid of democracy and inferior humans from Germany. nd before and after their election to power they used their paramilitary forces to terrorize the population and then used their position of power to gain complete control of the nation and do what they always promised to do.

 

Now I haven't seen profilic members of the alt-right say these things, sure there may be indiviuals, but then they are fringe elements and not the leading members of the group(s), let alone the majority of it. 

Howard, the Nazis were a fringe element at one time also.  

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Camicon]

19 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

You say it every time...

No, I don't. And if you can't use the damn quote function to prove otherwise then man up and admit that you're inventing things out of whole cloth.

 

People marching with and supporting Nazis are, themselves, Nazis. This has been what I said from the beginning, and I have not deviated from that at any point.

 

You disagree. Fine. You're entitled to your opinion. But do not put words in my mouth; if you want to quote me, then actually quote me.

 

Otherwise you can consider this the end of my involvement with you in this thread, because I will not waste my time verbally sparring with someone that repeatedly and flagrantly lies about what I've said.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Camicon]

1 minute ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Ok, so this is what I was talking about when I said that you use tautologies.  Here you are stating something pretty obvious, something that no one here is arguing against.  This is fine.

 

The problem is that you use this to springboard directly to definitive statements like:

 

 

When you say stuff like this, you are making the assertion that every person who protested the statue removal at Charlottesville marched with the white supremacists (e.g., tacitly supporting them), but this is false.  You are assuming the credibility from your previous statement carries over into these ones, but it doesn't.  You refuse to believe that the protest involved anything but the march, but you're wrong, which makes your absurd attempts to tie the American Right to Nazism...well, absurd.

For the people who marched with the Nazis to have done so in ignorance they would all need to have been simultaneously blind, deaf, and dumb. It wasn't hush-hush, there was no mistaking what they were there for or what they stood for. There was no "Nazi free" protest in Charlottesville; the marchers were there with Nazis, each and every one of them, as had been planned weeks in advance.

 

If anyone had wanted to protest the statues of traitors and slavers being removed from public places and put in museums, they had literally every opportunity to plan a Nazi-free protest at a later date. But the people who showed up did not do that. They chose to march in solidarity and support of Nazism, and they reaffirmed that choice every minute they spent there.

[Nevyn]

Traitor is also inaccurate. Every soldier who fought for the Confederacy was granted full amnesty.  They are all full veterans of the US. 

[Camicon]

4 hours ago, Nevyn said:

Traitor is also inaccurate. Every soldier who fought for the Confederacy was granted full amnesty.  They are all full veterans of the US. 

They committed treason against the United States and waged war against it. That is the textbook definition of a traitor, being granted amnesty doesn't change that.

[Nevyn]

 If that's treason then guess what? Everyone in the US and Canada are traitors to England and France. And yes, amnesty does in fact change their status legally. You can continue to think whatever you want, just be aware that it's not lining up with reality.