Hard to argue with.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Trump
- Thread starter ShandyH
- Start date
Hard to argue with.
Bevendean Hillbilly
New member
Tyrone Biggums
Well-known member
I will have to look up ANTIFA. Odd that after 50 years of reading about nut cases I have never heard of this lot, though. Are they really important and influential, and on a par with the KKK, for example? As for your 'quote', its nice to see something a little more credible than Breitbart. However, most 15 year old GCSE politics students can tell you that anarchists are NOT 'far left' (they loath the left) and that anti facists are not all 'far left' by default, as is implied by the 'other' in the quoted text.
As a matter of intrest, do you think the woman run over and killed a couple of days ago, as a presumed member of ANTIFA, deserved to die, the outcome of an equal 'far left versus far right' private matter?
ANTIFA have grown out from the Occupy movement. They are anti-free speech, anti-capitalism and anti-conservative, don't mind resorting to violence to shut things down. Many of them do promote communism. And yes they and their ilk have a lot of influence and say on a lot of US College campuses.
This is what they do if they don't agree with a persons view points. Berkley Riots.
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture...-the-campus-showdown-over-free-speech-w465151
As to the woman who was killed, absolutely the woman didn't deserve to die. Nobody from either side deserves to have violence thrust upon them simply for having a stupid opinion.
This didn't need to happen if they'd been left to have their stupid march and a bunch of others didn't go there with the sole purpose to start up a violent conflict.
The trouble is violence has been constant and most of it began with left leaning anti-Trump mobs but in the last 6 months or so the right which was never organised compared to the left has started to get organised and counter the violence with violence.
JetsetJimbo
Well-known member
- Jun 13, 2011
- 1,166
Embarrassing nonsense.
Wow.
Tyrone Biggums
Well-known member
Yes your lack of knowledge is embarrassing.
http://www.ibtimes.com/what-antifa-anti-fascist-movement-clashes-alt-right-2551045
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
Doesn't the far left also hate anyone on the left that doesn't measure up to their particular brand of revolutionary zeal? Anti Semitism also an issue plus they only seem to hate the far right if they are white ... which may be a bit racist. (Assuming the far left in the US has many of the same characteristics as their UK cousins).
Thanks. I have now done some reading of my own. ANTIFA are not representative of the 'left' any more than the KKK is rpresentative of the right. In fact, ANTIFA appear to have nothing to do with the left, and are simply a loose network of individuals who want to inflict violence on 'liberal' (capitalist) society and specially 'facists'. If they have an affinity for any recognised political philosophy (being anti something is not a philosophy) it is anarchism.
Thus they sound to me rather like a much nastier version of 'class war'. The wikipedia article does not give any impression this group has any affiliation or even affinity with 'left' groups. It is easy to assume that anyone who attacks an ultra right (Nazi) 'meeting' is 'ultra left' by definition. Perhaps constructing this as the fringe politic reality is appropriate.
However it has nothing to do with real 'left versus right' issues. The nice tory voters I know would be horrified to be labled as bedfellows with the KKK, and even red in tooth and claw old labourist acquaintances would be horrified to be considered in th same day, let alone the same breath, as kin to ANTIFA.
So what labels are appropriate here? Hmm.... Nazis and ANTIFA would seem to suffice. ANTIFA appear to be self defining, and to lable them as 'ultra left' and thereby associate them in the minds of the people you are addressing with anything 'left' (from the SWP through to Corbyn through to Mr Tony, through to Dr David Owen) would be counterproductive as well as wrong. A bit like making a link between the KKK and Farage, to Boris to Thresa May, etc. Silly.
But back to the recent events, it seems correct to me to critise Trump for failing to name and shame the affiliation of the lunatic who maimed protesters with his car, killing one. Even Pence has been on the radio, saying it how it really is, condemning 'white supremacists'. Trump may be able to backtrack, but the impression he has given is that he regards driving a car at speed at human beings to be on a par with whatever these human beings did to evidently deserve this, six of one, half a dozen of the other, i.e., challenge a white supremacist and expect to be killed,
JetsetJimbo
Well-known member
- Jun 13, 2011
- 1,166
[MENTION=4800]Tyrone Biggums[/MENTION]
First, that's not a reliable source, second, it's factually inaccurate, and third, you clearly didn't understand your own quotation, (that's pretty funny).
Wherever and whenever there are nazis, Antifa will be there to meet them on the streets. Long may it continue. Beating down Nazis is a great British and American tradition.
First, that's not a reliable source, second, it's factually inaccurate, and third, you clearly didn't understand your own quotation, (that's pretty funny).
Wherever and whenever there are nazis, Antifa will be there to meet them on the streets. Long may it continue. Beating down Nazis is a great British and American tradition.
daveybgtt
New member
I am dying to know what makes someone a nazi, it's tossed around so freely that it's on a par with the term racist. I think to be labelled as one of those would just illicit a shrug of the shoulders and a degree of contempt for the accuser.
John Oliver knocks it out the park, this week, well worth catching up on. Although one or 2 might not agree.
daveybgtt
New member
It might be ironic, maybe he is a hipster?
Tyrone Biggums
Well-known member
From a Wired article who have a left leaning bias and they score very high in the factual reporting scale. They see them as far left.
https://www.wired.com/2017/02/neo-nazis-face-new-foe-online-irl-far-left-antifa/
I do agree with you somewhat on that point. There is a class element.
They do have a left wing affiliation however. Billionaire George Soros is funding all kinds of anti-Trump and anti-right groups to turn up and protest and cause issues. Soros has his fingers in countless left wing pies.
What you once considered left or right has changed in meaning. As language often does evolve.
As someone who doesn't vote in a Labor/Liberal way it's noticeable that in order to shut down conversation all a lot of people on the left do now is call someone a Nazi or fascist to shut down any discussion. I mean where does one go after that, how do people have dialogue when being a moderate is seen by many as being an extremist.
You are correct it's all silly. This article sums up nicely how bad it's getting
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dogmad...ial-regressive-left-killing-atheist-movement/
It highlights the stupidity of both groups in their tit for tat exchanges.
But back to the recent events, it seems correct to me to critise Trump for failing to name and shame the affiliation of the lunatic who maimed protesters with his car, killing one. Even Pence has been on the radio, saying it how it really is, condemning 'white supremacists'. Trump may be able to backtrack, but the impression he has given is that he regards driving a car at speed at human beings to be on a par with whatever these human beings did to evidently deserve this, six of one, half a dozen of the other, i.e., challenge a white supremacist and expect to be killed,
My view is don't give them a name. Don't recognize their existence as a named group and don't give them oxygen to fuel more fires. If this guy belonged to some far right group just label him a vile hateful bigot, don't link him to any group so others can then seek out that group.
As soon as you give them a name you give others like them a brand name to rally around.
I don't see at all what he said as in anyway supporting any of these groups involved. He basically called both groups out which is correct because both sets of groups have contributed to this tragedy.
He was 100% correct when he said there is hatred, bigotry and violence on both sides and that was on display in Charlottesville.
I refer you to how he handled the shooting of the Republican politician as to how he seems to handle these situations. He doesn't relate the incident to a specific person or group, he simply condemns it using the appropriate words. Seems that's just his style in such issues.
Tyrone Biggums
Well-known member
Naturally you provide zero evidence for your claim.
Just out of interest, which self appointed morons get to decide who is a Nazi?
Last edited:
JetsetJimbo
Well-known member
- Jun 13, 2011
- 1,166
See Stat Brother's photo above.
[tweet]897069202833641472[/tweet]
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,015
Left and Right certainly have changed beyond all recognition if anyone considers George Soros to be left wing. he might well support anti-fascist and far right groups, with good reason.
brightn'ove
cringe
Maybe it's the guys shouting 'heil trump', waving nazi flags & sporting swastika tattoos?
The_Viper
Well-known member
This is a good post from elsewhere.
This an extraordinarily complex situation, and as such will be misrepresented and simplified by the media.
The Charlottesville clash was precipitated by the Charlottesville City Council changing the name of Robert E Lee Park to Emancipation Park and taking down the Robert E Lee statue.
The Charlottesville City Council is fully in their right to do this, and conversely individuals who disagree with the decision are fully in their right to protest this decision.
The legacy of the Confederacy is very complicated. In one sense the Confederacy was based on defense of the racist institution of slavery, and in another sense based on state's rights.
Robert E Lee believed at the outset that secession from the Union to defend slavery was not a good idea, but he found himself choosing to take the side of Virginia in the impending war with the United States.
For some, Robert E Lee represents the racist subjugation of African Americans, for others he represents the defense of Southern independence from the federal government.
There's no doubt that there were white nationalists who came to protest the removal of the statue. Their views were on display in the form of racist signs and symbols in today's clash. However, there is no doubt some who protest the removal of the statue, who don't hold racist views but see the Robert E Lee statue as a symbol of Virginia and the South and the effort to cleanse the South of Confederate symbols as a politically-correct campaign to white-wash history.
As for the counter-protesters, these too likely had a mixture of groups and intentions. For some, they came to legitimately protest what they see as a racist campaign to defend the Confederacy. However there is no doubt that the anarchist/Marxist group Antifa came not to protest, but to forcefully/violently prevent the legal assembly of statue removal protesters.
The pro-Robert E Lee statue protesters obviously anticipated Antifa blocking them so they brought shields and weapons to defend/attack and allow them to protest the statue removal. Antifa obviously anticipated the clash as they too brought shields and weapons. A recipe for disaster and thus the clash - a well anticipated and orchestrated event.
Lost in the clash, are the peaceful individuals on both sides who legitimately wanted to practice their freedom of speech and assembly to protest and counter-protest.
These complexities will likely be washed over and this will simply become a result of the Trump presidency. As the media already showing they are blaming Breitbart and Steve Bannon. This completely ignores the relatively recent phenomenon of Confederacy legacy removal.
No doubt, if Hillary Clinton was president we would see the same sort of clash play out again and again.
What's the solution? I don't know. But I feel it's important to take an honest overview of all sides in this complex situation.
This an extraordinarily complex situation, and as such will be misrepresented and simplified by the media.
The Charlottesville clash was precipitated by the Charlottesville City Council changing the name of Robert E Lee Park to Emancipation Park and taking down the Robert E Lee statue.
The Charlottesville City Council is fully in their right to do this, and conversely individuals who disagree with the decision are fully in their right to protest this decision.
The legacy of the Confederacy is very complicated. In one sense the Confederacy was based on defense of the racist institution of slavery, and in another sense based on state's rights.
Robert E Lee believed at the outset that secession from the Union to defend slavery was not a good idea, but he found himself choosing to take the side of Virginia in the impending war with the United States.
For some, Robert E Lee represents the racist subjugation of African Americans, for others he represents the defense of Southern independence from the federal government.
There's no doubt that there were white nationalists who came to protest the removal of the statue. Their views were on display in the form of racist signs and symbols in today's clash. However, there is no doubt some who protest the removal of the statue, who don't hold racist views but see the Robert E Lee statue as a symbol of Virginia and the South and the effort to cleanse the South of Confederate symbols as a politically-correct campaign to white-wash history.
As for the counter-protesters, these too likely had a mixture of groups and intentions. For some, they came to legitimately protest what they see as a racist campaign to defend the Confederacy. However there is no doubt that the anarchist/Marxist group Antifa came not to protest, but to forcefully/violently prevent the legal assembly of statue removal protesters.
The pro-Robert E Lee statue protesters obviously anticipated Antifa blocking them so they brought shields and weapons to defend/attack and allow them to protest the statue removal. Antifa obviously anticipated the clash as they too brought shields and weapons. A recipe for disaster and thus the clash - a well anticipated and orchestrated event.
Lost in the clash, are the peaceful individuals on both sides who legitimately wanted to practice their freedom of speech and assembly to protest and counter-protest.
These complexities will likely be washed over and this will simply become a result of the Trump presidency. As the media already showing they are blaming Breitbart and Steve Bannon. This completely ignores the relatively recent phenomenon of Confederacy legacy removal.
No doubt, if Hillary Clinton was president we would see the same sort of clash play out again and again.
What's the solution? I don't know. But I feel it's important to take an honest overview of all sides in this complex situation.