|
Should it be legal for other people to assault you if they disagree with you? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
183 | 49.06% |
| No |
|
190 | 50.94% |
| Total: | 328 votes | ||
|
FreeKillB posted:OK, I guess our views don't really diverge that much on the theoretical level. We crossed that Rubicon a long time ago. Unless you are cool with a racist murder system?
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 07:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:53 |
|
|
Saying that I think most Americans share core values doesn't mean I think our society is fully enlightened or that our institutions are all cool and good. I think that a large majority of people supporting the racist murder system support racist murder systems per se, especially as most of them currently deny that the current system is in fact a racist murder system. I believe Black Lives Matter's methods are well within King's notion of nonviolent protest to heighten the tensions of current injustice. King again: "You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 07:19
|
|
|
FreeKillB posted:OK, I guess our views don't really diverge that much on the theoretical level. All I can think of is the synopsis of "It Can't Happen Here" and I worry it's already too late. Rhjamiz fucked around with this message at 07:27 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
citybeatnik posted:Ah, you're sealioning and/or muddying the waters. y i'm talking more at the people handwringing about the possibility of america becoming violent without realizing america already celebrates violence in law and culture (the victims of violence belong to groups that the media doesn't treat favorably, however; the difference in this case is that it is happening to a white christian and that scares people)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 07:43
|
|
|
"To all Nazis and their supporters, we wish you bad entertainment."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 07:50
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:i'm talking more at the people handwringing about the possibility of america becoming violent without realizing america already celebrates violence in law and culture (the victims of violence belong to groups that the media doesn't treat favorably, however; the difference in this case is that it is happening to a white christian and that scares people) The thing is violence by law enforcement and by the military is something that can be just and legitimate, even if in many cases it isn't. Vigilante violence by random people on the street is a different category altogether. I guess my position is that it's definitely true that America celebrates violence in some hosed-up ways, and increasing the amount of violence sloshing around will make that problem worse rather than better. I will agree, of course, that it's hypocritical to think that anti-Trump protestors getting punched at rallies "were asking for it" but punching Richard Spencer is over the line. But I don't think anyone here holds that view.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 07:55
|
|
|
FreeKillB posted:The thing is violence by law enforcement and by the military is something that can be just and legitimate, even if in many cases it isn't. LOL. My violence is OK. But when oppressed people are violent that is bad and against the whole point of democracy and free speech. Get in line, you'll get your rights someday!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
I said that SOME violence by law enforcement and the military is good and just. For example, fighting actual Nazis (not internet Nazis) in World War II is cool and good. I also think that doesn't mean we shouldn't apply high standards to make sure they're only using violence properly (and not gunning down innocents, for example). By putting the words 'get in line, you'll get your rights someday' in my mouth, you also seem to be conflating my disavowal of violence as a solution with a disavowal of protesting in general. To the contrary, I think civil disobedience and peaceful protests are good! I think that in the grand scheme of things the peaceful Women's March is far more likely to lay the groundwork for a campaign to protect rights against Trumpism than a campaign of punching internet Nazis in the face (the latter makes for funnier memes for many I guess?).
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:09
|
|
|
Truth is, we need both. Nobody on the violence side is advocating for a purely violent approach. The misguided "The state is basically correct and if we just go through the right motions crowd" on the other hand, is hopeless naive. Edit: The Autobahn is a great highway system! I said SOME things the Nazi government were good!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:15
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Truth is, we need both. When is violence needed then? Because if the bar is set at "rear end in a top hat on street talking about pepe" then it must be really really low.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:22
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Truth is, we need both. I don't see why you're characterizing civil disobedience and protest as 'just going through the right motions'. I fear that the authoritarian shitheads are going to justify increasingly brutal crackdowns against any opposition no matter how peaceful it is. I think their propaganda will be easier to craft the more examples they have of violence from protestors. fakeedit: do you honestly think all violence by the police and the military is illegitimate? If you honestly believe the US military is on the same moral level as the Third Reich then I'm not sure we have enough common ground for a useful dialogue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:When is violence needed then? Because if the bar is set at "rear end in a top hat on street talking about pepe" then it must be really really low. The bar is already super low. People get killed all the time in America. Sometimes by cops and nobody cares. Sometimes by someone random but the deceased were the "wrong" kind of person so no one really looks into it. Sometimes by some specific but that specific person was higher on the social pecking order so they get a pass. Punching somebody is pretty low on the pre-existing scale. The assumption of non-violence is incredibly naive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:The bar is already super low. People get killed all the time in America. Sometimes by cops and nobody cares. Sometimes by someone random but the deceased were the "wrong" kind of person so no one really looks into it. Sometimes by some specific but that specific person was higher on the social pecking order so they get a pass. You dodged that question better than Kelly Ann Conway. I'm not even mad. But if you feel like it, let me know exactly when it is ok to use violence against someone because of their ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:31
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:You dodged that question better than Kelly Ann Conway. I'm not even mad. I believe in using speech against all manner of ideas. I just view violence as a form of escalated speech as opposed to something else entirely. But way to support the on going genocide. You are a loving poo poo-stain. You are the moderate King talks about. If you ask me, the biggest problem we have is that we're punching fascists instead of punching people like you. Say what you will about National Socialism, at least it's an ethos. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:When is violence needed then? Because if the bar is set at "rear end in a top hat on street talking about pepe" then it must be really really low. no no no "nazi on the street talking about pepe", stop adding poo poo to the situation
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:36
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I believe in using speech against all manner of ideas. I just view violence as a form of escalated speech as opposed to something else entirely. Double dodge! It's ok if you don't want to answer, but you clearly have thought this out before. What would someone have to do escalate your speech into violence? Think fascist thoughts? Speak fascist words? I know how I would answer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:45
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:But way to support the on going genocide. You are a loving poo poo-stain. You are the moderate King talks about. If you ask me, the biggest problem we have is that we're punching fascists instead of punching people like you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:47
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:Double dodge! It's ok if you don't want to answer, but you clearly have thought this out before. What would someone have to do escalate your speech into violence? Think fascist thoughts? Speak fascist words? I know how I would answer. Really earning that redtext. The answer is clear: be a Nazi. It's not some slippery slope. Nazis, like Spencer, will let you know that they are Nazis. They are open and proud of this fact.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:47
|
|
|
Actually, Spencer largely coined the term 'alt-right' because he doesn't label himself as a Nazi and he thinks that the term Nazi is outdated. e:Without the label, I think it might be hard to differentiate 'Nazi in all but name' from your garden-variety 'white supremacist with authoritarian tendencies'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:50
|
|
|
So, what you are saying is: he's a Nazi.
Shbobdb fucked around with this message at 08:56 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:51
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Really earning that redtext. Thanks. I can't tell if it is for or against the hashtag because I've never posted here on the issue. quote:The answer is clear: be a Nazi. It's not some slippery slope. Nazis, like Spencer, will let you know that they are Nazis. They are open and proud of this fact. It's funny you should mention that because Spencer has said that he isn't nazi (clearly is a nazi). In the other thread someone was calling trump supporters fascists, so the slippery slope can be pretty real.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:59
|
|
|
Ugggg, I just noticed that the redpills guy apparently doesn't know what pronouns are. e: Maybe we have to go around asking white supremacists "Hey Mr. White Supremacist, are you the kind of white supremacist who advocates genocide, or are you one of the genocide-agnostic white supremacists?" in order to determine whether or not they are OK to sucker punch. FreeKillB fucked around with this message at 09:04 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:00
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:It's funny you should mention that because Spencer has said that he isn't nazi (clearly is a nazi). In the other thread someone was calling trump supporters fascists, so the slippery slope can be pretty real. LOL
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:02
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:LOL I take you have slipped all the way down already.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:08
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:I take you have slipped all the way down already. Nice self own.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
OK buddy, I'll be over here with the ALCU defending your right to have ideas most people think are horrible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:13
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:OK buddy, I'll be over here with the ALCU defending your right to have ideas most people think are horrible. Keep it coming. How many innocent black people being murdered are worth one Nazi getting punched in the face?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:18
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Keep it coming. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:25
|
|
|
#AllLivesMatter
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:30
|
|
|
I was going to say I did Nazi this thread coming but I did and that would be disingenuous of me. I would like to say instead that I hope this thread does Nazis to exist for a good while so everyone can empty their brains
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:41
|
|
|
FreeKillB posted:Vigilante violence by random people on the street is a different category altogether.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 09:59
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:It's funny you should mention that because Spencer has said that he isn't nazi (clearly is a nazi). In the other thread someone was calling trump supporters fascists, so the slippery slope can be pretty real. You can cry "slippery slope" to the heavens all you want but that's where we are. Denying it at this point is just grasping at any bit of normalcy you can - it doesn't change a thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 10:03
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Trump supporters are fascists. Some of them might be unwitting fascists, but every one of them helped to bring about fascism in America. Shbobdb believes that it is justified to commit violence against people that speak in favor of fascism (or people he just thinks are fascists? Or maybe just idiots that just voted for Trump? Whatever, let god sort 'em out). Now Kilroy is stating that someone can be an unwitting fascist. You guys are starting to freak me out a bit. Exactly what percent of this country do you feel like it morally ok for you to assault based on your own private criteria? Kubrick fucked around with this message at 10:29 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 10:26
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:Shbobdb believes that it is justified to commit violence against fascists (or people he thinks are fascists? Or maybe just idiots that just voted for Trump? Whatever, let god sort 'em out).
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 10:34
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I think I'm being overbroad with what I'm calling a "fascist" here, and I retract it. Donald Trump is a fascist. The GOP is a fascist organization on the whole, and many of its members in national politics are fascists. A lot of GOP voters are fascists, but while voting for a Republican means you are supporting fascism, it doesn't make you a fascist. (It certainly doesn't help, though.) If you vote for a Republican, and the reasons for that vote align with the nakedly fascist ideals of that party, then you're a fascist. If you vote for a Republican who does not support the party as a whole, but whose election will enable the nakedly fascist party to enact nakedly fascist policies, then you're ambivalent to fascism, a oval office, and with the distinction being fag paper thin, who cares?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I think I'm being overbroad with what I'm calling a "fascist" here, and I retract it. Donald Trump is a fascist. The GOP is a fascist organization on the whole, and many of its members in national politics are fascists. A lot of GOP voters are fascists, but while voting for a Republican means you are supporting fascism, it doesn't make you a fascist. (It certainly doesn't help, though.) I don't think you are being overbroad at all. I think a vast majority Trump supporters and political allies hold fascist or fascist-adjacent ideas. They certainly hold ideas like authoritarianism and xenophobia. Many would consider that grounds enough for the label of "fascist". I think they are scum, and am actively resisting them, but I still don't think it's ok for me to hurt them based on their thoughtcrimes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 11:18
|
|
|
I don't think it's exactly controversial to say most people, myself included, honestly want people supporting the current political clusterfuck to change their minds peacefully and rationally and oppose the creation of an authoritarian and possibly genocidal police state that is threatening their own rights and safety along with everyone else's. However, I also don't think it's unreasonable to say that there's got to be a breaking point somewhere where rational discourse is not effective or even a sane response, and I think we're starting to see the edge cases now where that's true, where there are people who are unironically calling for the murder of innocent people and are whipping other disturbed fringe elements towards violence. If a person is actively stirring up violence against innocent people then they're already stepping outside the social contract. Belting them one at that point might not be legally permissible, it might not even be how I wish things would go, but if it's enough to make them shut up and save someone else's life, then good. I've always been taught that violence isn't an answer to problems, and it certainly isn't my first choice, and if it comes to running fights in the streets I'll probably be gutted and left to bleed out in a gutter, but gently caress, man. A person can believe that non-violent resistance, even if it results in extermination, is a worthy goal, but I'm not going to try to force that argument down someone else's throat. People have every moral right to resist this poo poo. Shady Amish Terror fucked around with this message at 11:34 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 11:30
|
|
|
Total Meatlove posted:If you vote for a Republican, and the reasons for that vote align with the nakedly fascist ideals of that party, then you're a fascist. its time to put these fascists down with a good old fashioned civil war. 50% vs 50% right now
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 11:39
|
|
|
Kubrick posted:I don't think you are being overbroad at all. I think a vast majority Trump supporters and political allies hold fascist or fascist-adjacent ideas. They certainly hold ideas like authoritarianism and xenophobia. Many would consider that grounds enough for the label of "fascist". I think they are scum, and am actively resisting them, but I still don't think it's ok for me to hurt them based on their thoughtcrimes. How do you think this mindset of "actively resisting" fascism without being prepared to do so physically held up in Italy and Germany in the 1930s? Or in Franco's Spain up to the early 70s? Or in Pinochet's Argentina? Or in apartheid South Africa?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 11:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:53 |
|
|
Wild Horses posted:its time to put these fascists down with a good old fashioned civil war. 50% vs 50% right now I'd join in but then I'd end up on the weekly naughty immigrants list you guys are going to publish now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 11:51
|
|