Legality of assaults

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Legality of assaults

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

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

DeusExMachinima: Sep 2, 2012; This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!

Put this loser on ignore immediately!

I didn't say anything about letting people, particularly other people in other countries, die being unusual for any system with humans in it historically, capitalism included. I said violently killing tens of millions of your own citizens in camps or intentional famine makes you stand out. That'd be socialists and Nazis.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 17:13

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 31, 2024 23:33

Communist Thoughts: Jan 7, 2008; Our war against free speech cannot end until we silence this bronze beast!

guys, its called National SOCIALISM

# ? Jan 29, 2017 18:17

TomViolence: Feb 19, 2013; PLEASE ASK ABOUT MY 80,000 WORD WALLACE AND GROMIT SLASH FICTION. PLEASE.

DeusExMachinima posted:

I didn't say anything about letting people, particularly other people in other countries, die being unusual for any system with humans in it historically, capitalism included. I said violently killing tens of millions of your own citizens in camps or intentional famine makes you stand out. That'd be socialists and Nazis.

Mmmm, yeah, I've never known capitalists to starve people. Except, you know, for the millions displaced and starved to death in the entirely preventable famines in India, Ireland and throughout Africa under the ambivalent misrule of the British empire.

edit: I suppose it might be worth bringing up the concentration camps we had in South Africa too. Oh, and the extermination camps the Germans had going in southwest Africa long before the final solution was even dreamt of. And while we're totaling up the crimes of capital, just think how many people disappeared to death camps in Latin America under avowedly capitalist (and sometimes even ostensibly democratic) regimes.

TomViolence fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Jan 29, 2017

# ? Jan 29, 2017 18:21

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

DeusExMachinima posted:

I didn't say anything about letting people, particularly other people in other countries, die being unusual for any system with humans in it historically, capitalism included.

Actually you did though. I don't recall any part of Bernie Sanders' platform which mentioned leaving certain regions to twist in the wind and die of famine. I'm looking at the website of the Democratic Socialists of America and I don't see anything here about "oh, and millions must also die". Yet according to you it is the manifest purpose of socialism and all socialists to leave people to starve or otherwise kill them. That's the only conclusion to draw, from your comparison of Nazis with socialists. I may as well criticize capitalism applying the same logic against the British in India, under whose rule there millions also died.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 18:30

Mechafunkzilla: Sep 11, 2006; If you want a vision of the future...

TomViolence posted:

Mmmm, yeah, I've never known capitalists to starve people. Except, you know, for the millions displaced and starved to death in the entirely preventable famines in India, Ireland and throughout Africa under the ambivalent misrule of the British empire.

edit: I suppose it might be worth bringing up the concentration camps we had in South Africa too. Oh, and the extermination camps the Germans had going in southwest Africa long before the final solution was even dreamt of. And while we're totaling up the crimes of capital, just think how many people disappeared to death camps in Latin America under avowedly capitalist (and sometimes even ostensibly democratic) regimes.

You say this as if the Nazis weren't capitalists.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 18:34

Keeshhound: Jan 14, 2010; Mad Duck Swagger

deep web creep posted:

No one is calling you a nazi you nitwit.
Even if they did (they didn't), but even if someone did, they're wrong and you don't deserve to get punched. Please notice that no one in the thread has said anything like "everyone with nazi-like ideals and nazi enablers should be met with violence" or even "all nazis should be murdered". It's "all nazis should be punched until they give up being nazis or at least go back underground".

It's happened as recently as two pages ago. I'm glad that that's not your position, but it's patently disingenuous to pretend that people arguing against the use of political violence haven't been accused of being nazi sympathizers.

quote:

People who openly advocate for genocide should be met with violence because anything else is dangerously ineffective. Any power a nazi or nazism might get is going to be put in the service of enacting genocide. Nazism is not like eg. anarcho-captialism or hardcore MRA activism or any other odious political stance -- as pointed out over and over again in this thread by posters far more eloquent than me, it fundamentally cannot be met with polite criticism and debate.
It doesn't help you to point out that the nazi is wrong because no poo poo. The nazi is not concerned about being right, the nazi is concerned with actually literally killing an entire race/s of people.

I don't actually buy this argument. Do we have any examples of this really working in history? And I don't know how else to say this, but you're strawmanning nazis. They're not Tolkien orcs, most of them aren't even true ideologues. With pretty much any hate group, what you're looking at is a bunch of people who, at a low point in their life, managed to encounter someone who sold them a narrative where they could blame all of their problems on a convenient scapegoat. Punching them is going to, at best, make them scurry back underground, but it's also going to reaffirm that narrative that they're being held back by other people. Even divorced of the risks of escalation, the use of violence against political groups usually strengthens their internal ties and makes them more resilient to external forces. If you really, really want to effect meaningful anti-racist change, your best choice is to volunteer as a mentor for low-income kids at risk of recruitment.

SSNeoman posted:

Well for starters Nazism doesn't have a consistent political agenda besides the whole hypernationalism and crypto-/not-so-crypto-genocidal rhetoric. Ask three modern day nazis what they'd like to see from the government and they'd probably respond with three different opinions. They'll prob say some leftist ideals (more jobs for families, tax breaks for families, gun control and so on) or some right-wing points (more unified country, no flag burning, incentives for businesses, no gun control and so on). We take for granted that Nazis are right wing, but that's not totally true. The modern Neo-nazis have thrown their lot with the Republicans because FOR SOME REASON that party resonates most with the aforementioned hypernationalism and crypto-/not-so-crypto-genocidal rhetoric. Past that point, it's a case-by-case basis on whether they agree with the rest of the Republicans stances.

That's literally all it takes to be a political movement. One issue. There are a bunch of articles on the major news sites where people interviewed members of the women's march and found that in the same way, you could ask three different marchers what their political views were and they'd give three different answers. If we go to a DSA meeting, I guarantee you we're going to find a mix of ideological views, all of whom are united only by a specific set of issues that they feel are worth compromising their other stances to achieve. Even ignoring that that, a mix of liberal and conservative values is what's meant to be fascism's appeal, anyway (historically it was sold as a third way, in opposition to capitalism and communism.)

We can argue if their one issue is so immoral that they loose the right to be allowed to express it as freely as other positions, but I'd disagree with that interpretation for a couple of reasons. For one, any time you create exceptions to a rule, you're automatically providing for the possibility of more exceptions. If we say "You can express any view point you like, except for X," we have very little grounds to complain when someone else decides to add "Y" to that exception. The second is that, as I argued earlier, I don't think you're going to see the effect you want by attempting to suppress an ideology, violently or otherwise. When external forces attempt to exert pressure on any subculture, the usual response is for the group to go to ground and engage in clandestine recruitment, rather than disband. Again, if you really want to choke out racist movements in the US, cut off their growth efforts by mentoring youth at risk of recruitment.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 19:36

stone cold: Feb 15, 2014

Keeshhound posted:

It's happened as recently as two pages ago. I'm glad that that's not your position, but it's patently disingenuous to pretend that people arguing against the use of political violence haven't been accused of being nazi sympathizers.

I don't actually buy this argument. Do we have any examples of this really working in history? And I don't know how else to say this, but you're strawmanning nazis. They're not Tolkien orcs, most of them aren't even true ideologues. With pretty much any hate group, what you're looking at is a bunch of people who, at a low point in their life, managed to encounter someone who sold them a narrative where they could blame all of their problems on a convenient scapegoat. Punching them is going to, at best, make them scurry back underground, but it's also going to reaffirm that narrative that they're being held back by other people. Even divorced of the risks of escalation, the use of violence against political groups usually strengthens their internal ties and makes them more resilient to external forces. If you really, really want to effect meaningful anti-racist change, your best choice is to volunteer as a mentor for low-income kids at risk of recruitment.

That's literally all it takes to be a political movement. One issue. There are a bunch of articles on the major news sites where people interviewed members of the women's march and found that in the same way, you could ask three different marchers what their political views were and they'd give three different answers. If we go to a DSA meeting, I guarantee you we're going to find a mix of ideological views, all of whom are united only by a specific set of issues that they feel are worth compromising their other stances to achieve. Even ignoring that that, a mix of liberal and conservative values is what's meant to be fascism's appeal, anyway (historically it was sold as a third way, in opposition to capitalism and communism.)

We can argue if their one issue is so immoral that they loose the right to be allowed to express it as freely as other positions, but I'd disagree with that interpretation for a couple of reasons. For one, any time you create exceptions to a rule, you're automatically providing for the possibility of more exceptions. If we say "You can express any view point you like, except for X," we have very little grounds to complain when someone else decides to add "Y" to that exception. The second is that, as I argued earlier, I don't think you're going to see the effect you want by attempting to suppress an ideology, violently or otherwise. When external forces attempt to exert pressure on any subculture, the usual response is for the group to go to ground and engage in clandestine recruitment, rather than disband. Again, if you really want to choke out racist movements in the US, cut off their growth efforts by mentoring youth at risk of recruitment.

so we should have more sympathy for poor widdle nazis than the victims of their hate crimes, got it

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Jan 29, 2017 19:39

Keeshhound: Jan 14, 2010; Mad Duck Swagger

stone cold posted:

so we should have more sympathy for poor widdle nazis than the victims of their hate crimes, got it

It's genuinely terrifying to me that our educational apparatus is only going to get worse if a sentence and three paragraphs are already so difficult for you to read and comprehend. Let me put it in simpler words for you:

"Ugh. Punch Nazi. Nazi run away, find other nazis. Nazis not like puncher. Hide from puncher. Nazis look for kid. Steal kid. Teach kid to be Nazi. No Punch Nazi. It no help. Find kid. Protect kid from Nazis. Teach kid to be good person. No New Nazis. Nazis die off."

Keeshhound fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Jan 29, 2017

# ? Jan 29, 2017 19:58

enki42: Jun 11, 2001; #ATMLIVESMATTER

Put this Nazi-lover on ignore immediately!

stone cold posted:

so we should have more sympathy for poor widdle nazis than the victims of their hate crimes, got it

No one is saying we should sympathize with Nazis. I don't sympathize with conservatives, evangelical christians, homophobes, racists, sexists, or a ton of other people but somehow I'm able to separate that lack of sympathy from needing to punch them in the face.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 19:58

Seraphic Neoman: Jul 19, 2011

Keeshhound posted:

It's happened as recently as two pages ago. I'm glad that that's not your position, but it's patently disingenuous to pretend that people arguing against the use of political violence haven't been accused of being nazi sympathizers.

I don't actually buy this argument. Do we have any examples of this really working in history? And I don't know how else to say this, but you're strawmanning nazis. They're not Tolkien orcs, most of them aren't even true ideologues. With pretty much any hate group, what you're looking at is a bunch of people who, at a low point in their life, managed to encounter someone who sold them a narrative where they could blame all of their problems on a convenient scapegoat. Punching them is going to, at best, make them scurry back underground, but it's also going to reaffirm that narrative that they're being held back by other people. Even divorced of the risks of escalation, the use of violence against political groups usually strengthens their internal ties and makes them more resilient to external forces. If you really, really want to effect meaningful anti-racist change, your best choice is to volunteer as a mentor for low-income kids at risk of recruitment.

read the rest of the thread im tired of addressing this point

Keeshhound posted:

That's literally all it takes to be a political movement. One issue. There are a bunch of articles on the major news sites where people interviewed members of the women's march and found that in the same way, you could ask three different marchers what their political views were and they'd give three different answers. If we go to a DSA meeting, I guarantee you we're going to find a mix of ideological views, all of whom are united only by a specific set of issues that they feel are worth compromising their other stances to achieve. Even ignoring that that, a mix of liberal and conservative values is what's meant to be fascism's appeal, anyway (historically it was sold as a third way, in opposition to capitalism and communism.)

We can argue if their one issue is so immoral that they loose the right to be allowed to express it as freely as other positions, but I'd disagree with that interpretation for a couple of reasons. For one, any time you create exceptions to a rule, you're automatically providing for the possibility of more exceptions. If we say "You can express any view point you like, except for X," we have very little grounds to complain when someone else decides to add "Y" to that exception. The second is that, as I argued earlier, I don't think you're going to see the effect you want by attempting to suppress an ideology, violently or otherwise. When external forces attempt to exert pressure on any subculture, the usual response is for the group to go to ground and engage in clandestine recruitment, rather than disband. Again, if you really want to choke out racist movements in the US, cut off their growth efforts by mentoring youth at risk of recruitment.

I don't buy your argument because there is nothing political about genocide come the gently caress on dude

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:03

TomViolence: Feb 19, 2013; PLEASE ASK ABOUT MY 80,000 WORD WALLACE AND GROMIT SLASH FICTION. PLEASE.

Think about this. Ever wonder why free speech is considered important in the first place?

Speech is the foundation of all political power. What is political power?

Political power is the ability to project violence.

The state protects speech so that people may exert political influence in order to direct and project the violence of the state against appropriate targets both at home and abroad.

Nazis seek to use this influence to enact a policy of ethnic cleansing. It cannot be argued that this agenda is in any way nonviolent. The threat of violence is ever-present in their rhetoric and in their mass manifestations as political agitators.

To violently confront such provocation is self defence.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:04

Seraphic Neoman: Jul 19, 2011

Keeshhound posted:

"Ugh. Punch Nazi. Nazi run away, find other nazis. Nazis not like puncher. Hide from puncher. Nazis look for kid. Steal kid. Teach kid to be Nazi. No Punch Nazi. It no help. Find kid. Protect kid from Nazis. Teach kid to be good person. No New Nazis. Nazis die off."

read this part a few times and try and see if you can find your own logical break.

If you cannot I'll rerun an answer yet again

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:12

TomViolence: Feb 19, 2013; PLEASE ASK ABOUT MY 80,000 WORD WALLACE AND GROMIT SLASH FICTION. PLEASE.

It's much easier to pick a nazi out of a crowd of nazis and punch them than pick a vulnerable impressionable kid out of the general population, ascertain their susceptibility to extreme right wing indoctrination and turn them into a better person.

How do you even go about that, by the way, it sounds like some lifetime movie bullshit.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:19

enki42: Jun 11, 2001; #ATMLIVESMATTER

Put this Nazi-lover on ignore immediately!

You're right, convincing people is hard. Maybe you should just punch them until they agree.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:22

Sulphuric Asshole: Apr 25, 2003

TomViolence posted:

Think about this. Ever wonder why free speech is considered important in the first place?

Speech is the foundation of all political power. What is political power?

Political power is the ability to project violence.

The state protects speech so that people may exert political influence in order to direct and project the violence of the state against appropriate targets both at home and abroad.

Nazis seek to use this influence to enact a policy of ethnic cleansing. It cannot be argued that this agenda is in any way nonviolent. The threat of violence is ever-present in their rhetoric and in their mass manifestations as political agitators.

To violently confront such provocation is self defence.

If free speech allows for intangibly retarded definitions of "self defense" and "power" perhaps I haven't been critical enough of free speech all these years.

Sulphuric Asshole fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Jan 29, 2017

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:22

TomViolence: Feb 19, 2013; PLEASE ASK ABOUT MY 80,000 WORD WALLACE AND GROMIT SLASH FICTION. PLEASE.

Sulphuric rear end in a top hat posted:

If free speech allows for intangibly retarded definitions of "self defense", perhaps I haven't been critical enough of it.

Their declared intent is to kill, evict or otherwise oppress anyone who isn't a white heterosexual male. If that isn't grounds for self defence, what the gently caress is? Does the knife already have to be buried in your gut before you're allowed to protect yourself?

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:27

Senor P.: Mar 27, 2006; I MUST TELL YOU HOW PEOPLE CARE ABOUT STUFF I DONT AND BE A COMPLETE CUNT ABOUT IT

Jesus Christ I do not know why so much time is spent on this argument.

If you have the right to punch someone in the face to shut them up. How do they also not have the same right? (BECAUSE I AM WRIGHT AND THEY ARE WRONG HURF DURF)

Person from group A sucker punches person from group B. Person from Group B sucker punches person from group A. If this is tolerated then at some point it will turn then into group brawls and gang fights. Then escalate into kidnapping, murder and worse.

As someone who enjoys boxing and MMA, the example above is stupid. All you will be doing is increasing the amount of violence and I can assure you it will escalate. There is always some meaner, badder, stronger, less ethical person around.

See a Nazi? Say "Hey pal you're full of poo poo." Do not go down the road of blood fueds, assaults and violence.

To give into the joy of assaulting someone else, is to give into the philosophy "might makes right".

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:36

Sulphuric Asshole: Apr 25, 2003

TomViolence posted:

Their declared intent is to kill, evict or otherwise oppress anyone who isn't a white heterosexual male. If that isn't grounds for self defence, what the gently caress is? Does the knife already have to be buried in your gut before you're allowed to protect yourself?

No, but It has to be greater than a group of spineless retards saying poo poo without any actual follow through or ability to carry out their genocide. "Hey round up the trailer park and bring some extra percocet, we's gots us a holocaust"

Sulphuric Asshole fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Jan 29, 2017

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:39

Keeshhound: Jan 14, 2010; Mad Duck Swagger

TomViolence posted:

It's much easier to pick a nazi out of a crowd of nazis and punch them than pick a vulnerable impressionable kid out of the general population, ascertain their susceptibility to extreme right wing indoctrination and turn them into a better person.

How do you even go about that, by the way, it sounds like some lifetime movie bullshit.

I guess that's the real issue, isn't it? Doing poo poo that's effective is hard. Punching people is easy. No, I don't care if it actually helps anything, I just want to feel better.

But in case anyone is willing to put in some effort, there's a bunch of mentorship programs all across the US. Big Brothers Big Sisters is probably the most prevalent one, but there are others, and a most of them specifically cater to at-risk youth (that is, lower income, only one parent, or one parent is in jail, etc.) It's not always going to be easy, but it's also not as hard as you might think, either. Mentoring a kid can be as simple as just taking them out to get pizza on a Saturday and talking to them about how things are going. As long as you're an active participant in their life and act as an example of the kinds of values you think are important, you'll be golden.

Keeshhound fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Jan 29, 2017

# ? Jan 29, 2017 20:44

White Privilegist: Jan 13, 2017

I can't feel bad that a Nazi was punched, and I would really like to punch Nazis myself, and I would happily vote for politicians whose campaign slogan was literally "Bash the Fasc", but I think it's important to keep in mind that the act of being bashed by non-fasc actually played a prominent role in Nazi propaganda. How do we punch Nazis without playing into their narrative?

http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/todays-history-lesson-how-brownshirt

quote:

In Berlin, Nazi Party leader Joseph Goebbels intentionally provoked Communist and Social Democratic actions by marching SA [Brownshirt] storm troopers into working-class neighborhoods where those parties had strongholds. Then he invoked the heroism of the Nazi "martyrs" who were injured or killed in these battles to garner greater public attention. Nazi newspapers, photographs, films, and later paintings dramatized the exploits of these fighters.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 21:03

Pittsburgh Lambic: Feb 16, 2011

you linked a website that i don't like and therefore your point is invalid and you're a punchable nazi :mad:

# ? Jan 29, 2017 21:09

Seraphic Neoman: Jul 19, 2011

I noticed you punked out on my responses. Okay.

Nazis crave attention and they crave conflict that they can win. When you make them look bad and marginalize them, you force them to, as you put it, "go into hiding". Without any outlet for their violence, they inevitably turn into introspection. This works for any hate group under the sun, be they Nazis, Al Queda, whatever. That's the part where the Nazi goes "poo poo I guess I suck" and seeks out ways to not be a Nazi. So sayeth the FBI: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/7stage_hate_model.htm

Get it? Being able to commit violence is the only way these groups can function, once you other them to the degree that they cannot appear in polite society, they fall apart.

Now yeah, you are right that obviously uniting entire towns against Nazis would be fantastic and obv doing the whole "mentoring kids" thing would be great too. gently caress it, lemme show you your logical breaks since you can't do it yourself.

quote:

Nazis look for kid. Steal kid. Teach kid to be Nazi.

lmao at this. Nazis never steal kids, they simply create a rhetoric which kids can find heroic and appealing. When you live in a red state, you inevitably pick up certain preconceptions about minorities, which leads you to be more susceptible towards hate group logic. And if you go looking for them, you'll find kindred spirits. Nazis don't use the Ludovico device, they simply press the buttons that parents/society imprinted on kids.

quote:

Find kid. Protect kid from Nazis. Teach kid to be good person

So I like the enthusiasm here and I even agree with it, but you're gonna have a hell of a hard time doing this since the kids in your quote are "all of the ones who live in white societies, especially the rural areas". Obviously motivating towns to show support against hate groups is more productive than punching and obviously I support mentoring. But, you're asking people to "protect" kids from rhetoric that has been around for centuries. It's naive and unrealistic. If you can help and you can motivate groups to help, sure do so, but actions like punching Nazis and othering them also helps to destroy their allure. Look at Spencer now, he looks like a sore loser and people are making fun of him. He's not convincing people to join the alt-right, or at least nobody who wasn't already gonna join.
That's what othering Nazis looks like and that's why bashing the fash does hep the situation.

Like I get what you're saying "mentorship and understanding is more productive than punching" but dude that's some white sage wisdom that only partially works in our society. The only way you could post something even more white and naive is if you say "we should sit down with Nazis/alt-right and convince them that their points are invalid"

Keeshhound posted:

I guess that's the real issue, isn't it? Doing poo poo that's effective is hard. Punching people is easy. No, I don't care if it actually helps anything, I just want to feel better.

But in case anyone is willing to put in some effort, there's a bunch of mentorship programs all across the US. Big Brothers Big Sisters is probably the most prevalent one, but there are others, and a most of them specifically cater to at-risk youth (that is, lower income, only one parent, or one parent is in jail, etc.) It's not always going to be easy, but it's also not as hard as you might think, either. Mentoring a kid can be as simple as just taking them out to get pizza on a Saturday and talking to them about how things are going. As long as you're an active participant in their life and act as an example of the kinds of values you think are important, you'll be golden.

I really hate tearing down plugs for good causes but this is like listening to Hallmark preach about paying money to enhance emotional moments.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 21:56

Pursesnatcher: Oct 23, 2016

Pseudo-God posted:

Same reasoning is used by Al-Qaeda and the like when they attack the west, "they are genociding and destroying the Muslims". Funny how I don't see anyone defending them using this logic, it is exactly the same reasoning.

Indeed. Although there's some beautiful, twisted irony in seeing a lot of people claiming to be anti-nazis, but then so desperately hostile to one very specific grouping of humans that they are advocating for a society where it is permissible to commit violence against them, and very specifically only them.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 23:12

Keeshhound: Jan 14, 2010; Mad Duck Swagger

SSNeoman posted:

I noticed you punked out on my responses. Okay.

Nazis crave attention and they crave conflict that they can win. When you make them look bad and marginalize them, you force them to, as you put it, "go into hiding". Without any outlet for their violence, they inevitably turn into introspection. This works for any hate group under the sun, be they Nazis, Al Queda, whatever. That's the part where the Nazi goes "poo poo I guess I suck" and seeks out ways to not be a Nazi. So sayeth the FBI: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/7stage_hate_model.htm

Get it? Being able to commit violence is the only way these groups can function, once you other them to the degree that they cannot appear in polite society, they fall apart.

Now yeah, you are right that obviously uniting entire towns against Nazis would be fantastic and obv doing the whole "mentoring kids" thing would be great too. gently caress it, lemme show you your logical breaks since you can't do it yourself.

lmao at this. Nazis never steal kids, they simply create a rhetoric which kids can find heroic and appealing. When you live in a red state, you inevitably pick up certain preconceptions about minorities, which leads you to be more susceptible towards hate group logic. And if you go looking for them, you'll find kindred spirits. Nazis don't use the Ludovico device, they simply press the buttons that parents/society imprinted on kids.

The fact that you desperately need to argue with a broken down version of my argument, which I made purely for the purposes of mocking someone who was arguing in bad faith, is telling.

The reason I "punked out" on your responses is that "I'm not going to advocate for my position" is not a response worth validating.

To address your actual argument, now that you've provided it, this:

quote:

Nazis crave attention and they crave conflict that they can win. When you make them look bad and marginalize them, you force them to, as you put it, "go into hiding". Without any outlet for their violence, they inevitably turn into introspection. This works for any hate group under the sun, be they Nazis, Al Queda, whatever. That's the part where the Nazi goes "poo poo I guess I suck" and seeks out ways to not be a Nazi. So sayeth the FBI: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate..._hate_model.htm

Is entirely correct. What you seem to be missing is that none of that involves attacking them. When you engage in political violence against ANY group, it results in them withdrawing, strengthening their ties, doubling down, and recruiting in secret. And that's a best case scenario. Others have pointed out that historically, Nazis and other fascists have used the violence against them to make themselves martyrs and bolster their recruiting efforts.

Absolutely mock them, ridicule them, make it impossible for people to take them seriously. All of that works, but when you use physical violence against them you are implicitly saying "I cannot debate you, so I must use violence to silence you." You're giving up.

If you need an example of this, look no further than the incident that kicked this latest round of discussion off; Richard Spencer gets punched in the face. Twice. Has it actually quieted his message? He's still spewing the same poo poo, and doesn't appear remotely afraid of retaliation. In fact, he's doing everything he can to use it to paint leftists as violent idiots. He's turned those punches into a recruiting tool.

quote:

I really hate tearing down plugs for good causes but this is like listening to Hallmark preach about paying money to enhance emotional moments.

What the gently caress are you even talking about? "Encouraging people to volunteer for noble causes in lieu of joining my call for violence MUST come from an insincere place?" Jesus, dude, look at yourself.

You're calling for us to use violence to root out rhetoric we don't like, a tactic that has never worked at any point in history, and you're calling me naive?

Keeshhound fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Jan 29, 2017

# ? Jan 29, 2017 23:31

Stinky Wizzleteats: Nov 26, 2015; You must pay the price for this post.

Actually, punching nazis is good and humiliates them finely. You must be exhausted, defending literally every sufferer of injustice before supper so you can post all night in defense of nazi fee fees.

# ? Jan 29, 2017 23:54

Rodatose: Jul 8, 2008; corn, corn, corn

Keeshhound posted:

Find kid. Protect kid from Nazis. Teach kid to be good person. No New Nazis. Nazis die off."

individual effort for teaching the next generation is nothing put up against whoever has most influence on media and the education system, who reach more kids

Senor P. posted:

See a Nazi? Say "Hey pal you're full of poo poo." Do not go down the road of blood fueds, assaults and violence.

Did john oliver stop trump from getting elected by calling them drumpf? Was the iraq war ended by witty satire and the outraged protesters whose numbers were comparable to vietnam war protesters?

# ? Jan 30, 2017 00:10

Extreme0: Feb 28, 2013; I dance to the sweet tune of your failure so I'm never gonna stop fucking with you.

Continue to get confused and frustrated with me as I dance to your anger.

As I expect nothing more from ya you stupid runt!

enki42 posted:

You're right, convincing people is hard. Maybe you should just punch them until they agree.

Try convincing a Nazi then and see how far you get.

# ? Jan 30, 2017 00:17

Seraphic Neoman: Jul 19, 2011

They are not a loving political group stop saying they are.

quote:

when you use physical violence against them you are implicitly saying "I cannot debate you, so I must use violence to silence you." You're giving up.

Sure. I guess you can see it that way because you cannot debate the loving Nazis. Why are you dying on this stupid hill? Why do you continue to insist the Nazis are a political group? How the gently caress do you justify the "politics" of genocide?
I hate asking such loaded questions but you keep insisting that Nazism is something we can argue or teach away.

quote:

If you need an example of this, look no further than the incident that kicked this latest round of discussion off; Richard Spencer gets punched in the face. Twice. Has it actually quieted his message? He's still spewing the same poo poo, and doesn't appear remotely afraid of retaliation. In fact, he's doing everything he can to use it to paint leftists as violent idiots. He's turned those punches into a recruiting tool.

I'd argue the opposite. He lost a lot of respect in his circles and he is now afraid. Mission accomplished. His followers are now ashamed of him and I expect white supremacists to start distancing themselves away from him.

quote:

What the gently caress are you even talking about? "Encouraging people to volunteer for noble causes in lieu of joining my call for violence MUST come from an insincere place?" Jesus, dude, look at yourself.

You're calling for us to use violence to root out rhetoric we don't like, a tactic that has never worked at any point in history, and you're calling me naive?

I'm not saying that. I'm saying using noble causes to support your kum-bah-yah argument for the loving Nazis naive and insincere. I have no doubt the program does good work but you're fighting against a culture which is predisposed to rhetoric that Nazis feed on. You need a lot more than ONE KID AT A TIME Lifetime moments, especially since now the Nazis have a way to legitimately mobilize in the public sphere.

Rodatose posted:

individual effort for teaching the next generation is nothing put up against whoever has most influence on media and the education system, who reach more kids

This is actually a good point too. Publicized antics like Nazi punching reach more people rather than debates on the merits of not killing minorities.

# ? Jan 30, 2017 00:59

Shbobdb: Dec 16, 2010; by Reene

People seem to really like defending Nazis. Someone punches a Nazi and that's too far. A jewish celebrity yells at a Nazi and he's a bully.

Meanwhile mosques burn in Texas and reactionary ideology is on the march in our government.

# ? Jan 30, 2017 01:09

Condiv: May 7, 2008; Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod

https://twitter.com/gaysexHaver420/status/825651804495036416?ref_src=tw

# ? Jan 30, 2017 01:43

yellowyams: Jan 15, 2011

Senor P. posted:

See a Nazi? Say "Hey pal you're full of poo poo." Do not go down the road of blood fueds, assaults and violence.

This is very much what they did before WWII broke out, and it very much ended with blood fueds, assaults and violence anyway with a dash of genocide.

# ? Jan 30, 2017 01:48

Keeshhound: Jan 14, 2010; Mad Duck Swagger

SSNeoman posted:

They are not a loving political group stop saying they are.

Sure. I guess you can see it that way because you cannot debate the loving Nazis. Why are you dying on this stupid hill? Why do you continue to insist the Nazis are a political group? How the gently caress do you justify the "politics" of genocide?
I hate asking such loaded questions but you keep insisting that Nazism is something we can argue or teach away.

Oh, well now that you've said it loud enough it must be true. :rolleyes:

They've got specific goals that they want to use state power to accomplish. They're a political group. Neither of us like them, or what they stand for, but pretending they're something other than what they are doesn't benefit us, especially if it's to try to redefine them so that we can pretend that otherwise universal norms don't apply to them.

Nazis aren't special. There is no fundamental aspect that separates them from you or me. And as a consequence anything you can do to a Nazi, you can do to me. All it takes is convincing yourself that I'm a Nazi, or in some way equally deserving as them. And again, even if you don't think I am one, I don't exactly need to go searching to find people who are more than happy to label me as such for expressing an unpopular opinion. What are you going to to to keep that happening? How are you going to make sure that only those most terrible of people are the targets of your righteous violence?

So I guess that's the ultimate reason I'm "dying on this stupid hill." Because I don't trust you, or anyone else advocating this poo poo not to gently caress up.

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:10

suck my woke dick: Oct 10, 2012; I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!

Put this cum-loving slave on ignore immediately!

TomViolence posted:

Their declared intent is to kill, evict or otherwise oppress anyone who isn't a white heterosexual male. If that isn't grounds for self defence, what the gently caress is? Does the knife already have to be buried in your gut before you're allowed to protect yourself?

if the nazi is pulling a knife/gun/flamethrower on you it's time to exercise your second amendment rights

not when the nazi is stumbling down the street piss drunk and yells something about concentrating people in camps before throwing up on the sidewalk
even if that nazi really really has it coming

suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Jan 30, 2017

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:12

Calibanibal: Aug 25, 2015

what if you and a nazi are standing on a slippery slope, and im at the bottom of the slope, and when you try to punch the nazi you fall down the slope and hurt me instead. can you guarantee that wont happen? i didnt think so

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:15

Ytlaya: Nov 13, 2005

DeusExMachinima posted:

I didn't say anything about letting people, particularly other people in other countries, die being unusual for any system with humans in it historically, capitalism included. I said violently killing tens of millions of your own citizens in camps or intentional famine makes you stand out. That'd be socialists and Nazis.

It is not an explicit part of communist (for example) ideology and policy, though. Nazis, on the other hand, explicitly have "want to ethnically cleanse _____ people" as part of their agenda.

As bad as the early USSR was, starving millions of people is not encoded into communist ideology.

Keeshhound posted:

I don't actually buy this argument. Do we have any examples of this really working in history?

...and do you have any examples of punching Nazis somehow causing some terrible escalation of violence? There are two angles to make the anti-Nazi punching argument from: 1. The belief that it will lead to bad results and isn't pragmatic as a result, and 2. the belief that punching Nazis itself is immoral. Most people seem to be arguing from the perspective of 1, but I have yet to see any persuasive argument that some people punching Nazis will be a slippery slope to...whatever terrible thing you think is going to happen.

Keeshhound posted:

"Ugh. Punch Nazi. Nazi run away, find other nazis. Nazis not like puncher. Hide from puncher. Nazis look for kid. Steal kid. Teach kid to be Nazi. No Punch Nazi. It no help. Find kid. Protect kid from Nazis. Teach kid to be good person. No New Nazis. Nazis die off."

You seem to just be assuming this would happen based upon faith though. Nazis are going to try to convince other people to be Nazis whether or not they get punched. If anything, the punching might at least force them to not recruit people openly. You're also for some reason assuming that punching Nazis and educating children to not be Nazis/immoral are mutually exclusive, which is really bizarre.

Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Jan 30, 2017

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:20

stone cold: Feb 15, 2014

It's really irritating to see this person stick up more for nazis than for actual minorities who are getting hate crimed.

Punch nazis erryday.

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:35

Pittsburgh Lambic: Feb 16, 2011

Keeshhound posted:

Absolutely mock them, ridicule them, make it impossible for people to take them seriously. All of that works, but when you use physical violence against them you are implicitly saying "I cannot debate you, so I must use violence to silence you." You're giving up.

If you need an example of this, look no further than the incident that kicked this latest round of discussion off; Richard Spencer gets punched in the face. Twice. Has it actually quieted his message? He's still spewing the same poo poo, and doesn't appear remotely afraid of retaliation. In fact, he's doing everything he can to use it to paint leftists as violent idiots. He's turned those punches into a recruiting tool.

basically from what i can tell you're not trying to argue that punching nazis is wrong, but that it's really dumb and counterproductive

the read i'm getting from the rest of the thread is that people believe that punching nazis feels good so they make up whatever excuse is necessary to justify doing it, despite its dumbness

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:41

esto es malo: Aug 3, 2006; Don't want to end up a cartoon

In a cartoon graveyard

if you could debate a nazi things would have been a lot easier 80 years ago, but you cant so loving punch them every day

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:51

Keeshhound: Jan 14, 2010; Mad Duck Swagger

Ytlaya posted:

...and do you have any examples of punching Nazis somehow causing some terrible escalation of violence? There are two angles to make the anti-Nazi punching argument from: 1. The belief that it will lead to bad results and isn't pragmatic as a result, and 2. the belief that punching Nazis itself is immoral. Most people seem to be arguing from the perspective of 1, but I have yet to see any persuasive argument that some people punching Nazis will be a slippery slope to...whatever terrible thing you think is going to happen.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/06/27/violent-clashes-erupt-sacramento-between-white-nationalists-and-antifascists

But first, why are we taking it on faith that it won't? Is it really that unreasonable for me to ask that when contemplating engaging in a campaign of targeted assaults, it should be the responsibility of the people advocating for the action to prove that it will have the results they predict without any undesired escalations?

quote:

You seem to just be assuming this would happen based upon faith though. Nazis are going to try to convince other people to be Nazis whether or not they get punched. If anything, the punching might at least force them to not recruit people openly. You're also for some reason assuming that punching Nazis and educating children to not be Nazis/immoral are mutually exclusive, which is really bizarre.

I think most people find it hard to mentor kids when they're serving time on an assault conviction, but maybe I'm wrong. And I wasn't saying that they only recruit while hiding underground, I was saying that violently suppressing them will have no actual effect on the spread of the ideology.

stone cold posted:

It's really irritating to see this person stick up more for nazis than for actual minorities who are getting hate crimed.

Punch nazis erryday.

Oh, it's been almost a day, so I was really starting to feel the absence of this one. "Why are you so concerned about the degradation of social norms that should be protecting everyone, why do you love nazis so much?" :allears:

Why don't you run me through your logic on why minorities will be so much safer once everyone decides that attacking people they don't like is a good idea? Oh, that's right, somehow only Nazis ever get punched in your fairy stories. But of course, minorities are already getting attacked, which means that they can't be attacked more. Oh, I'm defeated. Did I miss a part?

Pittsburgh Lambic posted:

basically from what i can tell you're not trying to argue that punching nazis is wrong, but that it's really dumb and counterproductive

the read i'm getting from the rest of the thread is that people believe that punching nazis feels good so they make up whatever excuse is necessary to justify doing it, despite its dumbness

I've got my own opinions on the morality of the action, but it's already clear that most of the posters in this thread have decided that nothing done to their preferred target can ever be immoral, so I'm not going to bother with that angle.

Keeshhound fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Jan 30, 2017

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:52

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 31, 2024 23:33

enki42: Jun 11, 2001; #ATMLIVESMATTER

Put this Nazi-lover on ignore immediately!

Extreme0 posted:

Try convincing a Nazi then and see how far you get.

You don't need to convince a Nazi though.

You can convince either of the following two sets of people:

1. A not-nazi who has allied themselves with Nazis. There are people who identify as "alt-right" who aren't Nazis. They have some lovely opinions, but they don't want genocide, or at least aren't sure they want it. Nazis don't spring fully formed with adorable little Hitler youth haircuts from the womb. In any situation where you encounter more than one "alt-right" or "Trump" supporter, chances are at least some of them are convincable.

2. More importantly, you can convince (or keep) the general public on your side. You have the moral high ground right now. The american public has less respect for Trump than any president in the history of the U.S., and his popularity isn't improving. Bannon is less liked. Richard Spencer even less so. The way you make their viewpoints unpalatable to modern society is to denounce them and show them for the hate crimes that they are while maintaining the moral high ground. Once you're viewed as just a thug, people stop listening to you, and in the worst cases, sympathize with the Nazis.

# ? Jan 30, 2017 02:53

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Legality of assaults

«‹›34 »