Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Antifa: Left Wing Militants on the Rise


msommer

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, knowledge dropper said:

And yet it happened during their protest.....

That was not foreseeable. He was not a member of BLM nor associated with the organizers or the participants of the protest. As mentioned before, unlike Antifa, BLM does not condone or encourage violence and has condemned any violence associated with their events. And nothing even remotely similar to this horrific shooting happened at any other BLM planned protests. Apparently you think BLM should not hold any public rallies at all because someone mentally ill might use that opportunity to shoot people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but when a guy whose angry about white police officers killing black men shows up at your protest of a white police officer killing a black man and starts unloading on white police officers as "revenge" you don't get to disavow the obvious connection.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jonessed said:

Sorry, but when a guy whose angry about white police officers killing black men shows up at your protest of a white police officer killing a black man and starts unloading on white police officers as "revenge" you don't get to disavow the obvious connection.

Why not?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, squistion said:

That was not foreseeable. He was not a member of BLM nor associated with the organizers or the participants of the protest. As mentioned before, unlike Antifa, BLM does not condone or encourage violence and has condemned any violence associated with their events. And nothing even remotely similar to this horrific shooting happened at any other BLM planned protests. Apparently you think BLM should not hold any public rallies at all because someone mentally ill might use that opportunity to shoot people.

BLM isn't one movement.  It's not hard to find videos of BLM leaders advocating violence or condemning it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Pwingles said:

Can we stop acting like this is a free speech issue?

When the entire reason you are assembling is to let other groups of people know that you feel like they are a lesser form of life, how isnt that a threatening thing? gtfoh with that ish

Perhaps you should review what free speech means and the narrow (really narrow) exceptions to it that have been recognized by the SCOTUS.

I say that as somebody who absolutely reviles these alt-right ####birds. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RedmondLonghorn said:

Perhaps you should review what free speech means and the narrow (really narrow) exceptions to it that have been recognized by the SCOTUS.

I say that as somebody who absolutely reviles these alt-right ####birds. 

I know hate speech isn't in bounds. Not sure anything else here is relevant. Who is stopping who from saying anything in this scenario, outside of hate speech?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jonessed said:

From the YouTube notes which you obviously didn't bother to read (and probably didn't listen to the video fully either). This was not BLM leader(s), this was some New Black Panthers:

ball bust10 months ago

This isnt BLM "Leader(sic)" these are some jokers from the documented hate group New Black Panther Party, a completely different organization which has zero overlap in membership with BLM. This clown in the vid even says hes with the NBPP, I dont understand how you confuse these two groups which have nothing in common +yamahatyros5 +The deplorable Noah Stevens +Ola Hoglund... help me understand...

Edited by squistion
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pwingles said:

I know hate speech isn't in bounds. Not sure anything else here is relevant. Who is stopping who from saying anything in this scenario, outside of hate speech?

There is no such thing as "hate speech" in the eyes of the Supreme Court. Or there is no legal distinction for it and it isn't an established exception to the First Amendment.

There is a "fighting words" exception and an incitement of violence exception, but both of those are extremely narrow, as they should be. Fighting words generally need to be uttered on a person-to-person basis. In order to fall outside of 1A protections, an incitement of violence needs to be specific and to lead to immediate violence that is a foreseeable outcome of the speech.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

There is no such thing as "hate speech" in the eyes of the Supreme Court. Or there is no legal distinction for it and it isn't an established exception to the First Amendment.

There is a "fighting words" exception and an incitement of violence exception, but both of those are extremely narrow, as they should be. Fighting words generally need to be uttered on a person-to-person basis. In order to fall outside of 1A protections, an incitement of violence needs to be specific and to lead to immediate violence that is a foreseeable outcome of the speech.

And what would you assume a gathering of people, whos entire philosophy in life is that you dont matter and need to be eradicated, is meant to do?

 

If you are insinuating that our government protects the ideology that if we dislike someone enough for something they cannot control, that we can intimidate them or worse from their homes, regardless of the fine print or lack therof, i refuse to accept that

Edited by Pwingles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pwingles said:

And what would you assume a gathering of people, whos entire philosophy in life is that you dont matter and need to be eradicated, is meant to do?

I suggest you review Brandenburg v. Ohio.

These alt-right groups are disgusting, but let's not wish to go down the slippery slope of eroding 1st Amendment protections due to the actions of a small fringe element.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RedmondLonghorn said:

I suggest you review Brandenburg v. Ohio.

These alt-right groups are disgusting, but let's not wish to go down the slippery slope of eroding 1st Amendment protections due to the actions of a small fringe element.

Im not suggesting anything except for that racists of all kinds are BS. 

However, the notion that its a small fringe element is naive at best. They just happen to acknowledge their prejudices by being smart enough to know theyre not culturally accepted. So they slink in the shadows and behind masks and anon internet hate forums. They usually need to be empowered or emboldened by someone or something. But just because thats the case, doesnt meant their numbers are small.

How big do you need that ideology to get in this country before youre ok with stomping it out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, squistion said:

From the YouTube notes which you obviously didn't bother to read (and probably didn't listen to the video fully either). This was not BLM leader(s), this was some New Black Panthers:

ball bust10 months ago

This isnt BLM "Leader(sic)" these are some jokers from the documented hate group New Black Panther Party, a completely different organization which has zero overlap in membership with BLM. This clown in the vid even says hes with the NBPP, I dont understand how you confuse these two groups which have nothing in common +yamahatyros5 +The deplorable Noah Stevens +Ola Hoglund... help me understand...

How can it have zero overlap?  There are people in that audience with BLM shirts cheering them.

BLM isn't one group, with one message.  It's a loosely organized social justice movement.  Some parts may be non-violent, but there are others that are pretty damn violent.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jonessed said:

How can it have zero overlap?  There are people in that audience with BLM shirts cheering them.

BLM isn't one group, with one message.  It's a loosely organized social justice movement.  Some parts may be non-violent, but there are others that are pretty damn violent.

But their website says they are well-behaved....

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pwingles said:

Im not suggesting anything except for that racists of all kinds are BS. 

However, the notion that its a small fringe element is naive at best. They just happen to acknowledge their prejudices by being smart enough to know theyre not culturally accepted. So they slink in the shadows and behind masks and anon internet hate forums. They usually need to be empowered or emboldened by someone or something. But just because thats the case, doesnt meant their numbers are small.

How big do you need that ideology to get in this country before youre ok with stomping it out?

I would love to stomp out extremist elements on both sides immediately.

I am simply not willing to open the Pandora's Box of further regulating free speech to do it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pwingles said:

Im not suggesting anything except for that racists of all kinds are BS. 

However, the notion that its a small fringe element is naive at best. They just happen to acknowledge their prejudices by being smart enough to know theyre not culturally accepted. So they slink in the shadows and behind masks and anon internet hate forums. They usually need to be empowered or emboldened by someone or something. But just because thats the case, doesnt meant their numbers are small.

How big do you need that ideology to get in this country before youre ok with stomping it out?

Who gets to decide which constitutional rights get taken away and from whom?  You?

Be happy you live in a country you can say whatever stupid crap you want without getting "stomped out".  It looks like you may end up needing it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jonessed said:

How can it have zero overlap?  There are people in that audience with BLM shirts cheering them.

BLM isn't one group, with one message.  It's a loosely organized social justice movement.  Some parts may be non-violent, but there are others that are pretty damn violent.

That doesn't make them BLM leaders nor this a BLM event.

And BLM is one group of individual chapters in various cities and their message is on their website. Not affiliated with New Black Panthers in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, squistion said:

That doesn't make them BLM leaders nor this a BLM event.

And BLM is one group of individual chapters in various cities and their message is on their website. Not affiliated with New Black Panthers in any way.

There are no official BLM leaders, BLM events, or BLM members.  It's not an organization.  You are whatever you claim to be.

If I wanted to start BLM of BFE, give a local interview, and organize a rally I'm as official a BLM leader as anyone else.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

There is no such thing as "hate speech" in the eyes of the Supreme Court. Or there is no legal distinction for it and it isn't an established exception to the First Amendment.

There is a "fighting words" exception and an incitement of violence exception, but both of those are extremely narrow, as they should be. Fighting words generally need to be uttered on a person-to-person basis. In order to fall outside of 1A protections, an incitement of violence needs to be specific and to lead to immediate violence that is a foreseeable outcome of the speech.

:goodposting: 

I'd also note that many state statutes do criminalize speech that could be seriously disruptive and disturbing of the peace (usually called "disorderly conduct") that do not necessarily need to be "fighting words."  These are more of a time, place and manner type restrictions and have led to the permit process for rallies and such. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jonessed said:

There are no official BLM leaders, BLM events, or BLM members.  It's not an organization.  You are whatever you claim to be.

If I wanted to start BLM of BFE, give a local interview, and organize a rally I'm as official a BLM leader as anyone else.

The BLM official website would disagree with you:

http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

About the Black Lives Matter Network

Black Lives Matter is a chapter-based national organization working for the validity of Black life. We are working to (re)build the Black liberation movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Pwingles said:

And what would you assume a gathering of people, whos entire philosophy in life is that you dont matter and need to be eradicated, is meant to do?

 

If you are insinuating that our government protects the ideology that if we dislike someone enough for something they cannot control, that we can intimidate them or worse from their homes, regardless of the fine print or lack therof, i refuse to accept that

"The best way to drown out and eliminate bad speech is with good." 

Personally, I can't stand a single thing the alt-right and these white supremacist groups have to say.  But I'll defend their right to say it just adamantly as I would anybody else trying to say something in a manner that it protected by the constitution. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

He was a nut, but once somebody decides that political violence is okay, I feel like they should have to answer for violence coming from their side first.

We fought a world war against the Nazis....pretty much anyone using their symbolism deserves an ### kicking...there are repercussions to their free speech

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, jonessed said:

There are no official BLM leaders, BLM events, or BLM members.  It's not an organization.  You are whatever you claim to be.

If I wanted to start BLM of BFE, give a local interview, and organize a rally I'm as official a BLM leader as anyone else.

 

 

 

If you create a webpage that is what would apparently make you "official."  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bicycle_seat_sniffer said:

We fought a world war against the Nazis....pretty much anyone using their symbolism deserves an ### kicking...there are repercussions to their free speech

First of all, that's the opposite of free speech.  Second, we also fought wars against imperial Japan, Vietnamese communists, Sunni Iraqis, and a bunch of other folks.  You don't get to go around slugging all those people.  Sorry, but you need to grow up and join civil society.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Yep and people have the right to counter protest right in their face too.....maybe the Nazi snowflakes need a safe space??

Protest all you want but you don't get to mace people and beat them with axe handles and violate their civil rights.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

He was a nut, but once somebody decides that political violence is okay, I feel like they should have to answer for violence coming from their side first.

Sanders condemned the actions.  I didn't listen to the video clip, but if you read the quote he did not deflect or blame anyone else.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, squistion said:

The BLM official website would disagree with you:

http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

About the Black Lives Matter Network

Black Lives Matter is a chapter-based national organization working for the validity of Black life. We are working to (re)build the Black liberation movement.

Those are just the people that started the hashtag.  Hopefully they can continue to build their own structure around the movement.  The movement itself though has no heirarchy.  This group had no Dallas BLM chapter when the protest and shooting in Dallas occurred.  There were no "officially" sanctioned leaders that organized the march.

Edited by jonessed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extremism is bad. Political violence is bad.

I don't care what the underlying ideology is, if a group needs to threaten, harass or act out in violent ways to get its "message" across, the message sucks. As do the members of the group.

This is an ideology neutral statement.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, msommer said:

Agreed. Now that obviously goes both ways (Deandre Harris)

Absolutely. Now we’re see low level violence become the norm at these events. Attending one of these rallies now is pretty much signing up for medieval warfare at this point. Both sides that attend know what they’re signing up for at this and it’s the same people doing it.

My fear right now is that now someone got killed by the other side so a revenge attack is likely to happen. Cities and police can’t be complacent and watch this happen. Why let people protest with mace and clubs? Why let them get near each other? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something ive struggled to articulate over the years and recently its become more frustrating is how to take these people off their soap boxes by discrediting the very idea of opinions and their false equivalency.

I was shared a TED talk about this specific thing recently and can't recommend it enough.

Deborah Lipstadt TED talk - behind the lies of the holocaust denial

It is paramount to maintain the 1st amendment, but its important to remember, that the 1st amendment protects you from the government and not individuals - these people should just be dismissed and marginalized until they don't exist any longer, they should be laughed off and ridiculed - they should have the facts thrown in their face and then ignored while they spin their wheels. The facts should be so mainstream that if a person walked up to a child on a playground and suggested that they were better or worse because of their skin color or religion or sexuality or gender identification that that child should already have the skills necessary to dismiss that person. Critical thinking should be taught in schools so all individuals are capable of tearing down these conspiracy theorist hate mongers. 

There should never be a footing for these people to gain an inch.

Edited by Run It Up
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Run It Up said:

Something ive struggled to articulate over the years and recently its become more frustrating is how to take these people off their soap boxes by discrediting the very idea of opinions and their false equivalency.

I was shared a TED talk about this specific thing recently and can't recommend it enough.

Deborah Lipstadt TED talk - behind the lies of the holocaust denial

It is paramount to maintain the 1st amendment, but its important to remember, that the 1st amendment protects you from the government and not individuals - these people should just be dismissed and marginalized until they don't exist any longer, they should be laughed off and ridiculed - they should have the facts thrown in their face and then ignored while they spin their wheels. The facts should be so mainstream that if a person walked up to a child on a playground and suggested that they were better or worse because of their skin color or religion or sexuality or gender identification that that child should already have the skills necessary to dismiss that person. Critical thinking should be taught in schools so all individuals are capable of tearing down these conspiracy theorist hate mongers. 

There should never be a footing for these people to gain an inch.

While a noble goal I don't think it's realistic.  Being intelligent or having a robust critical thinking toolbox does not make one immune to bad or dangerous ideas.  

These people aren't all just dumb rednecks.  I think it's dangerous to believe or assume that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe they are, I believe very intelligent people are just as capable of succumbing to these ideologies, but I think the failure in these instances are a couple things. 

  1. People, regardless of intelligence who have poor critical thinking.
  2. People, who are already disenfranchised for one reason or another who redirect their frustration and anger towards other 'groups' instead of the cause (another failure of critical thinking)
  3. Lastly, the mentally unstable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I regret now that I participated in this thread this morning. I don't like Antifa for the reasons I stated, and I won't take any of them back. But I have come to agree with Tobias that this issue is being used by some conservatives (and the President for that matter) to create a moral equivalency, and it's pretty shameful.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I regret now that I participated in this thread this morning. I don't like Antifa for the reasons I stated, and I won't take any of them back. But I have come to agree with Tobias that this issue is being used by some conservatives (and the President for that matter) to create a moral equivalency, and it's pretty shameful.

Let them....its lets the world know exactly where they stand.....siding with nazis??? I'll take the other side eveytime

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...