• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

ANTIFA attacks peaceful right wing protestors in Berkeley CA.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mr. Fade, please keep your Americansims straight: it's 'Murica. Y'all Qaeda/Vanilla ISIS refer to the Bundy "militia" crew what took over a bird sanctuary. And Dave just knows the facts, as presented by either Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Jones, dead Breitbart, or their subsidiaries; and they say "antifa" makes them sick. What the Klan and fascists make them feel is . . . unclear . . . .
 
That is what I was getting at. That is why most people railing against the entity of 'antifa' don't seem to even know what they are.

Ah, my apologies - i missed your sarcasm, which is pretty silly of me - of course you know antifascism has no hierarchy :D

As for whether or not "antifa" exists, scrofula - i don't know enough about the masinstream press portrayal of antifa, but i'm imagining it's something like the way the media talk about "members" of "hacker group anonymous"?

Like, antifascists are bloodthirsty hateres of freedom of speech, and we all meet up on weekends for barbeques to plot our next bombing of a church. (Oops, sorry - i keep getting antifascists mixed up the KKK, because "both sides are as bad as each other" according to the US president [an expert on grassroots political movements], the mainstream media and right wing trolls online).

In the sense that it's an organised struggle against fascism - a method of opposing right wing extremism, not a club or group or organisation - antifa certainly exists. But it's maybe a bit complicated for people to grasp, when they see unified political factions, the assume it must be a group.

I get the impression from some of the things i read that people think "Antifa" is something that's popped up recently, to oppose the alt-right, or trump or whatever modern fascists happen to be the targets of anti-fascist actions, but it's got a long history.

This photo is from Germany in 1932

DIkm3XCXoAIdVqb
 
Last edited:
And here I thought your flag was just a cat walking across a street grating that'd been accidentally electrified, or possibly a communist Pikachu.

I think we're arguing the same thing. You're using the term "antifa" as a broad brush for opponents of fascism, and of course that exists in the US, as much in the people who turn out every time the schoolboards get stacked with right-wing bookburners, as with kids prepared to start fires.

But a single group which calls itself "Antifa" and came about to oppose Trump's far-right machine with violence, I don't think exists. Do we have a count of the number of alleged "antifa" actions? When alt-right media locations and white power headquarters start being targeted, with damage that a reputable press can show, I'll believe it. Right now we have a few people wearing black engaging in fights at public demonstrations. I consider that Sunday in the Bay Area.

So I believe "Antifa" is wholly an alt-right invention, or loosely based on some now-disbanded or re-named group. Even though I know leftist groups prepared to do such things exist, as far as I know none have taken any actions. THe kind of actions that the alt-right strongly implies are happening.
 
How Russian & Alt-Right Twitter Accounts Worked Together to Skew the Narrative About Berkeley

#Antifa and #Berkeley were hot topics last weekend in America — and in Russia.

Social media has an important role in shaping perceptions of current events, as well as influencing mainstream news coverage of those events. Platforms like Twitter provide real-time access to events going on around the world, allowing anyone to get a front-row seat for breaking news. But as much as it has opened up new channels of information, social media has also opened up new avenues for manipulating perceptions of reality. Misinformation and disinformation often spread faster than the truth, and by the time the narrative is corrected, social media has already moved on to the next “big thing.”

The narrative surrounding last weekend’s protests in Berkeley took shape on social media and was picked up, at least in part, by mainstream news outlets. The result was a skewed presentation of events that was almost entirely devoid of the context in which they took place. Even more troubling: that narrative was influenced by pro-Russian social media networks, including state-sponsored propaganda outlets, botnets, cyborgs, and individual users.

In the case study below, I describe how the narrative surrounding Berkeley was picked up and shaped by Russian-linked influence networks, which saw a chance to drive a wedge in American society and ran with it. Next, I look at the individual accounts and users that were identified as top influencers on Twitter, and explore what they were posting, how they worked together to craft a narrative, and the methods they used to amplify their message. Finally, I look at how news coverage of the events in Berkeley was shaped by the skewed narrative that emerged on social media.

This is just a single case study in a larger story, but it serves as an important reminder that Russia is still exploiting social media to harm U.S. interests — and that plenty of Americans are willing to join in on the effort.

The Russian Connection

Russian-linked influence networks and propaganda arms quickly took interest in the Berkeley protests last weekend. On Sunday afternoon, the top story on the front page of Russian propaganda outlet RT was about the events in Berkeley. (Note that this was the main landing page — not the “America” section).


A screenshot from Sunday, Aug. 27 shows that the protests in Berkeley were featured as the top story on the front page of Russian propaganda outlet RT.
RT tweeted stories about the protests throughout the day Sunday (and some on Saturday), posting dramatic images and using trending hashtags to maximize their reach. Many of these tweets were retweeted by the semi-automated pro-Kremlin account @TeamTrumpRussia (aka Дepлorabлe Рuссian), which spent much of the day amplifying the hashtags #Berkeley and #Antifa.





Russian propaganda site RT used dramatic images from the protests in Berkeley to spread messages about unrest and divisions in American society.
On Twitter, the hashtag #Berkeley was amplified by Russian-linked influence networks, as evidenced by the output of the Hamilton 68 dashboard, a project of the Alliance for Securing Democracy, which tracks the activity of 600 Twitter accounts linked to Russian influence operations. These include state-sponsored propaganda outlets like Sputnik and RT, as well as individual users, automated accounts (“bots”), and cyborgs (accounts that produce automated content some of the time, but are human-controlled at other times) that actively and frequently amplify Kremlin propaganda (knowingly, and in some cases, potentially unknowingly).

Between the hours of 4pm EST and 8pm EST on Sunday, #Berkeley soared to the top spot among the most frequently used hashtags on Hamilton 68’s dashboard. The number of times the hashtag #Berkeley was used increased by a staggering 27,600% during that time period.
At 4pm EST, #Berkeley was not even in the top ten hashtags, though the related hashtag #Antifa was in ninth place.

But in a span of just four hours, the number of times the hashtag #Berkeley was used within the Russian-linked influence network increased by a staggering 27,600%, making it the top hashtag (measured by the number of times it was used) and the top trending hashtag (measured by the percentage increase in the frequency of use). As #Berkeley shot up to the top spot, the hashtag #Antifa also climbed the charts. Within the same four-hour window (4pm-8pm), #Antifa went from ninth place to sixth place among the most frequently used hashtags within the sample of 600 accounts linked to Russian influence campaigns.

Three of the top 10 most frequently shared URLs within the Russian-linked influence network were related to Antifa or the Berkeley protests
Looking further, three of the top 10 most frequently shared URLs were related to Antifa or the Berkeley protests, as were two of the top ten trending URLs on the Hamilton 68 dashboard. Two of these were news articles; one was a periscope video made by Irma Hinojosa, a far-right pro-Trump activist.



URLs linking to content related to Berkeley and Antifa were shared heavily within the Russian-linked influence network identified by Securing Democracy’s Hamilton 68 project.
As noted by the researchers who run Hamilton 68, these trends show that users in the network of Russian-linked influence operations wanted to exploit unrest in the U.S. and “amplify alt-right alarmism about the left-wing Antifa (short for anti-fascist) movement.” For several consecutive days this week, the most-tweeted link in the network was a whitehouse.gov petition seeking to declare Antifa a terrorist group.

In addition to promoting hashtags and a direct link to the whitehouse.gov site, stories about the petition were the most retweeted by two different Twitter accounts for Russian propaganda outlet RT. Ruptly, an RT-affiliated account, also heavily pushed a video clip showing footage of a fight between neo-Nazis and Antifa activists in Berlin, according to Hamilton 68.

The Alt-Right Propagandasphere

To get a better idea of who was pushing the hashtags and spreading content (information, misinformation, and disinformation) about the protests, I explored the top contributors to the hashtags #Berkeley and #Antifa.

#Berkeley: First, I searched for users tweeting about #Berkeley. As seen below, the top contributors (measured by engagement) included a mix of individual Twitter users (on the left and the right/‘alt-right’), as well as several local reporters and one local news agency. ‘Alt-right’/far-right Trump supporters comprised the largest group of top contributors.


Top influencers (by level of engagement) for the hashtag #Berkeley (via Keyhole)
In a second search of more recent tweets (late afternoon on Sunday [approx. 5pm EST]), ‘alt-right’/far-right Trump supporters made up a larger proportion of users tweeting with the hashtag #Berkeley — indicating that they likely started tweeting and retweeting more as the protests turned violent.
For the sake of comparison, I performed a similar search on the hashtag #Berkeley on a different platform, and with a slightly more restricted time range (to capture the most recent tweets only, as of about 5pm EST). The sample for this search was smaller (due to the more restrictive search criteria), but the results were largely in line with the first search. Top contributors included political activists (left and right/‘alt-right’), along with media figures and reporters. However, compared to the initial search, ‘alt-right’/far-right Trump supporters made up a larger proportion of the top contributors to the sample of more recent #Berkeley tweets, indicating that they likely started tweeting and retweeting more as the protests turned violent.



Top contributors to the hashtag #Berkeley, later in the day on 8/27/17 (via Social Bearing)
Once it started trending, the ‘alt-right’ made a concerted effort to flood the hashtag #Berkeley with negative posts about #Antifa in an attempt to saturate the hashtag, as well as to mix in some misinformation and disinformation to muddy the waters. The purpose was to create and then establish control of the narrative, skew perceptions of the event and those involved in it, and influence mainstream media coverage by boosting the visibility of certain content.


Twitter users were instructed to flood the trending #Berkeley hashtag with negative, inflammatory, and often false claims about Antifa protesters.
#Antifa: While contributors to the #Berkeley hashtag were a mix of a progressive/liberal activists, journalists and news outlets, as well as ‘alt-right’/far-right Trump supporters, the hashtag #Antifa looked quite different. Nearly all of the top influencers were ‘alt-right’/far-right Trump supporters, including Mike Cernovich, Paul Joseph Watson, Irma Hinojosa, Mike Tokes, Nick Short, Bill Mitchell, and Dinesh DSouza.

Only two of the top 30 influencers were not part of this ‘alt-right’/far-right group (myself, and investigative journalist Shane Bauer, who has extensively covered right-wing extremist movements, as well as the protest-related clashes instigated by far-right agitators).

Notably, Julian Assange was the most influential contributor to to the #Antifa hashtag (as measured by engagement), and both Roger Stone (bottom row, far left) and Nigel Farage were also among the top influencers (bottom row, last on the right). Interestingly, Alan Dershowitz was another top influencer (top row, fourth from the left) for the hashtag #Antifa, while Fox News was the only media organization in the top 30 influencers.

A final noteworthy observation: The third most influential contributor to the #Antifa hashtag was one of the many fake Antifa accounts (BevHillsAntifa) created in the spring and summer of 2017.


The most influential contributors to the #Antifa hashtag were nearly all ‘alt-right’/far-right Trump supporters.
Crafting a Narrative

So what were these accounts tweeting about? And what kind of narrative were they trying to create?

To find out, I looked at the tweets from some of the top influencers (seen above), as well as some of the top accounts they were retweeting and that were retweeting them. Many of the top influencers, particularly under the hashtag #Antifa, were amplifying their message by retweeting each other, and by sharing the same content repeatedly.

Below is a random sample of tweets using the hashtag #Antifa. As you can see, the hashtag was dominated by negative and inflammatory tweets about #Antifa, with several accounts trying to label #Antifa as a terrorist organization. (I’ll expand on this in another article, but Antifa is not an organization. Antifa is short for anti-fascist, so the term describes an ideological position, as well the broad activist movement driven by it. Encompassed within this larger movement are individuals and loosely connected groups — but “Antifa” is not a group). Other dominant themes included a concerted effort to connect Antifa to the Democratic party and to smear the name of Black Lives Matter, as well as to shift the focus from the surge of right-wing extremist violence to the individual actions of “leftist” protesters. Notably, in this random sample of tweets, all of those tweeting about #Antifa were doing so in a negative manner — showing how an orchestrated effort can really saturate a hashtag and skew the related sentiment, content, and narrative.


A random sample of tweets using the hashtag #Antifa on Sunday, Aug. 27 (tweets obtained via Social Bearing).
Looking at tweets from some of the top influencers as well as those amplifying them (below), you can see the narrative surrounding #Antifa really start to take shape. The dominant themes all involved presenting an exaggerated threat and promoting right-wing alarmism about that threat. These themes included labeling Antifa as a terrorist organization, trying to link Antifa to George Soros, presenting Antifa as the aggressor and far-right extremists as the victims, and trying to portray Antifa as the “real” fascists. Both-siderism was also a common tactic used, often in attempt to equate hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan with Antifa and Black Lives Matter.


Tweets by some of the top influencers under the hashtags #Antifa and #Berkeley promoted a skewed narrative of chaos, destruction, and terror at the hands of Antifa (without mentioning the role of right-wing agitators or the recent events in Charlottesville).
The narrative pushed by these accounts mirrored the content pushed by Russian propaganda outlets RT and Sputnik. While there was certainly unrest in Berkeley, the “alt-right”/far-right narrative presented a skewed, almost cartoonish image of utter destruction, chaos, and disorder.

To amplify their message, many of the top influencers shared the same content repeatedly — like this clip by Nick Short, a blogger and social media director for the newly-formed right-wing Security Studies Group, which is run by a group of men who are best known for their conspiracy theories about Muslims.


“Alt-right”/far-right influencers crafted and then amplified a skewed narrative about #Antifa using methods such as repetition, which is a key element involved in successfully disseminating propaganda.
Repetition is one of the most important elements of successful propaganda dissemination. Even when information is not true, being exposed to it repeatedly and from multiple sources boosts its credibility and increases the likelihood that an audience will internalize and believe the message. Repetition also increases the likelihood that any given person will be exposed to the message, while simultaneously drowning out alternative messages and perspectives.

There is also an important social normative element involved: When people see that other individuals with similar ideological viewpoints are propagating a certain message or position, they’re more likely to adopt that perspective themselves. Additionally, perceptions of widespread support can make extreme ideas seem more acceptable and “mainstream” —a key step in the process of normalization. These social normative factors make social media ripe for manipulation, as it’s easy to create false impressions of support using automated accounts (“bots”), cyborgs, and orchestrated hashtag campaigns.

The methods used by these “alt-right”/far-right figures to shape the narrative surrounding #Antifa and #Berkeley may look familiar, as they mirror the methods used by authoritarian states to manipulate public opinion and skew perceptions of reality. RAND detailed many of these methods in an extensive report on Russia’s “Firehose of Falsehood” propaganda model:

The experimental psychology literature suggests that, all other things being equal, messages received in greater volume and from more sources will be more persuasive. Quantity does indeed have a quality all its own. High volume can deliver other benefits that are relevant in the Russian propaganda context. First, high volume can consume the attention and other available bandwidth of potential audiences, drowning out competing messages. Second, high volume can overwhelm competing messages in a flood of disagreement. Third, multiple channels increase the chances that target audiences are exposed to the message. Fourth, receiving a message via multiple modes and from multiple sources increases the message’s perceived credibility, especially if a disseminating source is one with which an audience member identifies.
A Lesson For the Media

What was missing from the skewed narrative described above was context. By focusing on the isolated fights and outbursts by individual actors, a handful of Twitter accounts (amplified by bots & cyberborgs) shifted the focus away from the widespread, ongoing, and orchestrated activities of groups like the Proud Boys and their “military division” known as the Fraternal Order of Alt-Knights (FOAK), as well as provocateurs and instigators like Kyle Chapman, (aka “Based Stickman”, leader of FOAK), Gavin McGinnes (leader of the Proud Boys), Nathan Damigo (leader of the white supremacist group Identity Evropa), Joey Gibson (leader of Patriot Prayer, and the organizer of Saturday’s canceled rally in San Francisco), Mike Peinovich (aka Mike Enoch, founder of the racist and anti-Semitic website “The Right Stuff”), Milo Yiannopoulos, Tim “Treadstone” Gionet (aka “Baked Alaska”, former Buzzfeed editor and current “Internet personality” who manged the speaking tour of Yiannopoulos), Jack Posobiec (formerly of Rebel Media), and “alt-right” leader Richard Spencer, among others.

For months, these “alt-right” and far-right extremists have been traveling to liberal cities and showing up at rallies wearing helmets, goggles, and body armor, and often carrying shields, flagpoles, and weighted sticks. While they’ve gotten (somewhat) more discreet in recent months, their plans for violence — including directions for making weapons to get past security, instructions for making improvised explosive devices, and discussions about the best gear for battle — are often made out in the open, reflecting just how emboldened these groups have become. (Back in April, I documented some of this on Twitter and compiled it here). They carry this out under the guise of buzzwords like “free speech” or “patriotism”, but their intent is clear: They want to provoke violence.

They use these so-called “free speech” rallies as recruitment events to increase their membership, and they know violence sells. They also know that increasing their size and consolidating power requires more mainstream support, and a quick way to get that support is by portraying themselves as brave martyrs fighting against a supposed uprising of “violent leftists” — represented by Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and anyone else they can fool the media into demonizing. By traveling to liberal cities where they know they’ll encounter resistance, they can then frame their violence as a defense against “intolerant leftists” trying to “shut down free speech.” This, in turn, gives mainstream conservatives and right-wing figures a reason (or, in some cases, an excuse) to support their cause.

By saturating social media, they also hijack the mainstream media narrative and distract from the growing threat of organized right-wing extremism and white supremacist violence. Violence sells. Mainstream news outlets know this, too, which is why they often prioritize sensationalism over context. As Shane Bauer warned in his account of the events in Berkeley, “reporters shouldn’t lose sight of the big picture: Fascists and other far-right extremist groups in America are visible and organized in a way that they haven’t been in decades.” Only this time, they’re harnessing the power of social media to increase their visibility — and Russia is helping them do it.

link
 
Look at the vicious Leftist Marxist thug stifling that dude's free speech with bricks and chemicals, lies and deception! Dude's free speech repeating what he's heard from an enormous media machine.
 
May I ask if anyone lives in Portland?
Only as we are the hub of neo nazis and ANIFA I am curious as to if these well thought points come from living in the hub.
 
Good point, Portland is surrounded by much more KLan-friendly territory, and a city that's pretty left-leaning otherwise. Haven't heard the media do any breathless accounts of vicious antifa terrorism.

My guess is because Portland doesn't work as well for alt-right optics.
 
Portland's also had an active anti-fascist scene for many years (Rose City Antifa) because of white supremacist violence and murders that they have been continually subjected to (bonehead/nazi skinhead gangs etc)

I believe neo-nazi group Volksfront originated in Portland, hence the need for organised activism to defend their communities from hate crimes and intimidation.
 
Do you even listen to what come out of your own mouth? I'm not convinced anyone on your side of things actually does anymore.

The idea that antifa or some other feckless left-wing students are stopping nazis or whatever, is laughable. The sense of aggrandizement and self-importance is just about the only impressive thing antifa have to the ordinary person, it's reached new heights and provides for good entertainment I must say. You think you're doing some noble work but really you're just the other side of the coin to these hillbilly nazis.. neither one of you is actually capable of shifting society on your own merits because no one actually takes you seriously.

No they do not; but that's what makes cultural Marxists, leftists, Socialists, etc. so entertaining, hilarious, and sad. They should look into getting a job, saving money, and moving out of their parents' homes or shared living arrangements with 10+ people in a tiny house or flat instead of the silly and pointless resistance and other nonsense they do which accomplishes nothing at all.
 
Kinda like the alt-right frog worshippers that produce the fake antifa propaganda.

You obviously aren't familiar with Bay Area housing prices either.
 
No they do not; but that's what makes cultural Marxists, leftists, Socialists, etc. so entertaining, hilarious, and sad. They should look into getting a job, saving money, and moving out of their parents' homes or shared living arrangements with 10+ people in a tiny house or flat instead of the silly and pointless resistance and other nonsense they do which accomplishes nothing at all.

i understand that being a patronising bigot is your schtick, but you should try harder. you're just shitposting, really.

entertaining, hilarious, and sad.

like....people who believe in "cultural marxism"?
 
Southern Law Poverty Center criticizes Antifa but will not label as hate group

Richard Cohen, the president of the SPLC, told the Washington Examiner the loosely organized antifa movement, short for anti-fascism, is "wrongheaded" in opposing free speech and using violence.

"We oppose these groups and what they're trying to do. We just don't think anyone should be able to censor someone else's speech," Cohen said, echoing and endorsing recent statements from progressive scholar Noam Chomsky.

................

He said, however, the SPLC won't label antifa a "hate group" because adherents do not discriminate against people on the basis of race, sexual orientation or other classes protected by antidiscrimination laws, such as religion.

"There might be forms of hate out there that you may consider hateful, but it's not the type of hate we follow," Cohen said.

Antifa activism generally but not always features black-clad activists confronting adversaries they deem fascist, such as neo-Nazis or white supremacists. The movement is decentralized, and Cohen notes in many cases it lacks discernible organization, though he said that's not the reason against a hate-group designation.
 
You can only be charged for hating things on the list of things you can't hate. And nazis isn't on that list. It's perfectly legal to hate them.
 
So help me out, what am I not seeing here...

So if I understand this right, these guys go and try and stop a peaceful protest/demonstration, and they are supposedly ANTI fascist? What the fuck?

Seriously, this whole thing is new to me so maybe I just don't have all the facts. But it sure sounds like some people here think it's ok to use violence to disrupt a group of people who are doing nothing but advocating their political views without engaging in violence. Is that really what's happening here?
 
Last edited:
What are nazis peacefully protesting about?


Where is all the footage?

Why dont antifa just organise their own protest against nazis etc instead of stopping other whatever protests?

Are all alt right people nazis?


What are alt rights wanting?
 
No no, here's what happens. Some racists chose a single city, known for protesting anything and everything, to hold a public event, which they advertised and alerted the media. A press conference more than a rally.

Yes, everyone not busy that Sunday in the Bay Area, came out to spit on them. There were a few scuffles. Some of the people in the crowd wore black, and hid their faces.

Meanwhile a Raiders-game equivalent nearby saw three people get stabbed, probably.

THE END

Ah, but no, the alerted media arrived looking for dramatic footage of people with black Tshirts on their faces being angry at an innocent old racist. Clearly, these people hate free speech, and are such hypocrites to criticize the racists. And a big new story gets talked about for weeks.

It was really a typical weekend in Berkeley. Yes, I lived down the street for a long time.

OH, and some people are linking that to little shit Milo Yuandosomthing and Ann Coulter "cancelling" their shows or speeches or variety act that was going to be held somewhere in the same city. A city known for protesting everything. Sure enough, there were people on a corner, and one of them threw a brick or something. That's why the shows were cancelled ahead of time. Cause they hate free speech, just like Muslims or something.

What are nazis peacefully protesting about?

And see? That's a real good question nobody's really answered, probably because the point was to get media footage of college kids with black tshirts on their faces. The "event" had a name like "Down with Socialism in America", which considering current events, doesn't seem like a problem.

Like Black Lives Matter, what other events has "antifa" turned out for? When they start bombing Klan headquarters, then I will consider them a real organization.
 
You know, even if this event in particular is a bullshit media invention, and hell, it probably is, wouldn't surprise me. It still seems to me like there are posters in this thread that agree in principle with using direct action against groups of people they don't politically agree with. And that's definitely not ok.

But maybe (hopefully) I misunderstood them cause that really seemed like what some posts seemed to suggest.

Namely spacejunks post earlier. Spacejunk you and I rarely agree politically but please tell me you're not saying you think it's ok to use direct action to disrupt a group of people making a political statement nonviolently. Really what that political statement is shouldn't matter. The right to protest should be absolute. No matter what retarded stupidity you believe in.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, Jess, that's the philosophical question behind this bullshit story, "is there a line where you go against all your principles as a bleeding heart libtard overeducated fuckwit? A point where you stop putting daisies in their barrels?"

Also. "free speech, where does it end?"

The problem is what the alt-right seems to be promoting, and succeeding at: growing racial tension and creeping fascism. It's not a pretty thing. But they're an awful long way from that now, even if they have Sessions and the supposedly retired Bannon.

So what we've got is posters warning about the implications. It may be a little premature to talk about violence. And easy for me to talk about shooting fascists here on my chaise lounge. But that's the direction some people seem to be trying to steer this captain-less ship. Especially when I know they won't get close.

Is it morally OK to shout down groups trying to get a pointless, provocative message out? Well, it's kind of neutral; if you've ever watched a street preacher wander onto the quad to damn gays to hell, and the audience he provokes, well, each side gets what they wanted. It's a performance, and the shouters are part of it. If this was a scheduled event with a clear agenda meant to be actually communicated to an audience, it would be rude to interrupt, I agree. It would be better if the people who show up to a white power rally just ignored them.

But people are people, and they're going to spit on nazis.

OK, now using direct action against people you politically disagree with, well what the hell do you call world war II? When it comes time, I sure as shit will use direct action to defend myself from people whose political beliefs say shoot me because my diabetes means I'm too weak for the nation or something. And if a propaganda machine becomes a serious threat, yes, sabotage and direct action to prevent a fascist takeover is called for. We're just a long long way from that. Right now we need savvy media folks to counter the online crap.

We'd be fighting for the nazis right to piss us off. That's called liberal democracy, but it has the "l" word in it, which has been successfully poisoned by the alt-right, so it's evil to many here.. Also, fascists aren't known for their grasp of irony.

I think the back and forth scenarios get confused: the presser in Berkeley did not merit or receive any violence. If they had a rally in a stadium where they burned books and started new citizen registries, then violence is called for.

THis is too long, but the pipe hits are still wiggling into place.
Thank you for your patience
 
So are you saying it's ok to use force to stop this "propaganda" you don't like? In other words, using force to stop words you disagree with. Cause if you are, you ARE the nazis, and it's not you protecting society, society needs protecting from you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top