Originally Posted by hipotibor
Nobody in Europe likes muslim refugees, therefore every european is a nazi. Large groups of actual nazis don't exist anymore. They are the leftists' version of the boogeyman.
You have a weird perception of Europe. Generally speaking people dont hate refugees certainly not as principle, however almost everyone hates terrorists (far too many of which travel with peaceful refugees).
Also although technically incorrect I think pretty much everyone is aware that by "nazis" antifa and other far left aligned people mean people with different views to theirs, as opposed to the fascist German party that was involved in world war II.
Note: Im not stating where I stand here or taking sides in this post, where I said different views; this view could range anywhere from wanting biological sex to remain on birth certificates to hating all people who arent Caucasian out of principle.
Don't dm me pictures of bowls that you find attractive.
Blubkill, firstly, I hope you were triggered by seeing the word swastika in my signature and proceeded to weep. God forbid anyone use a symbol like that, except of course left wing artists such as the Sex Pistols, right? Are you sickened by Johnny Rotten and the Sex Pistols? How about the Dead Kennedys? FYI, I support freedom of speech, everything you antifa are against. I am not right wing, in fact my views are very liberal. I believe in fighting intolerance with words. When you do not tolerate the intolerant, it makes you the intolerant. You are everything you claim to hate, you intolerant fascist.
Originally Posted by Wicked
Blubkill, firstly, I hope you were triggered by seeing the word swastika in my signature and proceeded to weep. God forbid anyone use a symbol like that, except of course left wing artists such as the Sex Pistols, right? Are you sickened by Johnny Rotten and the Sex Pistols? How about the Dead Kennedys?
ah so youre some random punk child, because they sololey used the symbolism to protest and piss people off. thats not a good foundation for it i see. and totally makes sense to use those in a public place with the anonimity of the internet, 60 years later. i doubt you would walk around with one in a public city.
because you totally need to do that on the internet, in some forum where no one actually cares about your political opinion?
Parrot | Tabby | Nike | [Midnight] | Foxy | Deridor | Joel
Helping admins since 2013 (Can't ya'll leave this alone?)
Reta's Bitch, Property of Kriegery, Bribed by Bird, Tinerr 4 President.
Awaken, awaken, awaken, awaken. Take the land, that must be taken. Awaken, awaken, awaken, awaken. Devour worlds, smite forsaken
Helping admins since 2013 (Can't ya'll leave this alone?)
Reta's Bitch, Property of Kriegery, Bribed by Bird, Tinerr 4 President.
Awaken, awaken, awaken, awaken. Take the land, that must be taken. Awaken, awaken, awaken, awaken. Devour worlds, smite forsaken
Originally Posted by Fee
Rules
A) As always global forum rules apply. These can be found by following the link below:
Global Rules.
B) Useless posting is not tolerated within Discussion, below is the criteria used for deeming a post useless:
- The post holds no relevance to the topic being discussed.
- The post lacks in enough structure or content to be considered a valid contribution to the topic (no one-sentence posts (except when asking for clarification)).
- The post lacks any degree of originality.
- The post has derailing tendencies.
C) Personal digs between users will not be tolerated. This includes but is not limited to insulting comments, personally directed hate, and unnecessary rhetorical remarks. That being said, rhetoric may slide if it services a point rather than belittle the opposite party in the discussion. If the discussion is getting too heated step back, take a deep breath and make sure you are fully calm before posting a reply. Respect the points made by other users in the same manner you would expect yours to be respected.
Please make sure you keep discussion civil, the board is about exchanging opinions not insults
Don't dm me pictures of bowls that you find attractive.
Originally Posted by Ele
It seems to me like there's no real neo-Nazi threat (or if there is, its size is greatly exaggerated by Antifa). I think it's just a bunch of angry radical leftists, pissed off at having Trump run shit who promptly decided that political violence is a fine way to manage their anger.
Thoughts on this? Antifa's use of force or just thoughts about Antifa in general?
Since I have the time for this now, I'll actually give a more focused response.
There is a neo-Nazi threat. The problem is less how big it is, and more how it's become emboldened. Neo-Nazis have felt that the environment is accepting enough that they can walk on the street and parade their message of anti-Semitism and xenophobia in public, and far right extremism in the U.S. is on the rise in recent years, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. There is some speech that is indefensible due to the content of its message, and the spread of that speech should be prevented.
I know I'll get the argument of "free speech", but that defense is sorely misinformed. The right to free speech is not universally protected when it comes to offensive speech, as established by the Supreme Court in the case Chaplinsky vs. New Hampshire. It was decided that "fighting words" or speech that is aimed at antagonizing a person to provoke a violent reaction, or threats of bodily harm, are not protected under the First Amendment. Not all of the alt-right is advocating violence, but there are neo-Nazis who associate among the alt-right, and Nazi ideology explicitly demands the extermination of a people. There's also that recent event in Charlottesville with the torch-lit rally that was performed by the alt-right that, in my opinion, crossed this line by mirroring the days when KKK torch-lit rallies were performed to put fear into resident minorities.
That said, the antifa are not in the right either. While I sympathize with their intent, I believe their approach is both morally wrong and misguided in practice. While I would advocate violence against Nazism if it has power, the neo-Nazi movement is still small. Violence at this point only emboldens the members that are already a part of it, and can serve as a way to generate sympathy to their cause because it's clear they're still very much the minority in the general population. It is much more effective to smother their speech through unity at this point. Making it clear that they are both the minority and in the wrong through peaceful protests does more harm to their movement than violence while they have no real power. The moral high ground is not on their side, and we stand to lose more by fighting on their level.
Generally speaking, I view violence as morally acceptable only as an option of last resort. As I believe I've made clear, I don't believe we're anywhere near an option of last resort when it comes to neo-Nazis, so I don't believe violence is a morally acceptable answer.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
