Man Shot To Death At Political Demonstation In Denver; Police Assure The Public It Wasn't Antifa - Page 6 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15128695
blackjack21 wrote:
I've already said I'm not a fan of neo-nazis or the KKK. However, they aren't in power in the US today. The neoconservatives and the neoliberals are the authoritarian warhawks with deep hooks in the establishment.



Okay, no contention.


blackjack21 wrote:
Hedonism can be very destructive.



Not the way *I* do it.


= D


---


blackjack21 wrote:
Detox. Therapy. Etc.



Okay, no contention.


blackjack21 wrote:
SFPD. San Francisco Mayor London Breed announces cuts to police in new city budget



Okay, thanks.


---


blackjack21 wrote:
They have the right to peaceably assemble. Everyone does. Even Antifa. They don't have the right to initiate violence against people they don't like.



Hmmmmm, here's the point of contention -- you're content to frame the situation as some kind of 'playground politics', as I term it, meaning an *interpersonal* matter, and it's *not*. This is about *politics*, like the neoconservative / neoliberal thing you just mentioned.

The *politics* of this matter is that *fascists* should not be able to use public space for their right-sectarian-violent message. You're against violence, and you should be against it *pre-emptively*.


blackjack21 wrote:
Pretty much.


blackjack21 wrote:
There's nothing wrong with participating in a patriot rally.



But look at where the politics of the 'patriot' camp *is* these days -- it's defending killer cops, basically, instead of calling for the government to *defund* / demilitarize (basically) all police departments in the U.S., which has, by far, the most killer cops.


blackjack21 wrote:
No. They have the right to peacefully assemble and protest communists. They do not have the right to a communist rally and start attacking people.



Well, when are the police going to be defunded, and fascist hatred shut-down and shut-out of public spaces? Are you saying that communists / anti-fascists should wait for the *police* to do something about killer cops and fascist public displays? There's a *policy vacuum* there, that you're not addressing, either.


blackjack21 wrote:
Yes, back to semantics. When the communists do something you don't like, suddenly they aren't communists anymore.



Stalinists with governments / state power aren't interested in empowering the working class. Therefore they're *Stalinists*, and not communists. (See 'The Communist Manifesto'.)


---


ckaihatsu wrote:
Well, this, then, is the *crux* of the problem -- the *bourgeois* approach to civil society is obviously too linear and *reductionist* in its politicization. There's that caption on the graphic from one of the articles I included previously -- it says, speaking from the position of the cops, that 'Personally, I don't support racist stabbings, but I will defend to the death your right to recruit for them.'



blackjack21 wrote:
That's classical liberalism.



Yes, and that's the *problem* right now because there's a policy vacuum as a result, that doesn't address the fascists in the public view, the fascist in the White House, the killer cops, and sanctions on other countries.


blackjack21 wrote:
I didn't say it was laudable. I said it was understandable, given her unconstitutional use of power. It's also likely criminal.



What was her 'unconstitutional use of power', or are you just making shit up to justify the conspiracy to kidnap? And your resorting to the Michigan militia, ex-post-facto, is *extra-legal*, which is unconstitutional, since that would be a kind of fait-accompli *outsourcing* of governance, which is what *fascists* do.


blackjack21 wrote:
I just laid it out for you. If you live in Michigan, you can't go to your vacation house. However, Whitmer's husband can, because his wife is the governor. As I said, she also did things like preventing people from buying paint, etc. so that they could at least do something constructive to their houses while they were stuck at home. There was no constitutional authority for this, and it wasn't reasonable.



Was this all COVID-related?


blackjack21 wrote:
The supreme court of Michigan.

Michigan Supreme Court Confirms Whitmer’s Orders Are Out



Oh, so she provided for additional unemployment benefits, due to the ongoing and indefinite coronavirus hazard, that's caused 1,000,000 deaths worldwide.

You obviously object to this action as well and think that people should risk death to be back at the workplace or else live on thin air itself.


blackjack21 wrote:
I think you can glean that from Muslim extremists. Obviously, that means extremists with a Muslim background, and not all Muslims.



You really should specifically say 'ISIS', or what Islamist militia you're referring to. You open yourself up to looking Islamophobic and anti-Muslim / anti-Islam if you're too general and vague in your terming.


blackjack21 wrote:
And if the government endorses outsourcing of jobs, and imposes lockdowns, and enables illegal aliens to drive down wages, is that not primarily economic? Are people complaining about such things all right-wing extremists, or are they addressing an economic issue?



Why aren't you blaming the capitalist labor market? Why aren't rightists calling for an *end* to capitalism since it's fucking up so royally on this? (It's the inherent friction between a capitalist globalized *economy* and the patchwork nation-state *administration* over this globalized capitalist economy -- two world wars in the 20th century, I'll remind, due to this 'friction'.)


blackjack21 wrote:
Pretty much the Democrats control the so called killer cops. So the people doing the protesting are typically also the people putting those people into positions of political power.



Yes, I acknowledge this, and I also call it a 'schism', or factionalism, within the Democratic Party, currently. Or hypocrisy, which is what you were indicating.


blackjack21 wrote:
In North America and Europe, huge numbers of people have had enough of the globalist policies. They aren't necessarily looking for global development, but rather a restoration of social cohesion in their own societies.



Understandable, but a retrenchment into nationalism / isolationism, as under Trump, isn't a historically-progressive step, and it's bad for the consumer due to lesser selection from decreasing sources -- not that I look to the bourgeoisie for *any* improvements, of course, but I'm just describing things here.

I think the people of the *Global South* have had the frustration you're describing for *centuries*, and it's finally happening to the Global North, now, as well. That's because of *capitalism*, and capitalist *imperialism*, which is more descriptive and specific than a generic 'globalism', as you term it.
#15128713
ckaihatsu wrote:The *politics* of this matter is that *fascists* should not be able to use public space for their right-sectarian-violent message.

Why not? The left uses it for their violent message. Heck, elected officials have called for it. Obama frequently hinted at violence, and sent SEIU people to town halls to rough up detractors. Is it your contention that violence is bad if the right does it, but it's not so bad if the left does it because the left can be presumed to have good intentions?

ckaihatsu wrote:You're against violence, and you should be against it *pre-emptively*.

So you agree with George W. Bush's doctrine of preemption? Is that what you're saying, because that was exactly his argument for invading Iraq? Why do you think you need to initiate violence against people who have yet to initiate violence against you? We know what the Nazis did, and we know how they initiated violence against their detractors.

ckaihatsu wrote:But look at where the politics of the 'patriot' camp *is* these days -- it's defending killer cops, basically, instead of calling for the government to *defund* / demilitarize (basically) all police departments in the U.S., which has, by far, the most killer cops.

They aren't defending killer cops. Very few cops ever have to draw their guns and fire in the line of duty. It's actually pretty rare. Hell, even Chauvin didn't draw his weapon in the Floyd case. He simply abused someone who was already in handcuffs. The patriot camp is simply expressing support for the police and against defunding them. I've heard nobody suggesting police shouldn't be subject to investigations after a police-involved shooting. Those investigations are mandatory. I have heard interesting discussions on getting rid of police and prosecutor unions, which make a lot of sense to me.

ckaihatsu wrote:Well, when are the police going to be defunded, and fascist hatred shut-down and shut-out of public spaces?

Fascist public displays are constitutionally protected in the United States, just as communist displays are protected. You just can't commit crimes against people. Being hateful isn't a crime in the United States.

ckaihatsu wrote:Are you saying that communists / anti-fascists should wait for the *police* to do something about killer cops and fascist public displays?

I think you can't stop fascist public displays, because they are constitutionally protected in the US. If you want to go after cops, you need to get rid of their labor unions and the prosecutor unions. Explain to me how someone can get through law school, but cannot negotiate their own employment contract... It's absurd. That stuff is for pure political coordination. You can't get rid of dirty cops unless you get rid of the dirty people behind them--almost all of them part of the urban Democrat political machine.

ckaihatsu wrote:the fascist in the White House,

Trump is a populist not a fascist.

ckaihatsu wrote:What was her 'unconstitutional use of power', or are you just making shit up to justify the conspiracy to kidnap?

Her lockdown orders have been ruled unconstitutional by the Michigan Supreme Court.

ckaihatsu wrote:Was this all COVID-related?

Supposedly. However, many think that the purpose of the lockdowns was to destroy the economy in hopes of defeating Trump politically.

ckaihatsu wrote:You obviously object to this action as well and think that people should risk death to be back at the workplace or else live on thin air itself.

I think emergency rule has a short shelf life. There is no reason that state legislatures cannot write and pass legislation as a matter of law at this point. In the first 2-4 weeks, maybe that isn't the case. Six months later, arbitrary executive authority is unacceptable.

ckaihatsu wrote:You really should specifically say 'ISIS', or what Islamist militia you're referring to.

Trump can hardly be characterized as isolationist. Even when it comes to tariffs, he threatens them on China and Mexico as retribution for their own unfair practices; and, he did protect both the steel and aluminium industries against dumping. Otherwise, you can get anything else from anywhere else with no impediments from Trump.
#15128773
blackjack21 wrote:Antifa... don't have the right to initiate violence against people they don't like.

Between 2008 and 2018, 73% of all extremist murders in the US were carried out by the far-right, 23% by Islamists, and 4% by every other 'ist' out there.

* Source: FBI

I've already said I'm not a fan of neo-nazis or the KKK.

You could have fooled me.


:lol:
#15128827
maz wrote:What is an extremist murder... ?

A murder committed by a member of an extremist group.

Violent extremism is defined by the FBI as “encouraging, condoning, justifying, or supporting the commission of a violent act to achieve political, ideological, religious, social, or economic goals.”

Violent extremism and groupthink...

“The members’ firm belief in the inherent morality of their group … enable them to minimize decision conflicts … especially when they are inclined to resort to violence. ... ‘Since our group’s objectives are good,’ the members feel, ‘any means we decide to use must be good.’ This shared assumption helps the members avoid feelings of shame or guilt about decisions that may violate their personal code of ethical behavior.”

— Irving L. Janis, Victims of Groupthink


:)
#15128847
blackjack21 wrote:
Hedonism can be very destructive.



ckaihatsu wrote:
Not the way *I* do it.


= D



Want to see any photos?


x D


---


blackjack21 wrote:
Why not? The left uses it for their violent message. Heck, elected officials have called for it. Obama frequently hinted at violence, and sent SEIU people to town halls to rough up detractors. Is it your contention that violence is bad if the right does it, but it's not so bad if the left does it because the left can be presumed to have good intentions?



Let me put it *this* way -- is it bad if the U.S. military uses violence, as in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, for anything other than countering ISIS, versus *Islamists* using violence?

Domestically the use of violence by the left, and far-left, has better underlying *politics* / purpose, than violence used by the right and far-right, so I generally have no issue with it. I can't think of a *single instance* when left-wing violence was inappropriate or excessive.


blackjack21 wrote:
So you agree with George W. Bush's doctrine of preemption? Is that what you're saying, because that was exactly his argument for invading Iraq?



No, I *don't* support that particular use of pre-emptive warfare because he was chasing after *ghosts* in Iraq with that bullshit 'weapons of mass destruction' pretext. The U.S. was as bad as ISIS there, with the looting of treasure and destruction of antiquities in Iraq.

If you'd rather call it 'prevention', or 'necessity', that's fine -- the point being that, for a (leftist / far-leftist) politics / platform, violence can be a valid *tactic*.


Anatomy of a Platform

Spoiler: show
Image



---


blackjack21 wrote:
Why do you think you need to initiate violence against people who have yet to initiate violence against you? We know what the Nazis did, and we know how they initiated violence against their detractors.



Again, this isn't *interpersonal*, as the government and cops officially and logistically interpret it -- we can *generalize*, as you just did, to the *historical* actions of fascists, *in general*.

If you're so against violence, in principle, you should start with examining the fascist *ideology*, as historically seen with the Nazis and the Holocaust, and preventatively criminalize all who *tout* such genocide today and intended harmful activity on the basis of demographics.


blackjack21 wrote:
They aren't defending killer cops. Very few cops ever have to draw their guns and fire in the line of duty. It's actually pretty rare. Hell, even Chauvin didn't draw his weapon in the Floyd case. He simply abused someone who was already in handcuffs. The patriot camp is simply expressing support for the police and against defunding them. I've heard nobody suggesting police shouldn't be subject to investigations after a police-involved shooting. Those investigations are mandatory. I have heard interesting discussions on getting rid of police and prosecutor unions, which make a lot of sense to me.



Would you like to address the official policy / practice of 'qualified immunity' for cops, at all?


blackjack21 wrote:
Fascist public displays are constitutionally protected in the United States, just as communist displays are protected. You just can't commit crimes against people. Being hateful isn't a crime in the United States.



Well, that's the problem, because being hateful *in public* is against the *interests* of the public. The bourgeois laws are *insufficient* on this -- a 'policy vacuum'.


blackjack21 wrote:
I think you can't stop fascist public displays, because they are constitutionally protected in the US. If you want to go after cops, you need to get rid of their labor unions and the prosecutor unions.



The Constitution is ultimately *interpreted* by the judiciary, so the interpretations can always *change*, which is what needs to happen. Fascism should *not* be tolerated in public because it seeks to *destroy* other people's lives, through hate and harm.


blackjack21 wrote:
Explain to me how someone can get through law school, but cannot negotiate their own employment contract... It's absurd. That stuff is for pure political coordination. You can't get rid of dirty cops unless you get rid of the dirty people behind them--almost all of them part of the urban Democrat political machine.



Policing is ultimately for the sake of the *ruling class*, so I say that the way to get rid of policing is through *proletarian revolution*, so that there are no longer any classes, and thus no need to protect one from the other.


blackjack21 wrote:
Trump is a populist not a fascist.



Why are you *defending* Trump? He consistently shows *support* for fascist actions.


---


ckaihatsu wrote:
What was her 'unconstitutional use of power', or are you just making shit up to justify the conspiracy to kidnap?



blackjack21 wrote:
Her lockdown orders have been ruled unconstitutional by the Michigan Supreme Court.



This is *unacceptable* because people are facing the twin threats of disease and lack of income / money.


blackjack21 wrote:
Supposedly. However, many think that the purpose of the lockdowns was to destroy the economy in hopes of defeating Trump politically.



And what about people's well-being? Is your politics able to address *this issue* at all?


blackjack21 wrote:
I think emergency rule has a short shelf life. There is no reason that state legislatures cannot write and pass legislation as a matter of law at this point. In the first 2-4 weeks, maybe that isn't the case. Six months later, arbitrary executive authority is unacceptable.



You're getting *bourgeois-procedural* again, instead of focusing on the *issues* -- why not address the general threat to people's *well-being* during this time of pandemic and lack of safe work? What is government *for*?


blackjack21 wrote:
Trump can hardly be characterized as isolationist. Even when it comes to tariffs, he threatens them on China and Mexico as retribution for their own unfair practices; and, he did protect both the steel and aluminium industries against dumping. Otherwise, you can get anything else from anywhere else with no impediments from Trump.



Protectionism *is* isolationism, duh -- it's what normally-disadvantaged countries, like up-and-coming ones, do to avoid being swamped, as you're describing, by the hegemonic / monolithic economic world powers of the day. The use of tariffs by Trump just goes to indicate how far the U.S. economy has slipped, particularly compared to China's.
#15128860
maz wrote:What were the names of some of the groups

Over the years in the US...

Some of the groups whose members were convicted of committing murder to further their group's aims.

Ku Klux Klan
Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional (FALN)
The Jewish Defense League
Justice Commandos of the Armenian Genocide
The Order
Al Qaeda
Army of God
Christian Identity
Creativity
Aryan Nations
Supreme White Alliance
American Front
Hammerskins
Volksfront
White Aryan Resistance
National Alliance
Aryan Brotherhood
FEAR
White Patriot Party
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
Vanguard America
Atomwaffen Division.
Black Hebrew Israelites
Boogaloo

Just for you, to include groups other than far right arseholes, I delved deep going back to the 70's and 80s (Justice Commandos of the Armenian Genocide murdered the Turkish Consul-General in LA in 1982, for example).

Right-wing extremist murders by faction (2008-2018)

76% were committed by white supremacists, 19% by anti-government extremists (including those affiliated with the militia, "sovereign citizen," tax protester, and "Patriot" movements), 3% by "incel" extremists, 1% by anti-abortion extremists, and 1% by other right-wing extremists.

*Source: wiki


:)
Last edited by ingliz on 20 Oct 2020 17:56, edited 1 time in total.
#15128871
ingliz wrote:Over the years in the US...

Some of the groups whose members were convicted of committing murder to further their group's aims.

Ku Klux Klan
Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional (FALN)
The Jewish Defense League
Justice Commandos of the Armenian Genocide
The Order
Al Qaeda
Army of God
Christian Identity
Creativity
Aryan Nations
Supreme White Alliance
American Front
Hammerskins
Volksfront
White Aryan Resistance
National Alliance
Aryan Brotherhood
FEAR
White Patriot Party
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
Vanguard America
Atomwaffen Division.
Black Hebrew Israelites
Boogaloo

Just for you, to include groups other than right wing arseholes, I delved deep going back to the 70's and 80s (eg. Justice Commandos of the Armenian Genocide murdered the Turkish Consul-General in LA in 1982).

Right-wing extremist murders by faction (2008-2018)

76% were committed by white supremacists, 19% by anti-government extremists (including those affiliated with the militia, "sovereign citizen," tax protester, and "Patriot" movements), 3% by "incel" extremists, 1% by anti-abortion extremists, and 1% by other right-wing extremists.

*Source: wiki


:)


Thanks for the copy and paste from Wikipedia. But can you give a specific example of one of the incidences that a member of one of these extremist groups were involved in?
#15128873
maz wrote:But can you give a specific example of one of the incidences that a member of one of these extremist groups were involved in?

Yes.

Harking back to their roots in the UK of the 70s...

Extreme Paki-bashing, an homage.

Oak Creek, Wisconsin, August 5, 2012.

Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting: Six people were killed and three others were injured, including a police officer who was tending to victims. The gunman, 40-year-old Wade Michael Page a neo-Nazi white power skinhead and member of the Hammerskin Nation/Hammerskins, killed himself after being shot by police.

The local police not knowing the offshoot group's beginnings and symbolic cultural baggage were flummoxed as to motive.


Paki-bashing
British, derogatory

noun.

In skinhead culture the act of making vicious and unprovoked physical assaults upon S.E. Asian immigrants and businesses




:)

I am proud of myself too. :up: Me too. Low Ris[…]

@Drlee Precisely. He literally did all of t[…]

Election 2020

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/23/5-more-ways-[…]

The state cannot enforce any of these rules. One[…]