Antifa again demonstrates its undemocratic nature - Page 11 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15029323
Aexodus wrote:How did Ngo ‘help create the violence’?


My point was that Ngo cannot be simultaneously the only victim of antifa violence and the reporter covering said violence. All he is doing is getting them to hit him and filming it. It is not a good indicator that antifa is a terrorist group.

Yes, why wouldn’t it be. It’s terrorism if anyone of any stripe does it.

Communists attack Nazis: terrorism. Nazis attack communists: terrorism.

I’m surprised you needed to ask that question tbh.


So, all violent hate crimes are now terrorism. That is what you are arguing.

——————————

BigSteve wrote:Done what?

Document what antifa does?


You mean, the films he has made of himself getting pushed around?

Or has he ever filmed them doing something to anyone else?

So you agree there's no reason to believe Ngo would've physically instigated an altercation...


No. If you think I said that, your reading comprehension is bad.

He picks fights so that he can have them recorded and get a Youtube following from people who want to censor the left.

Fact is, the smartest thing you can do when attacked by a mob, like Ngo has been, is to try to get away.


Or maybe, he could not try and start fights with them.

So you agree that antifa are a pack of pussies. Good...


No. If you think I said that, your reading comprehension is bad.

The bullies and cowards were the racists and the homophobes and the people who are now clamoring for free speech, which translates as needing police protection and locking up counter protesters.

—————————-

So, why are the organisers and people in this thread calking it an anti-racism conference when it is a racism conference?
#15029324
Pants-of-dog wrote:So, why are the organisers and people in this thread calking it an anti-racism conference when it is a racism conference?


Because reactionaries have reprehensible positions that can't be argued in good faith without making them look bad. Truth is detrimental to their case and thus an obstacle to be overcome.

For example: "I support nazis marching in the streets and attacking people," doesn't look good.

Therefore you have to reframe the argument as: "Violent antifa are attacking proud patriots celebrating their free speech rights to demand the establishment of a race based hierarchy enforced through violence and must be stopped."

See how much better that sounds than saying you want to defend nazis from the people who are protecting their communities?
#15029331
Pants-of-dog wrote:You mean, the films he has made of himself getting pushed around?


If they're attacking him, why shouldn't he try to document that?

Or has he ever filmed them doing something to anyone else?


Videos of them attacking him are sufficient...

No. If you think I said that, your reading comprehension is bad.


You said both sides were consistent. That would support an argument that Ngo is, in fact, not physically assaulting anyone, as tghere's no evidence he's done that in the past...

He picks fights so that he can have them recorded and get a Youtube following from people who want to censor the left.


Well, then the antifa dipshits are playing right into his hands.

How is Ngo instigating them? Calling them names? Telling them their sisters blow goats? What is he doing that results in the antifa pussies being unable to exhibit any degree of self-control?

Or maybe, he could not try and start fights with them.


You need to wrap your head around a concept: Whoever throws the first punch is in the wrong. We have videos of antifa pussies throwing first punches. How many videos do we have of Ngo throwing the first punch?

No. If you think I said that, your reading comprehension is bad.


You said: "They always attacked in a group. Because that is what cowards and bullies do."

The antifa pussies attack in a group. Why? Because they're cowardly pieces of human shit. They're cowards and they're bullies.

And you admire them.

How nice for you...
#15029333
BigSteve wrote:...misunderstandings, implied insults, and red herrings....


You continue to make mistakes based on your misunderstanding.

And you have wandered far away from supporting your claim that antifa are a threat to anyone.

The vast majority of journalists who record antifa do so without any problem, so it is incorrect to argue that they attack journalists,

So, it would be illogical to designate them as terrorists or think they are a realistic threat to this conference supporting racism.

—————————

Do you think the organisers of this racism conference deliberately lied and misled people by billing it as an anti-racism conference?
#15029342
@BigSteve

The antifa pussies attack in a group. Why? Because they're cowardly pieces of human shit. They're cowards and they're bullies.


You totally unlike how groups of cops tackle an innocent and defenseless black male?

Or how groups of cops gang rape women they're supposed to protect?

Or how cops abuse their authority to do other inhumane things?
#15029344
Antifa in Theory and in Practice
by DIANA JOHNSTONE
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/10/09 ... -practice/

In recent weeks, a totally disoriented left has been widely exhorted to unify around a masked vanguard calling itself Antifa, for anti-fascist. Hooded and dressed in black, Antifa is essentially a variation of the Black Bloc, familiar for introducing violence into peaceful demonstrations in many countries. Imported from Europe, the label Antifa sounds more political. It also serves the purpose of stigmatizing those it attacks as “fascists”.

Despite its imported European name, Antifa is basically just another example of America’s steady descent into violence.

Historical Pretensions

Antifa first came to prominence from its role in reversing Berkeley’s proud “free speech” tradition by preventing right wing personalities from speaking there. But its moment of glory was its clash with rightwingers in Charlottesville on August 12, largely because Trump commented that there were “good people on both sides”. With exuberant Schadenfreude, commentators grabbed the opportunity to condemn the despised President for his “moral equivalence”, thereby bestowing a moral blessing on Antifa.

Charlottesville served as a successful book launching for Antifa: the Antifascist Handbook, whose author, young academic Mark Bray, is an Antifa in both theory and practice. The book is “really taking off very fast”, rejoiced the publisher, Melville House. It instantly won acclaim from leading mainstream media such as the New York Times, The Guardian and NBC, not hitherto known for rushing to review leftwing books, least of all those by revolutionary anarchists.

The Washington Post welcomed Bray as spokesman for “insurgent activist movements” and observed that: “The book’s most enlightening contribution is on the history of anti-fascist efforts over the past century, but its most relevant for today is its justification for stifling speech and clobbering white supremacists.”

Bray’s “enlightening contribution” is to a tell a flattering version of the Antifa story to a generation whose dualistic, Holocaust-centered view of history has largely deprived them of both the factual and the analytical tools to judge multidimensional events such as the growth of fascism. Bray presents today’s Antifa as though it were the glorious legitimate heir to every noble cause since abolitionism. But there were no anti-fascists before fascism, and the label “Antifa” by no means applies to all the many adversaries of fascism.

The implicit claim to carry on the tradition of the International Brigades who fought in Spain against Franco is nothing other than a form of innocence by association. Since we must revere the heroes of the Spanish Civil War, some of that esteem is supposed to rub off on their self-designated heirs. Unfortunately, there are no veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade still alive to point to the difference between a vast organized defense against invading fascist armies and skirmishes on the Berkeley campus. As for the Anarchists of Catalonia, the patent on anarchism ran out a long time ago, and anyone is free to market his own generic.

The original Antifascist movement was an effort by the Communist International to cease hostilities with Europe’s Socialist Parties in order to build a common front against the triumphant movements led by Mussolini and Hitler.

Since Fascism thrived, and Antifa was never a serious adversary, its apologists thrive on the “nipped in the bud” claim: “if only” Antifascists had beat up the fascist movements early enough, the latter would have been nipped in the bud. Since reason and debate failed to stop the rise of fascism, they argue, we must use street violence – which, by the way, failed even more decisively.

This is totally ahistorical. Fascism exalted violence, and violence was its preferred testing ground. Both Communists and Fascists were fighting in the streets and the atmosphere of violence helped fascism thrive as a bulwark against Bolshevism, gaining the crucial support of leading capitalists and militarists in their countries, which brought them to power.

Since historic fascism no longer exists, Bray’s Antifa have broadened their notion of “fascism” to include anything that violates the current Identity Politics canon: from “patriarchy” (a pre-fascist attitude to put it mildly) to “transphobia” (decidedly a post-fascist problem).

The masked militants of Antifa seem to be more inspired by Batman than by Marx or even by Bakunin.

Storm Troopers of the Neoliberal War Party

Since Mark Bray offers European credentials for current U.S. Antifa, it is appropriate to observe what Antifa amounts to in Europe today.

In Europe, the tendency takes two forms. Black Bloc activists regularly invade various leftist demonstrations in order to smash windows and fight the police. These testosterone exhibits are of minor political significance, other than provoking public calls to strengthen police forces. They are widely suspected of being influenced by police infiltration.

As an example, last September 23, several dozen black-clad masked ruffians, tearing down posters and throwing stones, attempted to storm the platform where the flamboyant Jean-Luc Mélenchon was to address the mass meeting of La France Insoumise, today the leading leftist party in France. Their unspoken message seemed to be that nobody is revolutionary enough for them. Occasionally, they do actually spot a random skinhead to beat up. This establishes their credentials as “anti-fascist”.

They use these credentials to arrogate to themselves the right to slander others in a sort of informal self-appointed inquisition.

As prime example, in late 2010, a young woman named Ornella Guyet appeared in Paris seeking work as a journalist in various leftist periodicals and blogs. She “tried to infiltrate everywhere”, according to the former director of Le Monde diplomatique, Maurice Lemoine, who “always intuitively distrusted her” when he hired her as an intern.

Viktor Dedaj, who manages one of the main leftist sites in France, Le Grand Soir, was among those who tried to help her, only to experience an unpleasant surprise a few months later. Ornella had become a self-appointed inquisitor dedicated to denouncing “conspirationism, confusionism, anti-Semitism and red-brown” on Internet. This took the form of personal attacks on individuals whom she judged to be guilty of those sins. What is significant is that all her targets were opposed to U.S. and NATO aggressive wars in the Middle East.

Indeed, the timing of her crusade coincided with the “regime change” wars that destroyed Libya and tore apart Syria. The attacks singled out leading critics of those wars.

Viktor Dedaj was on her hit list. So was Michel Collon, close to the Belgian Workers Party, author, activist and manager of the bilingual site Investig’action. So was François Ruffin, film-maker, editor of the leftist journal Fakir elected recently to the National Assembly on the list of Mélenchon’s party La France Insoumise. And so on. The list is long.

The targeted personalities are diverse, but all have one thing in common: opposition to aggressive wars. What’s more, so far as I can tell, just about everyone opposed to those wars is on her list.

The main technique is guilt by association. High on the list of mortal sins is criticism of the European Union, which is associated with “nationalism” which is associated with “fascism” which is associated with “anti-Semitism”, hinting at a penchant for genocide. This coincides perfectly with the official policy of the EU and EU governments, but Antifa uses much harsher language.

In mid-June 2011, the anti-EU party Union Populaire Républicaine led by François Asselineau was the object of slanderous insinuations on Antifa internet sites signed by “Marie-Anne Boutoleau” (a pseudonym for Ornella Guyet). Fearing violence, owners cancelled scheduled UPR meeting places in Lyon. UPR did a little investigation, discovering that Ornella Guyet was on the speakers list at a March 2009 Seminar on International Media organized in Paris by the Center for the Study of International Communications and the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University. A surprising association for such a zealous crusader against “red-brown”.

In case anyone has doubts, “red-brown” is a term used to smear anyone with generally leftist views – that is, “red” – with the fascist color “brown”. This smear can be based on having the same opinion as someone on the right, speaking on the same platform with someone on the right, being published alongside someone on the right, being seen at an anti-war demonstration also attended by someone on the right, and so on. This is particularly useful for the War Party, since these days, many conservatives are more opposed to war than leftists who have bought into the “humanitarian war” mantra.

The government doesn’t need to repress anti-war gatherings. Antifa does the job.

The Franco-African comedien Dieudonné M’Bala M’Bala, stigmatized for anti-Semitism since 2002 for his tv sketch lampooning an Israeli settler as part of George W. Bush’s “Axis of Good”, is not only a target, but serves as a guilty association for anyone who defends his right to free speech – such as Belgian professor Jean Bricmont, virtually blacklisted in France for trying to get in a word in favor of free speech during a TV talk show. Dieudonné has been banned from the media, sued and fined countless times, even sentenced to jail in Belgium, but continues to enjoy a full house of enthusiastic supporters at his one-man shows, where the main political message is opposition to war.

Still, accusations of being soft on Dieudonné can have serious effects on individuals in more precarious positions, since the mere hint of “anti-Semitism” can be a career killer in France. Invitations are cancelled, publications refused, messages go unanswered.

In April 2016, Ornella Guyet dropped out of sight, amid strong suspicions about her own peculiar associations.

The moral of this story is simple. Self-appointed radical revolutionaries can be the most useful thought police for the neoliberal war party.

I am not suggesting that all, or most, Antifa are agents of the establishment. But they can be manipulated, infiltrated or impersonated precisely because they are self-anointed and usually more or less disguised.

Silencing Necessary Debate

One who is certainly sincere is Mark Bray, author of The Intifa Handbook. It is clear where Mark Bray is coming from when he writes (p.36-7): “… Hitler’s ‘final solution’ murdered six million Jews in gas chambers, with firing squads, through hunger an lack of medical treatment in squalid camps and ghettoes, with beatings, by working them to death, and through suicidal despair. Approximately two out of every three Jews on the continent were killed, including some of my relatives.”

This personal history explains why Mark Bray feels passionately about “fascism”. This is perfectly understandable in one who is haunted by fear that “it can happen again”.

However, even the most justifiable emotional concerns do not necessarily contribute to wise counsel. Violent reactions to fear may seem to be strong and effective when in reality they are morally weak and practically ineffectual.

We are in a period of great political confusion. Labeling every manifestation of “political incorrectness” as fascism impedes clarification of debate over issues that very much need to be defined and clarified.

The scarcity of fascists has been compensated by identifying criticism of immigration as fascism. This identification, in connection with rejection of national borders, derives much of its emotional force above all from the ancestral fear in the Jewish community of being excluded from the nations in which they find themselves.

The issue of immigration has different aspects in different places. It is not the same in European countries as in the United States. There is a basic distinction between immigrants and immigration. Immigrants are people who deserve consideration. Immigration is a policy that needs to be evaluated. It should be possible to discuss the policy without being accused of persecuting the people. After all, trade union leaders have traditionally opposed mass immigration, not out of racism, but because it can be a deliberate capitalist strategy to bring down wages.

In reality, immigration is a complex subject, with many aspects that can lead to reasonable compromise. But to polarize the issue misses the chances for compromise. By making mass immigration the litmus test of whether or not one is fascist, Antifa intimidation impedes reasonable discussion. Without discussion, without readiness to listen to all viewpoints, the issue will simply divide the population into two camps, for and against. And who will win such a confrontation?

A recent survey* shows that mass immigration is increasingly unpopular in all European countries. The complexity of the issue is shown by the fact that in the vast majority of European countries, most people believe they have a duty to welcome refugees, but disapprove of continued mass immigration. The official argument that immigration is a good thing is accepted by only 40%, compared to 60% of all Europeans who believe that “immigration is bad for our country”. A left whose principal cause is open borders will become increasingly unpopular.

Childish Violence

The idea that the way to shut someone up is to punch him in the jaw is as American as Hollywood movies. It is also typical of the gang war that prevails in certain parts of Los Angeles. Banding together with others “like us” to fight against gangs of “them” for control of turf is characteristic of young men in uncertain circumstances. The search for a cause can involve endowing such conduct with a political purpose: either fascist or antifascist. For disoriented youth, this is an alternative to joining the U.S. Marines.

American Antifa looks very much like a middle class wedding between Identity Politics and gang warfare. Mark Bray (page 175) quotes his DC Antifa source as implying that the motive of would-be fascists is to side with “the most powerful kid in the block” and will retreat if scared. Our gang is tougher than your gang.

That is also the logic of U.S. imperialism, which habitually declares of its chosen enemies: “All they understand is force.” Although Antifa claim to be radical revolutionaries, their mindset is perfectly typical the atmosphere of violence which prevails in militarized America.

In another vein, Antifa follows the trend of current Identity Politics excesses that are squelching free speech in what should be its citadel, academia. Words are considered so dangerous that “safe spaces” must be established to protect people from them. This extreme vulnerability to injury from words is strangely linked to tolerance of real physical violence.

Wild Goose Chase

In the United States, the worst thing about Antifa is the effort to lead the disoriented American left into a wild goose chase, tracking down imaginary “fascists” instead of getting together openly to work out a coherent positive program. The United States has more than its share of weird individuals, of gratuitous aggression, of crazy ideas, and tracking down these marginal characters, whether alone or in groups, is a huge distraction. The truly dangerous people in the United States are safely ensconced in Wall Street, in Washington Think Tanks, in the executive suites of the sprawling military industry, not to mention the editorial offices of some of the mainstream media currently adopting a benevolent attitude toward “anti-fascists” simply because they are useful in focusing on the maverick Trump instead of themselves.

Antifa USA, by defining “resistance to fascism” as resistance to lost causes – the Confederacy, white supremacists and for that matter Donald Trump – is actually distracting from resistance to the ruling neoliberal establishment, which is also opposed to the Confederacy and white supremacists and has already largely managed to capture Trump by its implacable campaign of denigration. That ruling establishment, which in its insatiable foreign wars and introduction of police state methods, has successfully used popular “resistance to Trump” to make him even worse than he already was.

The facile use of the term “fascist” gets in the way of thoughtful identification and definition of the real enemy of humanity today. In the contemporary chaos, the greatest and most dangerous upheavals in the world all stem from the same source, which is hard to name, but which we might give the provisional simplified label of Globalized Imperialism. This amounts to a multifaceted project to reshape the world to satisfy the demands of financial capitalism, the military industrial complex, United States ideological vanity and the megalomania of leaders of lesser “Western” powers, notably Israel. It could be called simply “imperialism”, except that it is much vaster and more destructive than the historic imperialism of previous centuries. It is also much more disguised. And since it bears no clear label such as “fascism”, it is difficult to denounce in simple terms.

The fixation on preventing a form of tyranny that arose over 80 years ago, under very different circumstances, obstructs recognition of the monstrous tyranny of today. Fighting the previous war leads to defeat.

Donald Trump is an outsider who will not be let inside. The election of Donald Trump is above all a grave symptom of the decadence of the American political system, totally ruled by money, lobbies, the military-industrial complex and corporate media. Their lies are undermining the very basis of democracy. Antifa has gone on the offensive against the one weapon still in the hands of the people: the right to free speech and assembly.
#15029352
Didn't bother to read past the first paragraph.

Introducing violence into otherwise "peaceful" nazi demonstrations, lmao.

Even if the mythical peaceful nazi existed, their political aspirations are inherently violent. Unless you seriously expect me to believe they are so persuasive that they can effectively convince anyone who falls outside of the vague definition of whiteness that they do indeed deserve to be second class citizens at best, genocided at worst.

Just a reminder: The Great Replacement already happened. Irish and Italians replaced the "noble Aryan" when whiteness was conferred upon these degenerate subhumans. They rewrote the phrenology textbooks to make them "white."

Image

The guy on the left is white now. Good job, honkeys, you played yourselves.

Sivad wrote:Wild Goose Chase

In the United States, the worst thing about Antifa is the effort to lead the disoriented American left into a wild goose chase, tracking down imaginary “fascists” instead of getting together openly to work out a coherent positive program. The United States has more than its share of weird individuals, of gratuitous aggression, of crazy ideas, and tracking down these marginal characters, whether alone or in groups, is a huge distraction. The truly dangerous people in the United States are safely ensconced in Wall Street, in Washington Think Tanks, in the executive suites of the sprawling military industry, not to mention the editorial offices of some of the mainstream media currently adopting a benevolent attitude toward “anti-fascists” simply because they are useful in focusing on the maverick Trump instead of themselves.



[Bolding Sivad's]


Sivad, you are the physical avatar of "The right demands victory, the left demands perfection."

You spend all of your time working yourself up into a frothing rage that leftists aren't going after whatever dumb pet cause you have and are utterly incapable of seeing why people in the communities affected by reactionary violence might want to take to the streets and confront it. You expect them to sit at their computers and rage impotently at the same causes you do, and somehow have convinced yourself that parroting actual nazi talking points is effective.

You are Tina Fey in the terrible cake eating bit she did where she jokingly begged people to stay home and let nazis march unimpeded. In short, you are a terrible leftist with so little self awareness that I am surprised you can cross the street without being run down by a car.
#15029356
Antifa are actually unimportant.

They are not terrorists.

They are not some Pied Piper of the Left dragging all Anglo leftists into some fantasy.

They are simply young men looking for conflict in the way young men do.

They are not organised, they have no strategy, their tactics are crude and predictable. They are exactly what you expect if all it takes to join is to go to a protest wearing black and a mask.
#15029358
SpecialOlympian wrote:Didn't bother to read past the first paragraph.

Introducing violence into otherwise "peaceful" nazi demonstrations, lmao.



Johnstone isn't talking about antifa there, genius, she's talking about black bloc anarchists in Europe.
#15029368
SpecialOlympian wrote:Why is black bloc bad Sivad?

Define black block for us, Sivad.


A bunch of militants in ski masks throwing shit at cops and smashing corporate property. The European anarchists groups who developed the strategy weren't targeting fringe wingnut groups, they were mixing it up with the cops and they were out to tear shit up and spark riots at big protests.

parrots nazi talking points.


What nazi talking points have I ever parrotted? :knife:
#15029370
SpecialOlympian wrote:Why is black bloc bad?"


Sivad wrote:A bunch of militants in ski masks throwing shit at cops and smashing corporate property.

Image


Image

Won't anyone think of the property held by this LLC? This limited partnership that shields its owners from liability? It belonged to them once. This property was whole, and perfect, and within the terms of its lease. Until antifa ruined it.

Now the shareholders of this legal entity have suffered a loss. Who will mourn their dividends? I will, even if your heart is too small to feel their grief.

*falls down dramatically*

What world do we live in where legal entities do not have genders, or personhood?
#15029372
SpecialOlympian wrote:Won't anyone think of the property held by a limited liability corporation??


Wow, you lost the thread of the discussion pretty quick there. So just to recap before we go on so you can remember what you were talking about, you dismissed the Johnstone article because you thought she was referring to violence against nazis, I corrected you, and then you challenged me on my knowledge of the history of the tactic. Now you're responding with a non sequitur about vandalism but what we're talking about isn't whether the tactics were justified but whether those tactics were originally directed against neo-nazi groups. They weren't, they were directed against cops and corporations. So Johnstone was right and you were talking out your ass.
#15029375
The big problem with antifa isn't that it's politically meaningless LARPing that's derailing the left down a cul de sac, and it isn't that it's inherently cancerous and already devolving to the point where anyone who isn't an identitarian extremist will be targeted as a nazi, it's that it gives the real reactionaries who hold real power a perfect vehicle for a gladio reboot that can be used as a justification for a real rightwing coup if the real left ever starts to get any real political traction.
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 27
EU-BREXIT

@B0ycey Also which is worse for the NHS? Br[…]

Trump's Dumb Economics

Not one Trump supporter has attempted to counter […]

The Evolution Fraud

Thanks for doing the homework for me. So you are […]

No one cares because it doesn't fit people's polit[…]