Oh Realist.....

[Utility]

Personally I'm very anti-White Nationalist and anti-Conservative (as people generally know), but I understand that there has to be democracy and there has to be accountability. A conservative commentator for Fox said it best, much better than Trump could say it:

"Antifa and the white supremacists are two sides of a common coin. The people dead in Charlottesville died because of one neo-Nazi, but there were dozen of people left bleeding in the streets because of Antifa"

I can mostly agree with that quote, but it is wrong to say Antifa was solely responsible for leaving people bleeding in the street. Remember that as angry and irrational and rudderless as antifa protesters can be sometimes, it is still in essence a reactive group.

 

[CaptainJackson]

There's definitely issues with it. I need to point out that Trump's responses during the press conference were pretty bad. Several times he sounded like he was defending what the alt-right members did. I'm not defending what Trump said, just attacking how the press handled it. CNN for example praised the work of the ANTIFA movement for combating white nationalism and ridiculed Trump for saying that they were violent. This is a major news outlet supporting violence while also pretending it doesn't exist, even when there is a mass of evidence that ANTIFA are using violence to get their point across.

I understand that they're fighting stupidity when combating movements like the KKK and other white nationalist groups, but the media deliberately supporting one side in a violent protest can only turn out bad. Antifa have turned up to protests with weapons and riot gear and it's reported as "They're defending their selves". They turned up to University talks to oppose people like Milo whathisface with armed with baseball bats and threatening to kill him and anyone else who went to see him, and other than a couple of news outlets they were generally praised for it.

The President should have come out and said "I will not condone violence from anyone. What happened at the rallies is a tragedy but we will not condone violence from anyone". Instead he did his usual thing. When asked about the violence by the alt-right he got defensive and said "Well, what about the alt-left". He's crap with words. And this is what should be reported. "President is crap with words and sounded like what alt-right did wasn't so bad". Instead of "The alt-left violence is warranted". When the press starts supporting one side in a conflict that's been raging for hundreds of years, it pushes toward another civil war.

I think you'll find that there's been many of us who've been pointing to the media's inflaming of these problems, some media organisations do it for ratings, while others do it because they lean to one side or the other.

So to expect a balanced media perspective from a privately owned corporation, is highly doubtful and I don't really see a purpose in discussing this unless we are looking at the option of bringing in laws to fine media organisations for purposefully conflating the truth. And I say this while IDEALLY believing in free speech. What I mean by IDEALLY, is that some media groups have a wide wide reach in flouting their views, and hence because they have a wide reach it is hard to have the same reach and counter their mis-truths. If it's an even playing field by all means lets have free-speech, but given it's not an even playing field, I do reckon governments should hold media groups accountable for mis-truths the promote

However, the POTUS has a much larger responsibility on his shoulders, and his words should have targeted the origins of this problem. Don't forget that this all started on Friday night, with a small group of counter protestors being attacked by white nationalists (who reminisced a scene out of the KKK's popularity days). It escalated over the course of the weekend.

Personally I'm very anti-White Nationalist and anti-Conservative (as people generally know), but I understand that there has to be democracy and there has to be accountability. A conservative commentator for Fox said it best, much better than Trump could say it:

"Antifa and the white supremacists are two sides of a common coin. The people dead in Charlottesville died because of one neo-Nazi, but there were dozen of people left bleeding in the streets because of Antifa"

And I'd disagree with that, there would be no one bleeding, no one dead, if people did not have blatantly incorrect racial ideologies.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Fair points.....I'm the first to admit the media has played a huge role in the division and segregation of society and justification of blatantly destructive or violent acts is not a way to promote even handed debate. But why do the press bear all the responsibility? That seems like a bit of a Trumpian deflection in itself.....America's politicians and a history of shocking civil rights discrepancies play a part, as do the entrenched inequities of the system...... so doi the nation's vocal media darlings (mouthpieces who are an extension of the media but also somewhat independent from it) and so do corporate elites who resist change to a system that provides them endless self gratification......so do the alt right ideologues through their responses to selective media reporting which often include its own completely logic free interpretations of truth.....Ayn Rand has a lot of responsibility tbh....not to mention people like Paul Ryan and her butt licking, establishment lackeys.

Yeah the media is full of shit, but it's only part of the problem. I'm all for admitting the deficiencies of the modern left as long as I feel the discussion is holistic.

It's definitely not the media's responsibility entirely. If anything it's Trump's fault for being terrible with words and generally terrible at everything. A lot of blame should also go on the alt-right and those who pushed it. It's just that this media bias has become so strong lately and people believe what they hear. Articles like the ones posted by CNN encourage conflict. The right wing media is just as bad with some of the crap they post.

 

[Utility]

I can mostly agree with that quote, but it is wrong to say Antifa was solely responsible for leaving people bleeding in the street. Remember that as angry and irrational and rudderless as antifa protesters can be sometimes, it is still in essence a reactive group.

Also, the implication that the psycho in the car was the only right winger there who was responsible for violence is laughable. Trying to lay the rest of the violence at the feet of Antifa is stupid. Again I'll point out Antifa is a REACTIONARY group. Why can't people just speak truths without trying to politicise them? yeah I know...Fox....too much to expect.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

And I'd disagree with that, there would be no one bleeding, no one dead, if people did not have blatantly incorrect racial ideologies.

And there would be no wars if everyone agreed with each other on everything. But that's not how the world works.

 

[CaptainJackson]

And there would be no wars if everyone agreed with each other on everything. But that's not how the world works.

I know but that wasn't the point of my post. The point is the blame should lie squarely at the feet of the white nationalists.

As utility pointed out antifa are reactionary.

It's the white nationalist hateful rhetoric that get the opposing side to stand up and say they won't accept that kind of ideology in their country

 

[Utility]

And there would be no wars if everyone agreed with each other on everything. But that's not how the world works.

I agree there are two sides to the coin....but that fox quote did seem to apply an editorial slant that made out Antifa was actually responsible for the bulk of the violence. I think that quote attempts to minimise accountability of the right, just as those pro Antifa reports try to minimise the accountability of the left. Everyone is full of shit and noone wants to take responsibility, but sometimes you've just got to call a hate rally out for what it is, especially as president.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Also, the implication that the psycho in the car was the only right winger there who was responsible for violence is laughable. Trying to lay the rest of the violence at the feet of Antifa is stupid. Again I'll point out Antifa is a REACTIONARY group. Why can't people just speak truths without trying to politicise them? yeah I know...Fox....too much to expect.

Yep. The media is really bad with that. And POTUS being the worst one suggesting that it's only the driver.

Antifa is a reactionary group though but it's not like they exist because of Trump. The origins of the group date back to pre-war Germany and there have been many iterations of it especially in England during Thatcher's rule.

The problem with the current Antifa is their immediate response post election. Before all the white nationalist marches and everything, the groups praised Clinton coming in and said that the right wing couldn't handle that she was going to be President, then as soon as Trump became President they started trashing everything. Violent destruction of property and riots.

If they waited until there were rallies then went there to hold a united front then I'd have no issue with them. Instead they caused destruction and mayhem because the Presidential election didn't work out the way they wanted. They literally destroyed random things and claimed to be doing the right thing. They weren't. They just wanted a reason to riot.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I know but that wasn't the point of my post. The point is the blame should lie squarely at the feet of the white nationalists.

As utility pointed out antifa are reactionary.

It's the white nationalist hateful rhetoric that get the opposing side to stand up and say they won't accept that kind of ideology in their country

I agree that they're reactionary but the whole thing started when they began rioting because Trump was elected President. I understand that Antifa comes from a Communist and Socialist background so they're not strong supporters of democracy, and Antifa are technically an anti-government movement, but this wasn't them protecting people against racism or Nationalism. This was them throwing a fit because they didn't like the results.

I'm not saying that the white nationalists shouldn't be blamed, but Antifa aren't the heroes here. They've come a long way from their roots of fighting Nazis. They're now demanding dictatorship under their ideals.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I agree there are two sides to the coin....but that fox quote did seem to apply an editorial slant that made out Antifa was actually responsible for the bulk of the violence. I think that quote attempts to minimise accountability of the right, just as those pro Antifa reports try to minimise the accountability of the left. Everyone is full of shit and noone wants to take responsibility, but sometimes you've just got to call a hate rally out for what it is, especially as president.

That I can agree with.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

You have to be very careful in these situations. It's one of the key reasons the US has free speech. If you remove a group's right to speak then they'll speak in other ways.

 

[Utility]

Yep. The media is really bad with that. And POTUS being the worst one suggesting that it's only the driver.

Antifa is a reactionary group though but it's not like they exist because of Trump. The origins of the group date back to pre-war Germany and there have been many iterations of it especially in England during Thatcher's rule.

The problem with the current Antifa is their immediate response post election. Before all the white nationalist marches and everything, the groups praised Clinton coming in and said that the right wing couldn't handle that she was going to be President, then as soon as Trump became President they started trashing everything. Violent destruction of property and riots.

If they waited until there were rallies then went there to hold a united front then I'd have no issue with them. Instead they caused destruction and mayhem because the Presidential election didn't work out the way they wanted. They literally destroyed random things and claimed to be doing the right thing. They weren't. They just wanted a reason to riot.

Sure, I realise that Antifa isn't a direct response to Trump....but it has always been a reactionary group....the hint is in that first syllable of its name.

I agree that rioting and causing civil unrest isn't an honourable or constructive response....especially after you've made a big song and dance about respecting electoral integrity whilst you mistakenly though your candidate would win as many pro Clinton liberals did....both in the public sphere and media.

I think there are scared people on both sides and fear and associated states of panic do not exactly nurture rational thought.

 

[CaptainJackson]

I agree that they're reactionary but the whole thing started when they began rioting because Trump was elected President. I understand that Antifa comes from a Communist and Socialist background so they're not strong supporters of democracy, and Antifa are technically an anti-government movement, but this wasn't them protecting people against racism or Nationalism. This was them throwing a fit because they didn't like the results.

I'm not saying that the white nationalists shouldn't be blamed, but Antifa aren't the heroes here. They've come a long way from their roots of fighting Nazis. They're now demanding dictatorship under their ideals.

Not defending ANTIFA's actions in that sense at all, they should be held accountable (and yes I did partake in whataboutisms, at the time, when I should have known better).

It's unfortunately the nature of mob mentality, mob's rarely end up in positive actions. The tearing down of the monument and kicking, spitting on it was reminiscent of Saddam's monument being torn down, but we'd like to think that the west is a lot more rational and civil than the middle east. But all that was displayed, that when it gets down to the core of the situation humans are the same, and they act like spoilt rotten children when in a mob.

With the weekend's incidents though, it wasn't just ANTIFA counter-protesting, I'm sure there were normal everyday citizens, who were concerned about white nationalism, who partook in the counter protest. There's no real statistic that says how many of the crowd were antifa and how responsible antifa were for the violence, it was just a muddled mob mentality mess.

As I said previously, if police, from video review, can identify the perpetrators then by all means they should come down with the full force of the law.

 

[Utility]

You have to be very careful in these situations. It's one of the key reasons the US has free speech. If you remove a group's right to speak then they'll speak in other ways.

Free speech has never been completely free though....there are certain things, which, if said in the wrong company, will land you in jail. Free speech has never been absolute and its point was never to champion the rights of people who acted in contravention of the constitutionally amended law of the country.

In any case, no word or action is free.....all come with consequences and this has always been the case. Freedom of speech is about affording people the right to speak their minds and defend their opinions, but it has never been absolute and essentially a concept that is about equality at its root. The right oh spo often forgets this.....increasingly more frequently, the left forgets it too.

 

[south of heaven]

Not defending ANTIFA's actions in that sense at all, they should be held accountable (and yes I did partake in whataboutisms, at the time, when I should have known better).

.

I like tism also

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Free speech has never been completely free though....there are certain things, which, if said in the wrong company, will land you in jail. Free speech has never been absolute and its point was never to champion the rights of people who acted in contravention of the constitutionally amended law of the country.

In any case, no word or action is free.....all come with consequences and this has always been the case. Freedom of speech is about affording people the right to speak their minds and defend their opinions, but it has never been absolute and essentially a concept that is about equality at its root. The right oh spo often forgets this.....increasingly more frequently, the left forgets it too.

In the US it's a lot less complicated than we have here. The only time you're not afforded free speech in the US is if you're directly inciting violence. As in, you're saying "Go kill these people". All other times you can say whatever you want.

In Australia we're stricter. You have free speech but you aren't allowed to insult or intimidate people.

 

[Utility]

In the US it's a lot less complicated than we have here. The only time you're not afforded free speech in the US is if you're directly inciting violence. As in, you're saying "Go kill these people". All other times you can say whatever you want.

In Australia we're stricter. You have free speech but you aren't allowed to insult or intimidate people.

I know their laws are different. I'm more arguing over interpretation and what I see as behaviour or speech that insights violence. A lot of the rhetoric of these groups is not just insulting and intimidating, it is inciting violence. I suppose you could make the argument a veiled call for violence is less direct. Personally, considering The US' colonial, slave trading roots and violent history, I'd make the argument this sort of rhetoric and action is direct enough to be problematic. Hate speech is also illegal in the states.....a hate rally is just as direct as hate speech.

Some other examples you can get into trouble in America for saying the wrong thing in the land of free speech without directly inciting violence;

https://debmcalister.com/2011/06/03/7-things-you-cant-claim-first-amendment-rights-to-say/

Defamation laws are a great example.....what is white supremacy if not a movement that defames entire groups and subcultures by calling them inferior? It's a more complicated matter than you make it out to be IMO. it might not be a felony to say certain things in the US, but saying certain things can still be unlawful....and inciting violence isn't the only aspect of the free speech debate that can be problematic.

 

[Realist90]

I know but that wasn't the point of my post. The point is the blame should lie squarely at the feet of the white nationalists.

As utility pointed out antifa are reactionary.

It's the white nationalist hateful rhetoric that get the opposing side to stand up and say they won't accept that kind of ideology in their country

Lolllll one could say the white nationalists were a reactionary to all the leftist rhetoric? You're so fkn dumb on so many levels. You ignore facts to try and put fourth your fkd up agenda

 

[Realist90]

I agree that they're reactionary but the whole thing started when they began rioting because Trump was elected President. I understand that Antifa comes from a Communist and Socialist background so they're not strong supporters of democracy, and Antifa are technically an anti-government movement, but this wasn't them protecting people against racism or Nationalism. This was them throwing a fit because they didn't like the results.

I'm not saying that the white nationalists shouldn't be blamed, but Antifa aren't the heroes here. They've come a long way from their roots of fighting Nazis. They're now demanding dictatorship under their ideals.

You're such a good talker bro. I love how pcrealist **** keeps trying to say 'I get that but' 'yeah but they' 'whites are bad' etc.

Keep doing you bro as an apparent alt right that I am, my views are very closely aligned with yours, just not with certain transpecies lolll

 

[Realist90]

Not defending ANTIFA's actions in that sense at all, they should be held accountable (and yes I did partake in whataboutisms, at the time, when I should have known better).

It's unfortunately the nature of mob mentality, mob's rarely end up in positive actions. The tearing down of the monument and kicking, spitting on it was reminiscent of Saddam's monument being torn down, but we'd like to think that the west is a lot more rational and civil than the middle east. But all that was displayed, that when it gets down to the core of the situation humans are the same, and they act like spoilt rotten children when in a mob.

With the weekend's incidents though, it wasn't just ANTIFA counter-protesting, I'm sure there were normal everyday citizens, who were concerned about white nationalism, who partook in the counter protest. There's no real statistic that says how many of the crowd were antifa and how responsible antifa were for the violence, it was just a muddled mob mentality mess.

As I said previously, if police, from video review, can identify the perpetrators then by all means they should come down with the full force of the law.

You're a joke and I think most intelligent people se straight through you. You call it people if there is a hint of them justifying a righty group but you in turn justify your leftist retarded groups but saying oh they're reactionary. All groups are fkn reactionary doesn't mean one is worse or better than the other they're just as bad as each other. And if you think the latest protest with the leftists coming in acting all staunch was reactionary then you're fucked up, the white supremacists organised the protest as a reaction to you leftists trying to suppress free speech and trying to create a rhetoric that all whites are evil. So you and the white supremacists are both as fucked as each other. Especially if you wanna defend the leftist assholes who think they're tough and then cry isms when they get fucked up. Sort of like how you justified Isis's reactionary attacks by saying it was coz of America and the west. Get an education, like a real education that isn't complete bullshit