Current Events > Why is everyone shaming that dude for hitting the Antifa woman?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Vamp_Aubrey posted...

kewldude475 posted...

Vamp_Aubrey posted...

averagejoel posted...

There's no such thing as racism against white people,

agreed

Well, there is, it just doesn't affect them as negatively on average, for obvious reasons. You can be racist against anyone.

no, if its against white people its called "reverse racism" which is way less bad than normal racism and sometimes it can actually be a good thing

All racism can be a good thing.
---

averagejoel posted...

Fascism is an inherently violent ideology. Anyone who follows it is an inherent threat to anyone who would be marginalized under fascism, simply by virtue of following it. Therefore, if someone belongs to one or more of the groups that would be marginalized under fascism (women, LGBT people, people of colour, religious minorities, non-fascists, etc.), physical violence against fascists is self-defense.

Fascism is an inherently violent ideology, I completely agree. Ideology. A system of ideas and ideals. Richard Spencer was a guy who voiced support for these ideas, but did not actually do anything violent.

Let's not conflate a Nazi like Richard Spencer who has never so much as swung a fist at someone to the Nazis of WWII who were systematically genocidal.

Also let's not downplay getting king-hit like that. That's how people die. I'm not going to support any response to violent ideas that could easily lead to someone dying. It's not because I remotely support Nazi ideology. It's because I don't ever want to live in a society where vigilante justice is considered reasonable and can result in assassinations for the punishment of thought.

Add to all this, I don't even think punching someone on the street like that works at all as a form of defense, even if I thought that it constituted defense.
---

can we just have the war already
---

Vamp_Aubrey posted...

no, if its against white people its called "reverse racism" which is way less bad than normal racism and sometimes it can actually be a good thing

Shit CE says again
---

Anyone know a good non bias site that can explain just who the heck these people are.
---

TommyG663513 posted...

I mean no not necessarily. Not all groups have been treated equally and should be held to the same standard. White people showing up ready to fight over white shaming are significantly worse than a black person in the civil rights/MLK era showing up to a similar rally ready to fight.

this is racism.

racism is bad no matter whether it's against whites or not
---

Vamp_Aubrey posted...

kewldude475 posted...

Vamp_Aubrey posted...

averagejoel posted...

There's no such thing as racism against white people,

agreed

Well, there is, it just doesn't affect them as negatively on average, for obvious reasons. You can be racist against anyone.

no, if its against white people its called "reverse racism" which is way less bad than normal racism and sometimes it can actually be a good thing

wtf is this.
---

averagejoel posted...

Richard Spencer did something violent by being fascist.

I would have loved for him to be killed by that punch.

Fascism needs to be eradicated, and if it's necessary to dehumanize and kill fascists in order to do so, then so be it.

Also, whether or not something is an effective means of self-defense has no bearing on whether or not it actually constitutes self-defense.

The end-game of what you're talking about is literally thought-policing, and you're personally determining which thoughts are executable, on the spot, without-trial offenses. You realise this yes?

I thought we lived in a society with laws and courts and a judicial system that determines the guilt of offenders. Not a society where someone says something and another civilian gets to kill them instantly.

Also there's a clear contradiction in what your apparent goals are here. Is it self defense, or militant proactive action? The way you're talking ("eradicating fascists") sounds a lot more like interventionism to me.
---

averagejoel posted...

pinky0926 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Fascism is an inherently violent ideology. Anyone who follows it is an inherent threat to anyone who would be marginalized under fascism, simply by virtue of following it. Therefore, if someone belongs to one or more of the groups that would be marginalized under fascism (women, LGBT people, people of colour, religious minorities, non-fascists, etc.), physical violence against fascists is self-defense.

Fascism is an inherently violent ideology, I completely agree. Ideology. A system of ideas and ideals. Richard Spencer was a guy who voiced support for these ideas, but did not actually do anything violent.

Let's not conflate a Nazi like Richard Spencer who has never so much as swung a fist at someone to the Nazis of WWII who were systematically genocidal.

Also let's not downplay getting king-hit like that. That's how people die. I'm not going to support any response to violent ideas that could easily lead to someone dying. It's not because I remotely support Nazi ideology. It's because I don't ever want to live in a society where vigilante justice is considered reasonable and can result in assassinations for the punishment of thought.

Add to all this, I don't even think punching someone on the street like that works at all as a form of defense, even if I thought that it constituted defense.

Richard Spencer did something violent by being fascist.

I would have loved for him to be killed by that punch.

Fascism needs to be eradicated, and if it's necessary to dehumanize and kill fascists in order to do so, then so be it.

Also, whether or not something is an effective means of self-defense has no bearing on whether or not it actually constitutes self-defense.

Literally advocating thought crime.

Get the fuck off my planet you waste of resources.
---

It's become crazy that now the most racist people on the site tend to be the liberals.

Wasn't long ago that it was the conservatives who were trying to gray the rainbow.
---

pinky0926 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Richard Spencer did something violent by being fascist.

I would have loved for him to be killed by that punch.

Fascism needs to be eradicated, and if it's necessary to dehumanize and kill fascists in order to do so, then so be it.

Also, whether or not something is an effective means of self-defense has no bearing on whether or not it actually constitutes self-defense.

The end-game of what you're talking about is literally thought-policing, and you're personally determining which thoughts are executable, on the spot, without-trial offenses. You realise this yes?

I thought we lived in a society with laws and courts and a judicial system that determines the guilt of offenders. Not a society where someone says something and another civilian gets to kill them instantly.

It's not thought-policing. It's the elimination of an inherently violent ideology

Fascism is an exponential social phenomenon. It's completely unremarkable for the first 90% of its existence. Early on, it might have been possible to destroy it without such drastic measures, but once it becomes visible, as it is now, it spreads faster, and peaceful methods are no longer possible
---

averagejoel posted...

It's not thought-policing. It's the elimination of an inherently violent ideology

Fascism is an exponential social phenomenon. It's completely unremarkable for the first 90% of its existence. Early on, it might have been possible to destroy it without such drastic measures, but once it becomes visible, as it is now, it spreads faster, and peaceful methods are no longer possible

"It's not thought policing. It's just policing thoughts that are violent in nature". That's literally what you just said.

I'm proud to live in a civilised country where if someone makes a threat or does something that infringes on my rights then I can go to the authorities. I won't be killing anyone unless I believe that it's the last resort option because I don't have the time or capacity to turn to the necessary legal system for aid. That's pretty much only going to happen if I believe my life is immediately in danger. I won't be killing someone because I believe my rights could possibly be under threat.
---

averagejoel posted...

It's not thought-policing. It's the elimination of an inherently violent ideology

Via thought-policing.
---

Another good thing about direct physical violence against fascists (for instance, Richard Spencer being punched) is that it forces previously neutral parties to choose sides.

This was done by the anti-slavery side in the Civil War. They would go to "neutral" churches, forcibly interrupt the services, and refuse to allow the sermon to continue until the church had chosen a side
---

lol that dude literally sucker punched a 120 pound girl.

Imagine being proud of this dude. "he showed that liberal by being a coward"

You guys have a lot of hate in your hearts
---

From what I can see, he's pretty hot. Does anyone have a photo of the guy, so I can see him better to make a more accurate judgement.
---

averagejoel posted...

Another good thing about direct physical violence against fascists (for instance, Richard Spencer being punched) is that it forces previously neutral parties to choose sides.

This was done by the anti-slavery side in the Civil War. They would go to "neutral" churches, forcibly interrupt the services, and refuse to allow the sermon to continue until the church had chosen a side

Another bad thing about direct physical violence against fascists is it makes martyrs out of them and galvanises their cause.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=richard%20spencer

Look at how completely irrelevant that fuckhead was before someone lost their cool and made him a celebrity.
---

communism and Islam are also violent ideologies. should we go punching anyone who might be part of them too?
---

averagejoel posted...

I'm%u200Bnot saying you should kill fascists at every opportunity, I'm only saying that it's morally right to do so

You're saying it's necessary and that we should be militant about it. Quote: Fascism needs to be eradicated, and if it's necessary to dehumanize and kill fascists in order to do so, then so be it.

I could agree with you if we were at war with fascism, and if this was an unavoidable conflict that had reached an immovable state of direct violence. Somehow some random guy on the street saying fascist stuff doesn't feel like war.
---

averagejoel posted...

Fascism needs to be eradicated, and if it's necessary to dehumanize and kill fascists in order to do so, then so be it.

only the sith deal in absolutes
---

Craziest part is we KNOW this logic of "violence stops ideas I don't like" is bullshit.

Look no further than Johnny Lee Clary who expains how Wade Watts defeated an entire chapter of the KKK just by being a nice guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fMXdCjv9qo
---

MakoReizei posted...

Vamp_Aubrey posted...

kewldude475 posted...

Vamp_Aubrey posted...

averagejoel posted...

There's no such thing as racism against white people,

agreed

Well, there is, it just doesn't affect them as negatively on average, for obvious reasons. You can be racist against anyone.

no, if its against white people its called "reverse racism" which is way less bad than normal racism and sometimes it can actually be a good thing

wtf is this.

cold hard truth nothing but
---

MakoReizei posted...

TommyG663513 posted...

I mean no not necessarily. Not all groups have been treated equally and should be held to the same standard. White people showing up ready to fight over white shaming are significantly worse than a black person in the civil rights/MLK era showing up to a similar rally ready to fight.

this is racism.

racism is bad no matter whether it's against whites or not

I mean I hope you are just trying to be facetious here.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Craziest part is we KNOW this logic of "violence stops ideas I don't like" is bulls***.

Look no further than Johnny Lee Clary who expains how Wade Watts defeated an entire chapter of the KKK just by being a nice guy:

I honestly believe that most racists people are just people who havent actually socialized with people that they hate.

Like they see some negative stuff on TV or a racist anecdote and run from there.

That dude just talked to a bunch of them and just showed them that black people were no different. I saw that a while ago and it still makes me happy
---

MakoReizei posted...

communism and Islam are also violent ideologies. should we go punching anyone who might be part of them too?

1. "might" implies some doubt. Of course you should make sure that the person is actually fascist before attacking them.

2. Communism and Islam are not inherently violent
---

holding someone to a different standard because of their race is racism. sorry

if it's not okay for a white person to get riled when they experience it, then it's not okay for anyone.
---

It's worth noting that the same users here who are saying racism agaisnt whites doesn't exist or is less important, are the same users in the Travyon Martin topic are saying Zimmerman is a murderer.


Says it all right there I think,
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Last time a bunch of "progressives" pepper-sprayed a woman because she was a libertarian and no one cared.

This time a woman gets punched by right-wing nuts and progressives go crazy.

Call me contrarian but I'd rather get punched than pepper-sprayed

This seems like a double standard where people are only angry because of who the attacker is, not what they did

LOL

No one is dumb enough to prefer getting punched instead of getting pepper sprayed unless you've got a real bad allergy.

There you've gotten some attention. Now run away.
---

I4NRulez posted...

I honestly believe that most racists people are just people who havent actually socialized with people that they hate.

Like they see some negative stuff on TV or a racist anecdote and run from there.

I'm absolutely certain you're right. It seems to be the theme of hatred you see over and over and over.

People hate what they don't understand.
---

averagejoel posted...

2. Communism and Islam are not inherently violent

lol
---

averagejoel posted...

Communism and Islam are not inherently violent

communism is arguable, but Islam was literally birthed out of violence.
---

Her ATKingdom pics are lame, hairier than I would like down there. Don't mind the armpit hair.
---

averagejoel posted...

and Islam are not inherently violent

The source material is violent as fuck. The teachings given from the religions spiritual leaders around the world is violent as fuck. The actions of its people are violent as fuck. The institutionalised religious law (at the federal, state and civil levels) in many of its countries is violent as fuck. And even excluding the violence it very much marginalises so many minority groups and women as a whole.

What constitutes "inherently" to you, exactly?
---

pinky0926 posted...

I could agree with you if we were at war with fascism, and if this was an unavoidable conflict that had reached an immovable state of direct violence. Somehow some random guy on the street saying fascist stuff doesn't feel like war.

As I said:

averagejoel posted...

Another good thing about direct physical violence against fascists (for instance, Richard Spencer being punched) is that it forces previously neutral parties to choose sides.

This was done by the anti-slavery side in the Civil War. They would go to "neutral" churches, forcibly interrupt the services, and refuse to allow the sermon to continue until the church had chosen a side

It's only a matter of time



fire810 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Fascism needs to be eradicated, and if it's necessary to dehumanize and kill fascists in order to do so, then so be it.

only the sith deal in absolutes

lol

pinky0926 posted...

Another bad thing about direct physical violence against fascists is it makes martyrs out of them and galvanises their cause.

*sees nazi get punched*
"I support ethnic cleansing now"
---

pinky0926 posted...

averagejoel posted...

and Islam are not inherently violent

The source material is violent as fuck. The teachings given from the religions spiritual leaders around the world is violent as fuck. The actions of its people are violent as fuck. The institutionalised religious law in many of its countries is violent as fuck. And even excluding the violence it very much marginalises so many minority groups and women as a whole.

What constitutes "inherently" to you, exactly?

when Hitler commends your religion because it makes zealous warriors, I'd pretty much say that its inherently violent.
---

averagejoel posted...

*sees nazi get punched*
"I support ethnic cleansing now"

UnfairRepresent posted...

Craziest part is we KNOW this logic of "violence stops ideas I don't like" is bullshit.

Look no further than Johnny Lee Clary who expains how Wade Watts defeated an entire chapter of the KKK just by being a nice guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fMXdCjv9qo

---

pinky0926 posted...

The source material is violent as fuck. The teachings given from the religions spiritual leaders around the world is violent as fuck. The actions of its people are violent as fuck. The institutionalised religious law in many of its countries is violent as fuck. And even excluding the violence it very much marginalises so many minority groups and women as a whole.

why are you singling out Islam here? Every single one of those things also applies to Christianity
---

averagejoel posted...

It's only a matter of time

Minority Report, I'm sure you've seen it? Let's be frank here. You're talking about being ok with vigilante assassinating people for the things they say for the crimes they have not yet committed.

pinky0926 posted...

*sees nazi get punched*
"I support ethnic cleansing now"

As ridiculous as this sounds this is exactly what has happened. Support for Richard Spencer is higher than ever. People who see him as a victim and a person suffering from persecution (note: I am only expousing how others feel, not myself). He has been immortalised by this action. This is literally the definition of martyrdom.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Craziest part is we KNOW this logic of "violence stops ideas I don't like" is bullshit.

Look no further than Johnny Lee Clary who expains how Wade Watts defeated an entire chapter of the KKK just by being a nice guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fMXdCjv9qo

He isn't the only one
Daryl Davis has a closet full of KKK robes by befriending members and getting them to revoke their ideas. He severly damage the klan in maryland by doing this. Not being a little savage moron and fighting them or trying to justify being a racist against them. by befriending them.
---

averagejoel posted...

pinky0926 posted...

The source material is violent as fuck. The teachings given from the religions spiritual leaders around the world is violent as fuck. The actions of its people are violent as fuck. The institutionalised religious law in many of its countries is violent as fuck. And even excluding the violence it very much marginalises so many minority groups and women as a whole.

why are you singling out Islam here? Every single one of those things also applies to Christianity

Because you were talking about Islam, obviously. Don't deflect - would you go out of your way to punch a Muslim cleric if he said "Homosexuals must be put to death", as so many of them do?
---

This is a really dumb topic with plenty of dumb posters tbh
---

Is joel some kind of gimmick or is he serious and chugging his own kool aid?
---

I'd rather have Nazi's and Fascist than thought poilce.

Punching them will not solve anything. An eye for eye and tooth for tooth would lead to a world of the blind and toothless.

They will always exist and stooping to their levels only prove their point.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Because you were talking about Islam, obviously. Don't deflect - would you go out of your way to punch a Muslim cleric if he said "Homosexuals must be put to death", as so many of them do?

No more than I would a Christian cleric who said the same thing
---

averagejoel posted...

pinky0926 posted...

Because you were talking about Islam, obviously. Don't deflect - would you go out of your way to punch a Muslim cleric if he said "Homosexuals must be put to death", as so many of them do?

No more than I would a Christian cleric who said the same thing

So would you or would you not? You're still deflecting, as if saying "But Christianity" is at all relevant to the discussion.
---

pinky0926 posted...

averagejoel posted...

pinky0926 posted...

Because you were talking about Islam, obviously. Don't deflect - would you go out of your way to punch a Muslim cleric if he said "Homosexuals must be put to death", as so many of them do?

No more than I would a Christian cleric who said the same thing

So would you or would you not? You're still deflecting, as if saying "But Christianity" is at all relevant to the discussion.

I don't think he's capable of holding a conversation
---

The white woman who got punched was sporting dreads which makes her a racist by default. It's called "cultural appropriation".
---

istmirechtegal posted...

That´s how Christians behave these days?

Didn´t Jesus say something about getting hit and offering the other cheek?

Jesus was nailed to a cross. The peace signs and feed the poor thing didn't really work out for him. He should've been more like Mohammed, who had no problems stabbing people.
---

Oh wow, modded for that post about Islam. Lol
---