[Gorefest]

worry, on 02 July 2019 - 08:34 PM, said:

Except it's perfectly valid to stop them that way, and it is effective.

I read the article that you quoted, and nowhere I see any mention of using *physical* violence against neonazis or fascists. They talk about organised counter-protests, rallying the local communities to stand up against far right extremists, and using legal action to take down some of the key players. Which is all absolutely fine in my book, good for them. So I don't really see how your quoted article contradicts my viewpoint, i.e. violence as a means of counter-protest being unsavoury and counter-productive. Once people start deciding who is right and who is wrong based on a group ideology instead of lawful systems and then take that one step further by physically assaulting or damaging any individuals or groups that are seen as 'the enemy', chaos ensues. It is not coincidental that some of the left wing protest groups referred to in your article self-identify as 'anarchist' (e.g. RASH). I strongly sympathise with any movements that combat far right extremism in society, but my sympathy is lost as soon as it tips over into violent aggression (N.B.: I don't consider self-defence after provocation 'violent aggression', I am totally fine with anyone who is being assaulted having the right to defend themselves, or helping other people who are being physically assaulted).

Again, protest away, that is not my issue. My issue is with people being 'fine' with punching people on the nose as a way of countering vile idealism. It is simplistic and you cannot convince me that it is effective. And even if it would be effective in certain specific examples, the core issue remains that it is a slippery slope to chaos. As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, a significant number of self-proclaimed antifa members, at least here in Europe, are also prominent members of organisations like the animal liberation front and other radical environmental and social groups. I consider myself someone with left-wing sympathies and I happily agree with many of the basic ideologies that these groups rally under, but I strongly disagree with the methodology as soon as violent actions come into play. Because where on Monday they are beating up someone who hates Jews, the next day they may be beating up someone who works in a lab animal breeding centre, or an employee at Shell or BP, or a supermarket shelf stocker for stocking food items with non-degradable plastics. Any ideology, when carried to an extreme, can become toxic, particularly when it is used as an excuse to hand out 'justice' based on subjective grounds.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 03 July 2019 - 11:57 AM

[Gorefest]

I hope that appeases your platitude criticisms, Obdi?

[King Lear]

Gorefest, on 03 July 2019 - 11:54 AM, said:

worry, on 02 July 2019 - 08:34 PM, said:

Except it's perfectly valid to stop them that way, and it is effective.

I read the article that you quoted, and nowhere I see any mention of using *physical* violence against neonazis or fascists. They talk about organised counter-protests, rallying the local communities to stand up against far right extremists, and using legal action to take down some of the key players. Which is all absolutely fine in my book, good for them. So I don't really see how your quoted article contradicts my viewpoint, i.e. violence as a means of counter-protest being unsavoury and counter-productive. Once people start deciding who is right and who is wrong based on a group ideology instead of lawful systems and then take that one step further by physically assaulting or damaging any individuals or groups that are seen as 'the enemy', chaos ensues. It is not coincidental that some of the left wing protest groups referred to in your article self-identify as 'anarchist' (e.g. RASH). I strongly sympathise with any movements that combat far right extremism in society, but my sympathy is lost as soon as it tips over into violent aggression (N.B.: I don't consider self-defence after provocation 'violent aggression', I am totally fine with anyone who is being assaulted having the right to defend themselves, or helping other people who are being physically assaulted).

Again, protest away, that is not my issue. My issue is with people being 'fine' with punching people on the nose as a way of countering vile idealism. It is simplistic and you cannot convince me that it is effective. And even if it would be effective in certain specific examples, the core issue remains that it is a slippery slope to chaos. As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, a significant number of self-proclaimed antifa members, at least here in Europe, are also prominent members of organisations like the animal liberation front and other radical environmental and social groups. I consider myself someone with left-wing sympathies and I happily agree with many of the basic ideologies that these groups rally under, but I strongly disagree with the methodology as soon as violent actions come into play. Because where on Monday they are beating up someone who hates Jews, the next day they may be beating up someone who works in a lab animal breeding centre, or an employee at Shell or BP, or a supermarket shelf stocker for stocking food items with non-degradable plastics. Any ideology, when carried to an extreme, can become toxic, particularly when it is used as an excuse to hand out 'justice' based on subjective grounds.

Well if they hypothetically beat up you up, or an petrol station attendant, or supermarket shelf-stocker, I'm sure the lawful systems will handle it, why are you worried? And if your response to that is, understandably, that you don't want to be beaten up and that is shouldn't come to that, well neither do the counter-protesters and local community organizers or the journalists and researchers covering them who are not hypothetically but actually being beaten up and murdered, and it isn't the law standing on the line. By the time you have police-backed fascists in the streets, you've already slipped down the slope and the chaos is on your doorstep. And it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. If it gets better.

[Gorefest]

Again, you are missing the point. I have no problem with people protesting against fascism or neonazism. So I don't really understand what you are trying to say. Protesting is fine, but leave the prosecution of violence to the authorities. It sounds more as if you don't trust the police to do their job, which may be a specifically American issue. If so, that is a whole different worry all in itself. But that is not the discussion we are having here.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 03 July 2019 - 08:04 PM

[worry]

Again, I just can't relate to that reductionist definition of violence. Obviously, physical attacks are violent (and that's what groups like Proud Boys & Patriot Prayer aim for, as Illy, Pheri, KL, and Grief pointed out), but so is marching down the street in promotion of fascism, white nationalism, ethnic cleansing, and/or genocide. Holding a lit tiki torch and shouting 'Jews will not replace us' is violence. Richard Spencer, getting profiled and photographed in his natty suit by mainstream publications to advance his cause is violence. Distributing pamphlets, organizing meetings, and/or shouting through a megaphone in promotion of those ideologies are all violence. Intimidation is violence. It's not just "vile idealism". The people on the receiving end of all that, by and large, recognize the threat.

So aggressive opposition against any and all of that, up to and including physically violent confrontation, is self-defense (& defense of others). And sure, violence is not always the smartest way, it's not always the best tactic, it's not always untainted by machismo or subculture pressures in its own right (eg randos hijacking other people's causes to do violence -- but to my memory at least, that has never once been an Antifa thing in the US). Sometimes just showing up makes the difference, and finding other ways to give consequences (like naming and shaming, contacting employers/schools, etc. as Identify Europa does) is great too. But it's not inherently wrong, inherently off limits, inherently worse than. It's definitely not 'never the answer'. And very often it's helpful and effective, and even necessary. As others have mentioned, lives are at stake.

Now if you cannot be convinced, what can I say to that? I think everyone in this thread has been speaking in earnest, on either side, so it's not like anyone here is doing devil's advocacy or parroting right wing disinformation (with exception of the OP advancing the quick dry cement lie). So it's all good in that regard. On the other hand, I imagine you could be convinced, eventually, it's just that hopefully what it would take to do that will never come to pass -- with the efforts of brave people with various perspectives on this who are all fighting how they see fit, including you, but also including the fine folks doing antifa work.

This post has been edited by worry: 03 July 2019 - 08:13 PM

[worry]

Wow, we both just started posts with the word "Again". We really aren't that different after all!

[Gorefest]

Oh sure, I am sure that one can envision scenarios where the use of violence is warrented as a positive driver. But in my opinion (and yes, that is a personal opinion that I don't feel inclined to move away from based on the current discussion) those scenarios are not the ones we currently encounter. If we would find ourselves in a society where the legal checks and boundaries have vanished and you have a fascist / national socialist government with minorities being systematically repressed and prosecuted, civil disobedience and violent action may be needed in response. If I would get a chance to travel back in time and shoot Hitler, I might do so. Hey ho. These are all hypotheticals though. Nice to discuss over a pint and see where people's boundaries lie. But in most modern day western societies, vigilante justice and violence are not the answer. *In my opinion.*

[King Lear]

Gorefest, on 03 July 2019 - 08:04 PM, said:

Again, you are missing the point. I have no problem with people protesting against fascism or neonazism. So I don't really understand what you are trying to say. Protesting is fine, but leave the prosecution of violence to the authorities. It sounds more as if you don't trust the police to do their job, which may be a specifically American issue. If so, that is a whole different worry all in itself. But that is not the discussion we are having here.

I'm not actually missing the point. You have been loud and clear that you think the law is somehow neutral and will get ride of fascist in defiance of all evidence to the contrary both current and historical. You have yet to explain how are the authorities going to prosecute violence that they support, though.

I don't appreciate you framing this as being *my* problem with not trusting police when these police in particular have documented ties with the fascist groups specifically in Portland which is the subject of this conversation, when you have offered no evidence to refute that, or your belief that fighting fascism directly is ineffective, other than your personal feelings. And if you think this is an American only thing, you are not paying attention. So it is, in fact the discussion we're having here, to which I would also like to add, where is everyone who was tut-tutting about concrete milkshakes now that it is beyond clear that there never was any cement?

[nacht]

Perhaps this is now how you beat unacceptable ideas out of the head of an old nazi
https://www.youtube....h?v=yAMF9fXlsT4

[worry]

Lol at "unacceptable ideas". Wearing socks with sandals is an unacceptable idea. Promoting genocide is a threat.

[worry]

He definitely works undercover for the FBI and is gathering names of undesirables on fantasy message boards across the internet.

[Pherikus Nul]

nacht, on 03 July 2019 - 08:29 PM, said:

Perhaps this is now how you beat unacceptable ideas out of the head of an old nazi
https://www.youtube....h?v=yAMF9fXlsT4

This is one view of this incident. Here's an image of the individual that appears to have been swarmed by antifa in this video: WARNING GRAPHIC.

Here's also another point of view of the incident where you see the elderly man initiating the assault by attacking the antifa crowd with his extendable baton: WARNING GRAPHIC. In fact, if you look close enough, you can see the bearded individual briefly speak with the fedora'd elderly man before any kerfuffle between them and antifa. The video you have posted, while it appears to be antifa instigating an attack on a random bystander, is in fact antifa acting in self-defense after being assaulted by an extendable baton. So, yes, this is precisely how you beat unacceptable ideas out of the head of an old Nazi that is attacking you with a police baton.

[Macros]

One thing I'll pitch into the argument. About letting the authorities take care of things.

The thing is Facists movements can march and meet and all the rest without breaking the law "per se" but it doesn't stop them being racist vile human beings.
beating the actual fuck out of them might

[Tsundoku]

Macros, on 04 July 2019 - 08:19 AM, said:

One thing I'll pitch into the argument. About letting the authorities take care of things.

The thing is Facists movements can march and meet and all the rest without breaking the law "per se" but it doesn't stop them being racist vile human beings.
beating the actual fuck out of them might

As satisfying as that may be, albeit with an unknown degree of efficacy, once you start doing that shit regularly you've definitely let the genie out of the bottle.

Basic human nature is bad enough, but you throw keyed up emotions, high degree of tension, mob psychology, siege mentality and immutable opinions together with the magic ingredients: self-righteousness and a perceived "licence to thump" ... well then you can end up with the politest people in the world rioting over the result of an ice hockey game. For starters.

"Dogs and cats, living together ... mass hysteria!"

This post has been edited by Tsundoku: 04 July 2019 - 08:54 AM

[Primateus]

Tsundoku, on 04 July 2019 - 08:53 AM, said:

Macros, on 04 July 2019 - 08:19 AM, said:

One thing I'll pitch into the argument. About letting the authorities take care of things.

The thing is Facists movements can march and meet and all the rest without breaking the law "per se" but it doesn't stop them being racist vile human beings.
beating the actual fuck out of them might

As satisfying as that may be, albeit with an unknown degree of efficacy, once you start doing that shit regularly you've definitely let the genie out of the bottle.

Basic human nature is bad enough, but you throw keyed up emotions, high degree of tension, mob psychology, siege mentality and immutable opinions together with the magic ingredients: self-righteousness and a perceived "licence to thump" ... well then you can end up with the politest people in the world rioting over the result of an ice hockey game. For starters.

"Dogs and cats, living together ... mass hysteria!"

I think I'd argue that the genie has been out of the bottle and on the run for a long time, we've just politely turned our back and pretended it was thoroughly secured thinking no one would be stupid enough to believe genies actually exist.

[Illuyankas]

The far right are already killing people. They haven't stopped despite all the uninterrupted parades and airtime on news shows interviewing them as if their views were worth hearing in the slightest.

[nacht]

Somewhere the overlords must be laughing their asses off.

These are the Circuses for modern times, maybe we should build a Colosseum and stage it there, maybe even offer free Big Gulps for all the spectators.

The real problem in the USA are the overlords (who have access to huge amounts of capital and make millions of dollars in profits in a day and bailouts when they fail) wheres we poor schmucks need 30 year loans for a college degree and house.

Meanwhile let's pick some misguided poor people or maybe somebody who is there to support free speech and beat the shit out of them and feel great about having "solved that problem".

What has been deeply disappointing to me is how a group of people who read complex literature, and have gone through all the philosophical ramblings of Steven Erikson which have a central theme of compassion and tolerance at the core, are willing to tolerate violence and even encourage it, and inexcusably are stupid enough to be duped by the manipulations and propaganda of the sociopath narcissists that rule the world.

[Pherikus Nul]

nacht, on 04 July 2019 - 06:01 PM, said:

Somewhere the overlords must be laughing their asses off.

These are the Circuses for modern times, maybe we should build a Colosseum and stage it there, maybe even offer free Big Gulps for all the spectators.

The real problem in the USA are the overlords (who have access to huge amounts of capital and make millions of dollars in profits in a day and bailouts when they fail) wheres we poor schmucks need 30 year loans for a college degree and house.

Meanwhile let's pick some misguided poor people or maybe somebody who is there to support free speech and beat the shit out of them and feel great about having "solved that problem".

What has been deeply disappointing to me is how a group of people who read complex literature, and have gone through all the philosophical ramblings of Steven Erikson which have a central theme of compassion and tolerance at the core, are willing to tolerate violence and even encourage it, and inexcusably are stupid enough to be duped by the manipulations and propaganda of the sociopath narcissists that rule the world.

SPOILERS FOR ALL MALAZAN RELATED SERIES AND ERIKSON'S NOVEL "REJOICE". YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.


I never took pacifism to be a theme in Erikson's work. What this situation is more apt to is Urusander's Legion ethnically cleansing the Deniers. Pacifism allows the ethnic cleansing to still take place. No Tiste would have been able to stand in front of Esthala or Silann and have been able to use arguments to stop them from raping and killing either Deniers or nobility that housed Deniers. In fact, for FoD, I see Mother Dark not wanting to point out an enemy to Anomander is a lack of scope on the part of Anomander. He wants a fight, he wants a goal from her, yet what gets him motivated to act the most is only when the actions of Urusander's Legion directly affect his personal life. And, moreover, he's motivated to vengeance. Mother Dark doesn't embrace Anomander until TtH where a conflagration of violence and death in Darujhistan summons Hood for Anomander to slay and then accept death so he can go fight Chaos in a penal colony that's contained in his sword. I read this to mean that Mother Dark couldn't point out an enemy to Anomander or embrance him until he was able to discover this enemy for himself and sacrifice himself in a fight against the wrongs of the world. In FoD, had Anomander begun to protect the Deniers against Urusander's Legion, those who deny the worship of Mother Dark's divinity, I believe his vengeance-driven, 400,000 year period of Opposition Defiant Disorder wouldn't have ever happened.

None of what antifa does is vengeance while all of fascist violence can be viewed through a lens of the in-group achieving vengeance on the out-group. In fact, I'd argue that antifa are agents of being Unwitnessed--never looking to be associated or accredited or feel good about solving a problem. The nature of antifa is very much specifically within the realms of communism and anarchism: this is particularly what makes fascists hate antifa so much. That's why I find it curious that you point out that the 'overlords' are the problem, because that is very much precisely what individuals associated with antifa are and have been saying for nearly 100 years. Antifa is strictly about compassion: compassion for the victims of fascism. Without that compassion, why would they be demonstrating as anti-fascists? Did the Bonehunters cross the Glass Desert in narcissistic pursuits? Did they fight the Forkrul Assail because of the manipulations of propaganda? No, Erikson showed us during the scenes of the Bonehunters meeting with the Snake that there exists types of violence that cannot go unchallenged.

You are right: the problem is the fact that the working class has to endure 30 back-breaking years to afford basic necessities to living in the 21st Century. The intersection of anti-capitalists and antifa is huge. However, fascism's anti-elitism is different than leftist anti-capitalism. Instead of taking their anger toward the bourgeoisie, working class fascists choose (or are convinced) to explicitly take that anger out violently on minorities and women. This is misguided violence as it increases the hardships that minorities and women face each day while allowing the upper classes to go unscathed. Fascism doesn't want to eliminate the capital class necessarily, it wants the power to be able to differentiate who is allowed in the capital class and who is not. This is why state capitalism is so popular in historical examples of fascism. You have an anti-elitism that explicitly establishes a new notion of the elite as time goes on as fascism moves from its early phases to its later phases.

Again, not tolerating the intolerant is not a lack of tolerance. The tolerance paradox shows us this. In fact, for a tolerant society, Popper tells us that it is imperative to not tolerate the intolerant. So, I don't see how you map this lack of tolerance by antifa as something that is counter to Erikson. In fact, Erikson is pretty self-evidently an anti-capitalist. We see this his design of the Indebted in Letheras and their later emancipation. We see this in his science fiction works: in Rejoice we see how capital is related to possessing a monopoly on violence. We see this in his Facebook and blog posts. We see this in the fact that, tragically, it is often necessary to use violence to stop violence. No one walked up to the Tenescowri of the Pannion Domin and thought they'd be able to talk them out of cannibalizing and raping. So, yes, I explicitly believe that one can read the Book of the Fallen and still appreciate the unwitnessed acts of antifa fighting against the historically existential threat of fascism.

EDIT: In fact, I'd argue that the 'Ascendancy' story lines of several characters thriving out of struggle to become Heroes that save the Weak found within the Book of the Fallen can VERY MUCH SO be interpreted through a fascist lens. I also believe that Erikson is well aware of it and challenges that lens throughout the series to various degrees of success. (e.g. think Karsa as a ubermensch breaking chains.)

This post has been edited by Pherikus Nul: 04 July 2019 - 07:23 PM

[Illuyankas]

nacht, on 04 July 2019 - 06:01 PM, said:

Somewhere the overlords must be laughing their asses off.

These are the Circuses for modern times, maybe we should build a Colosseum and stage it there, maybe even offer free Big Gulps for all the spectators.

The real problem in the USA are the overlords (who have access to huge amounts of capital and make millions of dollars in profits in a day and bailouts when they fail) wheres we poor schmucks need 30 year loans for a college degree and house.

Meanwhile let's pick some misguided poor people or maybe somebody who is there to support free speech and beat the shit out of them and feel great about having "solved that problem".

What has been deeply disappointing to me is how a group of people who read complex literature, and have gone through all the philosophical ramblings of Steven Erikson which have a central theme of compassion and tolerance at the core, are willing to tolerate violence and even encourage it, and inexcusably are stupid enough to be duped by the manipulations and propaganda of the sociopath narcissists that rule the world.

You can tell the billionaires are annoyed by the success of the punch a Nazi strategy by how many thinkpieces and talking heads they have out there chatting shit in a desparate attempt to poison the well. Like, for example, missing out the man attacking antifa with a baton that you bought hook line and sinker. If you want to make a Malazan comparison you'd absolutely be one of the crowd at Malaz Harbour screaming at the Wickans on the ships.

Speaking for myself, I'm a socialist precisely because I want to defang the exact sociopathic narcissists currently running the world into the ground, as is inevitable in a capitalist society. They want fascism because they're insulated from the sharp end, and socialism would strengthen the working classes and leave them less susceptible to manipulation along with reducing their power base and influence.

There's a reason the poem begins First they came for the socialists...

[Grief]

Historically speaking, violence and the threat of violence have been essential in securing rights from the 'ruling class'. Furthermore, fascist ideology works to maintain the position of that class by upholding traditional hierarchies.

Blaming everything on a handful of billionaires - to the extent of glossing over the people fighting to protect the system that secures the billionaire's existence - is convenient but I think it misses the point. It reminds me of people throwing around the "100 companies produce 71% of emissions" statistic, as though we just need to stop those 100 companies from being jerks, while glossing over the underlying reason for the statistic (i.e, that the companies are connected with whole rest of the system). Also most Nazi footsoldiers were regular people too, it doesn't mean fighting them was wrong.

If we're going to complain about intelligent people advocating violent action, then I could equally complain about intelligent people facilitating the present massive violence of the system through apathy, misguided "moderation", and status quo bias. And of course there is a subjective moral judgement in deciding what is worth fighting for but that is true regardless; everyone draws the line somewhere.

I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." - MLK Jr.