qman said:

SleepyE said:

i despise richard spencer and his group of hitler loving pricks, although i feel that there must be a better way than to attempt to stop the hate with violence.

its a tricky situation. i have seen facebook posts about this and the comments are complicated. One person said you shouldn't use violence to get your point across and also condemned these nazi but others responded negatively towards this person saying the is no justification for defending anything that happens to this person and if you stand up for him you are part of the problem.

very tricky on finding the proper moral high ground in this situation.

---

Should violence also be used against Blacklivesmatter's when they spew racial hatred towards whites? 

Why the main focus on white racial groups?

---

Ezuma said:

I don't think instigating violence is justified. If some organized and definable fascists were hypothetically going around lynching people or themselves being violent, by all means shoot em full of holes. The only good fascist is a dead fascist but it still just discredits opposition to start punching people in a previously non-violent discourse.

---

This is what I'm saying . I realise by putting the gif there it seems like i'm making the same argument for both scenarios but I was not.

Bodhi of Ankou said:

Pretty much everything you just said. Hillary was helping run kidnapping rings in Haiti to steal kids. Check out Martin Martelly, Laura Silsby, and the gang galil on google, if you wanna look into it. Shit we even got Kerry on tape saying he wanted to nurture ISIS and all the salafist's so they could use them to topple Al-Assad. Everything you're accusing Trump of doing (he isnt) is what the former administration was doing for years, and you didnt say a peep about it.

You've been living in a lie.

---

The Ecstatic said:

How did we get to Hillary theories from infowars?

---

Bodhi of Ankou said:

These arent theories mate, shes gonna get her ass hauled off to jail and its gonna be a huge public spectacle. They've been doing some seriously vile things behind closed doors man.

---

Tipote said:

Genuine African gangs and Salafist terrorist groups should be met with all kinds of resistance in the same way. You talk in general terms of anyone living south of the Western world, not about specific fascist groups.

---

Quote:

Quote:

"racial superiority"

Do you hold the same feelings for Black or Asian groups that feel their race is "superior" in some way?  Or is this violence against this type of mindset exclusive to just white groups?

---

Yes, i detest race superiority bullshit.

---

Quote:

Quote:

How do you feel about religious groups that feel they're superior based on their belief system and culture?  Should we violently target Muslims that think all non-Muslims are inferior?  Because "the hatred they propagate only fuels more violence".

---

no, I'm not talking about violence against those who 'feel superior', i'm talking about those who mobilise and provoke.

---

The Ecstatic said:

Bodhi of Ankou said:

These arent theories mate, shes gonna get her ass hauled off to jail and its gonna be a huge public spectacle. They've been doing some seriously vile things behind closed doors man.

---

Any decade now.

---

Yup, shes just radiating confidence.

myc10is said:

Richard Spencer and his band of Merry Morons can eat shit (pardon my language), but what Nazi are you speaking of? The dude in the picture is most definitely not a Nazi.
The Nazi party is the "Socialist Democratic Workers Party". That man is a capitalist, and a Republican (by policy advocacy). So, he certainly is not a Nazi. He is a Nationalist, and a racist.

If you are asking is it OK to attack people for holding beliefs that differ from your own the answer is no. Just because we find someone's position or beliefs offensive does not mean you should attack them unless they move from the realm of words. If you think you should, think of this: someone will find your position offensive. Should they attack you? Lol. The idea of actually attacking people for not holding your ideologies was a huge hallmark of the Nazi party, absolutely MORE of a definig characteristic of the Nazi Ideology than racism. That said, while the first amendment guarantees our freedom of speech it does not guarantee some child with poor emotional control won't lash out in anger. If you do though, you might get arrested. You would definitely be trying to limit someone's first amendment rights. Do you not enjoy saying what you want with out being assaulted?

It is vital that you allow ALL ideas be expressed. An adult with full grasp of his faculties should be able to hear someone who holds disgusting beliefs speak and not be roused to anger. While Spencer is a horrible person full of horrible ideas, he has a right to voice them. The problem is if you say it is ok to attack people over racist ideas, where does the line get drawn? It's a slippery slope.

---

Quote:

Now a question for the OP. Do you think people should punch members of the New Black Panther Party if they mobilize? They openly advocate violence against whites, have a Nationalist Ideology, and believe their race to be superior to any other. For all intents and purposes they are the transposition of the Nazi party. The mentality, structure, Ideology, politics, and Belief in a racial Ubermensch is the same.

---

Quote:

If you are asking is it OK to attack people for holding beliefs that differ from your own the answer is no

---

The Ecstatic said:

How did we get to Hillary theories from infowars?

---

#pizzagate

Tipote said:

qman said:

SleepyE said:

i despise richard spencer and his group of hitler loving pricks, although i feel that there must be a better way than to attempt to stop the hate with violence.

its a tricky situation. i have seen facebook posts about this and the comments are complicated. One person said you shouldn't use violence to get your point across and also condemned these nazi but others responded negatively towards this person saying the is no justification for defending anything that happens to this person and if you stand up for him you are part of the problem.

very tricky on finding the proper moral high ground in this situation.

---

Should violence also be used against Blacklivesmatter's when they spew racial hatred towards whites? 

Why the main focus on white racial groups?

---

how you want to deal with race hate speech is up to individual countries, i'm talking about citizen action against nazis marching in jewish/muslim areas to intimidate.

In the US you can say a whole bunch of racist stuff that you can't say here in the UK. I'm not talking about violence against people for speech, but about action.

I know qman and others like to pretend that these centuries long struggles are over but people regardless of background will resist the denial of humanhood happening again.

---

qman said:

Do you know why we let those Muslim groups to march and advocate hate against people different from them?  Because they have freedom of speech and ideas.

---

qman said:

Violence isn't the solution, people must work within the criminal justice system. 

Now if the criminal justice system fails to provide security for the people they might be violently attacking, then all bets are off.

Words are just words, you don't counter words with violence.  You counter violence with the criminal justice system, if that system fails then all bets are off, but that's a long distance away from preemptive violent strikes against ideas and words.

---

qman said:

"citizen action against Nazis marching"

Again, the slant towards just white groups, why not include all racial groups? 

---

Quote:

"but about action"

Sure, protest their march in a non-violent fashion. You're obviously fixated just on white groups and ignore the other groups that do much worse today, your biased view of the world isn't helping your case.

---

Bodhi of Ankou said:

Who says any of that stuff is even happening. Where are the camps the muslims are being rounded up and sent to?

---

Quote:

Wheres all the rabid islamphobia and street lynchings youre trying to panic about?

---

Where have you been? there is rabid islamophobia where I am, I have had friends attacked in the street just for being muslim or "looking muslim". I have had hostility and threats of violence for defending the existance of muslim and questions of whether i'm really a secret muslim like obama  

Are there street lynchings? no, not quite,but does that mean we can't discuss a potential future? The far right are on the rise, neo nazis are stronger than they have been for a long time, and muslims are the new jews in many ways. Refugee centres and mosques are under attack throughout Europe.  Just because things are fine by your estimations now, doesn't mean things always will be. I hope things don't get worse but my point is that when Nazis mobilise and threaten the social fabric with violence then they will be met with violence by counter mobilisations.

I was making reference back to the Battle of Cable street which if you google you will understand better what I mean.

Ecstatic made a point that I've only heard one person say about the Cable street battles- that violence against them can inadvertently empower them. Its a very fair argument to make. It wasn't hugely relevant with the Black Shirts because they never had much traction in the long run in the UK.

I think so far Ezuma has said what i've failed to articulate clearly.

Ezuma said:

I don't think instigating violence is justified. If some organized and definable fascists were hypothetically going around lynching people or themselves being violent, by all means shoot em full of holes. The only good fascist is a dead fascist but it still just discredits opposition to start punching people in a previously non-violent discourse.

---