Is ANTIFA = recruitment tool for Neo Nazis?

[August]

Violence is the way that ANTIFA is dealing with the far right. In Berkeley they did that. In Charlottesville they did that. In everywhere the far right is they did that. Now I think that their strategies aren't working. ANTIFA fighting through violence against the far right would just make the far right stronger. It would reinforce their beliefs that the left is (insert antangonizing words). ANTIFA is hated in the streets due to the rioting. The dissents of ANTIFA would likely turn to the far right due to the far left violence.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/08/nonviolence-is-the-perfect-answer-to-neo-nazis/

^Key sentences in the article
 

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-left-is-doing-exactly-what-white-nationalists-want/ 
(related article)

 

(Pitcavage went on to explain that "All the antifa tactics do is give extremists more attention, make extremists feel good, feel like warriors — and give them an opportunity to recruit."What's true for antifa's violent tactics is true for those who are binging on Charlottesville to score political points against Trump and their political enemies.Liberals and the press should know that wildly exaggerating the size and influence of these racist miscreants only serves as a powerful recruiting tool for more disaffected whites to join their ranks.)

^Quote from the article

 

 

[Caecus]

One only needs to look back on history to see the success of violence in democratic debate. The last time the left surged in political violence was Vietnam and the Civil Rights era. Just ask the Black Panthers how their movement worked out. 

Monday is the 54th anniversary of MLK's march on Washington. MLK represents a higher form of idealism where the stability of democracy is the strict adherence to peaceful discourse, even if the other side murders your family and the government doesn't care. He eventually died for it. Nonetheless, his ideals were the heart and soul of the movement, and it was more or less a success. Since I'm just a woodpecker in the woods with too many guns, I would have likely joined with the Black Panthers if extremists on the other side were lynching people and the government didn't do anything.

The same could not be said for Malcolm X. History will have a disagreement on Malcolm's legacy. On one hand, he fought for civil rights. On the other hand, it is tainted by extremist violence. 

ANTIFA represents a very basic reaction to injustice, perceived or real. An eye for an eye, so to say. Violent vengeance, in a lot of ways, is something built into our biological instincts and comes natural to a lot of us in the heat of the moment. Ask anyone on the street who MLK was, and everyone would be able to remember his speech at the height of his movement. Ask anyone on the street (under the age of 30) who Malcolm X was, and you are more likely to get blank stares. ANTIFA is a "feel good" movement, but it has a dead legacy and no ideals behind it. History will not treat them kindly. 

[ComradeMilton]

Also it's literally opposed to fascism. I disagree about violence, but at this point more the scale of violence being permitted to the alt-right white supremacists who haven't, as far as I know, been taken into custody on terrorism charges from Charlottesville. Everyone was pretty agreed on that French truck driver killing people with his vehicle in Nice. How is this at all different?

[August]

15 hours ago, Caecus said:

One only needs to look back on history to see the success of violence in democratic debate. The last time the left surged in political violence was Vietnam and the Civil Rights era. Just ask the Black Panthers how their movement worked out. 

Monday is the 54th anniversary of MLK's march on Washington. MLK represents a higher form of idealism where the stability of democracy is the strict adherence to peaceful discourse, even if the other side murders your family and the government doesn't care. He eventually died for it. Nonetheless, his ideals were the heart and soul of the movement, and it was more or less a success. Since I'm just a woodpecker in the woods with too many guns, I would have likely joined with the Black Panthers if extremists on the other side were lynching people and the government didn't do anything.

The same could not be said for Malcolm X. History will have a disagreement on Malcolm's legacy. On one hand, he fought for civil rights. On the other hand, it is tainted by extremist violence. 

ANTIFA represents a very basic reaction to injustice, perceived or real. An eye for an eye, so to say. Violent vengeance, in a lot of ways, is something built into our biological instincts and comes natural to a lot of us in the heat of the moment. Ask anyone on the street who MLK was, and everyone would be able to remember his speech at the height of his movement. Ask anyone on the street (under the age of 30) who Malcolm X was, and you are more likely to get blank stares. ANTIFA is a "feel good" movement, but it has a dead legacy and no ideals behind it. History will not treat them kindly. 

As for the civil rights movement its a mix bag. Its success would be the anti discrimination policies towards POC. However it fails to tackle future racism and discrimination. If the civil rights movement in the 60's is successful in the method of violence (X) or peace (Luther King Jr.) how come organization like Black Lives Matter come to existence to protect the African American populace from police brutality. Violence never solves the problem in case of left right spectrum fighting.

 

14 hours ago, ComradeMilton said:

Also it's literally opposed to fascism. I disagree about violence, but at this point more the scale of violence being permitted to the alt-right white supremacists who haven't, as far as I know, been taken into custody on terrorism charges from Charlottesville. Everyone was pretty agreed on that French truck driver killing people with his vehicle in Nice. How is this at all different?

Yes they opposed to fascism or in general the far-right but their tactics are ineffective and are even beneficial to the far-right. As far as I know the mayor of Charlottesville called the far-right car rammer a terrorist.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/charlottesville-mayor-car-attack-was-terrorism

[Sketchy]

ANTIFA are domestic terrorists.

And yes they are very much a factor in the rise of the neo nazis and their ilk. White Identitarian movements were (and to an extent still are) reduce to fringe movements until the rise of identity politics of the left.

Get rid of Identity politics and it'll go a long way to resolving all these issues in America rn. Subscribe to it and you are part of the problem. Simple as that.

[丂ħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™]

What the left is in itself, is a good enough recruitment tool for any right wing movement. They're a bunch of weirdo degenerates who are parasites and an overall drain on society. Traditional values aren't outdated or broken, you're broken. Simple as that.

But will Anti-Fa make jackboots, book burnings, and torches at night in again? Yeah, they're setting it up for Marxism vs Fascism HD anniversary edition.

[August]

5 hours ago, Sketchy said:

ANTIFA are domestic terrorists.

And yes they are very much a factor in the rise of the neo nazis and their ilk. White Identitarian movements were (and to an extent still are) reduce to fringe movements until the rise of identity politics of the left.

Get rid of Identity politics and it'll go a long way to resolving all these issues in America rn. Subscribe to it and you are part of the problem. Simple as that.

Its hard to classify ANTIFA as domestic terrorists. No one dies due to ANTIFA YET as far as I know. Also making ANTIFA a terrorist organization will actually benefit ANTiFA as they would be seen as underdogs or martyrs.

I fear that these white nationalist/neo nazis will become the norm in the West. Everything that the left throws at them just makes them stronger. Its like the left is using water to fight a fire that is caused by electricity. Its just getting bigger. One of the mistakes that the left did is to underestimate them and ridicule them at the same time fearmonger about them taking control over the West.

About identity politics I don't think that it would be erased in politics. Republicans identify themselves mostly as Christians. Democrats identify themselves as liberals. identity politics is one of the foundations of nations in the world.

[Sketchy]

58 minutes ago, August said:

Its hard to classify ANTIFA as domestic terrorists. No one dies due to ANTIFA YET as far as I know. Also making ANTIFA a terrorist organization will actually benefit ANTiFA as they would be seen as underdogs or martyrs.

I'm fairly certain that isn't a prerequisite for a group to be considered domestic terrorists. Either way, I disagree with the premise that it'll help them, the problem has been for some time now, that the media and the Democratic Party have refused to denounce ANTIFA, often painting them in a positive light. The only people who would see it that way are people as radical as they are.

1 hour ago, August said:

I fear that these white nationalist/neo nazis will become the norm in the West. Everything that the left throws at them just makes them stronger. Its like the left is using water to fight a fire that is caused by electricity. Its just getting bigger. One of the mistakes that the left did is to underestimate them and ridicule them at the same time fearmonger about them taking control over the West.

While I agree that the left is primarily responsible for the growth of the neo nazis, I don't really think it is likely to become the norm. Despite what the media and the whiny victim groups would have people believe, most people aren't racist. The majority of people in the West are white people, if the majority of white people are racist as some of these whiny little college kids would have us all believe, then there would be no social pressure against being a racist in the first place. The accusation of racism wouldn't have the power it does, to destroy peoples careers and reputation. The social taboo against being a racist would not exist. The reality is the reason these groups have a voice, and the amount of support they do, is because most white people, and people in the west in general, are not racist.

1 hour ago, August said:

About identity politics I don't think that it would be erased in politics. Republicans identify themselves mostly as Christians. Democrats identify themselves as liberals. identity politics is one of the foundations of nations in the world.

Identifying as something isn't identity politics. I "identify" as white, or at least I have a mirror and 2 eyes, but that doesn't mean I'm a white identitarian (idgaf about that shit).

The far left for the past 8 years (maybe longer) has used identity politics as a baton to attempt to devalue the opinions of demographics they don't like. It is literally everything they cry out against, racially motivated bigotry.

White people are an evil race who literally invented racism and who should cowtow to the whims of infantile professional victims incapable of seeing past their racial hatred and realizing they are bunch of hypocrites.

Men, because they have a penis, are all rapists and sexual harassers who can't help but oppress teh wemonz.

Straight people are bad because they can legally get married.. Or something idk.

People who have a firm grasp of reality and understand they aren't one of the 247 genders that don't exist are evil too.

Or in other words, intersectional feminism.

[Caecus]

8 hours ago, August said:

As for the civil rights movement its a mix bag. Its success would be the anti discrimination policies towards POC. However it fails to tackle future racism and discrimination. If the civil rights movement in the 60's is successful in the method of violence (X) or peace (Luther King Jr.) how come organization like Black Lives Matter come to existence to protect the African American populace from police brutality. Violence never solves the problem in case of left right spectrum fighting.

Looking at it from their perspective, white police officers run around with the authority of the law behind them and shooting unarmed black people. The police officers are never charged with any serious crime, and usually show up the next day to work despite someone else being in the mortuary. There are famous superhero origin stories that pop out of scenarios like this, because using violence to correct corruption and injustice is not only ingrained in popular culture, but it is perhaps the most natural of urges that anyone can relate to. 

It takes a leader with true morality, patience, and charisma to convince people of non-violence. BLM is disorganized and dislocated, without a national leader. It has no overarching voice of reason or goal, only the disgruntled urge to fight. 

1 hour ago, Sketchy said:

White people are an evil race who literally invented racism and who should cowtow to the whims of infantile professional victims incapable of seeing past their racial hatred and realizing they are bunch of hypocrites.

Lol, who invented racism then? Black people? Race is a social construct used to justify the enslavement of people obviously different characteristics by calling them "inferior." Correct me if I'm wrong, but the last time white people were enslaved, the Romans called them Gauls and freed them by giving them citizen rights upon the death of their masters. 

Also, it's "kowtow." It's a bastardization of Latinized Chinese, but it's still more appropriate to spell with a k. 

[Caecus]

2 hours ago, August said:

I fear that these white nationalist/neo nazis will become the norm in the West. Everything that the left throws at them just makes them stronger. Its like the left is using water to fight a fire that is caused by electricity. Its just getting bigger. One of the mistakes that the left did is to underestimate them and ridicule them at the same time fearmonger about them taking control over the West.

 

1 hour ago, Sketchy said:

While I agree that the left is primarily responsible for the growth of the neo nazis, I don't really think it is likely to become the norm. Despite what the media and the whiny victim groups would have people believe, most people aren't racist. The majority of people in the West are white people, if the majority of white people are racist as some of these whiny little college kids would have us all believe, then there would be no social pressure against being a racist in the first place. The accusation of racism wouldn't have the power it does, to destroy peoples careers and reputation. The social taboo against being a racist would not exist. The reality is the reason these groups have a voice, and the amount of support they do, is because most white people, and people in the west in general, are not racist.

I'm not sure if Mr. Augustus Pax here meant that the growth of neo-Nazis is the primary responsibility of the "left."

If that is the case, I would disagree. Neo-Nazis have existed in this country well before Nazism existed. The KKK terrorist is the OG Nazi, the Germans just took our ideas and applied it to Jews. Luckily, since 1942, most Americans don't think Nazism is for them. The only reason why you guys think that Nazism is somehow coming back into fashion is because they make the news more. They are rallying and showing up in the news because they actually feel like they have a shot at spreading their message in the modern day. I'll give you three guesses as to what I think changed the status quo.

Otherwise, these white trash little shits would be in their mom's basement trolling on Xbox live in fear of taking a 308 round to the face. Condemnation of Nazis from the "left" has never changed in this country (though I suppose for a brief 3 years, it was okay to shoot them in France). And it's not just the left. The Republican party, down to the bane of eyesight and olfaction Ted Cruz, condemns Nazis and what they stand for. This isn't a "left" issue. There is no "right" that the Nazis are a part of. There is the left, the right, and little shits like Nazis who the left and the right collectively disapprove of. 

It also sounds like Sketchy has been called racist too many times. Someone stop calling him racist, you racist somebody. 

[Dubayoo]

On 8/26/2017 at 0:12 PM, Caecus said:

One only needs to look back on history to see the success of violence in democratic debate. The last time the left surged in political violence was Vietnam and the Civil Rights era. Just ask the Black Panthers how their movement worked out. 

Monday is the 54th anniversary of MLK's march on Washington. MLK represents a higher form of idealism where the stability of democracy is the strict adherence to peaceful discourse, even if the other side murders your family and the government doesn't care. He eventually died for it. Nonetheless, his ideals were the heart and soul of the movement, and it was more or less a success. Since I'm just a woodpecker in the woods with too many guns, I would have likely joined with the Black Panthers if extremists on the other side were lynching people and the government didn't do anything.

The same could not be said for Malcolm X. History will have a disagreement on Malcolm's legacy. On one hand, he fought for civil rights. On the other hand, it is tainted by extremist violence. 

ANTIFA represents a very basic reaction to injustice, perceived or real. An eye for an eye, so to say. Violent vengeance, in a lot of ways, is something built into our biological instincts and comes natural to a lot of us in the heat of the moment. Ask anyone on the street who MLK was, and everyone would be able to remember his speech at the height of his movement. Ask anyone on the street (under the age of 30) who Malcolm X was, and you are more likely to get blank stares. ANTIFA is a "feel good" movement, but it has a dead legacy and no ideals behind it. History will not treat them kindly. 

Yea, that makes sense.  Malcolm X and the Black Panthers are remembered as much as the leftist organizations in Weimar Germany that alienated Zentrum from the coalition.  They're remembered by students of history, but nobody else.

ANTIFA is an outcome of the past 30 years' political correctness which counter-generalized against those who didn't generalize in the first place while exploiting how some people are actually traumatized from being victimized.  It confuses the genuine concern with systemic revolution against hopeless discrimination with those who want to be punks and create drama against those who are similar but not the same as the privileged, privileging, and prejudicial.

On the side, I'm rather convinced that the radical left is composed of many subversive conservatives who provoke identity politics in order to avoid having their deeper attitude problems addressed.  Discrimination is a product of wise guy inductive reasoning which:

Aristocratically elitist spoiled brats,

Anti-intellectuals obsessed with folk community common sense, and

Conformists who expect you to go along with the flow or else you're rocking the boat and need to fit in...

...all use.  They use this far beyond demographic discrimination as well to discriminate against others who are simply incompatible with their lifestyles.  

As long as identity politics is focused on though, these other attitude problems that are the real root of the problem will never be addressed.  It's effectively a gigantic sensationalist distraction against the truth.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Dubayoo

[Ogaden]

Antifa has gained hundreds of thousands of new members due to the right's actions

[Clarke]

There is no wave of Nazi's or whatever, there is just a wave of idiotic leftists calling everyone Nazi's. There's nothing really racist about not wanting your neighborhood to turn to shit and for your country to lose what made it what it is. Diversity has always being a weakness throughout history. 

The racial problem with the USA and other countries is not that undesirable minorities are treated unfairly which they're not but the fact that they're even in the country. 

 

 

[Dubayoo]

2 hours ago, Ogaden said:

Antifa has gained hundreds of thousands of new members due to the right's actions

Eh... ANTIFA's members are just wise guy punks with attitude problems who never grew up.

If anything, the right's inaction for decades has tolerated their attitude problems festering because they were never punished for having them.

[August]

3 hours ago, Lightning said:

There is no wave of Nazi's or whatever, there is just a wave of idiotic leftists calling everyone Nazi's.

You actually believe that people like Andrew Anglin and Richard Spencer doesn't exist!? Or the fact that they were able to rally at Charlottesville?

6 hours ago, Caecus said:

I'm not sure if Mr. Augustus Pax here meant that the growth of neo-Nazis is the primary responsibility of the "left."

Yes but the Left and the western governments are indirectly responsible for it. The censorship laws didn't do a dent to the far-right as they would just migrate to the dark corners of the internet. Pretty much sure that if they moved there they would be undetected and harder to track making their actions virtually invisible. Also the PC culture that is being promoted backfired at them since more and more people turned into the far right due to that.

[Sketchy]

7 hours ago, Caecus said:

-snip-

I didn't say neo nazis didn't exist before now, obviously they did, I said the far lefts actions in the past 8 years or so have pushed people directly into their arms. Keyword in that sentence was growth. 

I've said before that if things continued down this path someone would end up dying (as have many others) and I wasn't the least bit surprised when someone died at Charlottesville. Big difference this time is the ANTIFA people actually found some REAL nazis and didn't just start attacking normal conservatives or right wing libertarians.

It would be in the best interests of everyone if the left condemned groups like ANTIFA in the same fashion as the right does against groups like the KKK and Alt right as they are just contributing the escalating violence in politics atm.

[Caecus]

1 hour ago, Sketchy said:

I didn't say neo nazis didn't exist before now, obviously they did, I said the far lefts actions in the past 8 years or so have pushed people directly into their arms. Keyword in that sentence was growth. 

I've said before that if things continued down this path someone would end up dying (as have many others) and I wasn't the least bit surprised when someone died at Charlottesville. Big difference this time is the ANTIFA people actually found some REAL nazis and didn't just start attacking normal conservatives or right wing libertarians.

It would be in the best interests of everyone if the left condemned groups like ANTIFA in the same fashion as the right does against groups like the KKK and Alt right as they are just contributing the escalating violence in politics atm.

Ah, you must have misunderstood me. I didn't think you didn't know there were Nazis before now, I'm saying that they aren't growing. We only hear of Nazis because of the spotlight. They are ultimately a very small minority, most certainly outnumbered by the overwhelming amount of people who aren't Nazis. 

Also, are we 100% sure that only ANTIFA people showed up to Charlottesville? I'm not with ANTIFA, but if I saw Nazis walking down the street shouting Sieg Heil, I would be counter-protesting them too, like any decent American citizen would against genocidal white supremacists. This notion that you have to be on the left or with a protest group like BLM or ANTIFA in order to be anti-Nazi is simply false and only compounds the fake notion peddled by liberals that the right harbors these extremists in their body politic. Frankly, I think I would take a much more radical approach than ANTIFA. Anyone with a loaded AR-15 and body armor walking onto my property shouting racist and violent things would find a 308 round in their head before they could finish saying "blood and soil." That's the great thing about living in a conservative state like Utah. We're like Texas, but with a lot less bullshit. 

I agree with this statement, just not with how its presented. Political violence, regardless of whether or not it is chucking a rock or a dipshit driving a car into a crowd, is intolerable. My issue with this statement is that it equates ANTIFA with the KKK and Nazis. Unlike the KKK or Nazis, ANTIFA has not used deadly force (to my knowledge). Besides, ANTIFA has a platform that 99.997% of the people can get behind, which is anti-fascism, albeit not everyone agrees with how they go about their political actions. On the other hand, KKK and Nazis have a platform that only appeals to the 100 white dudes who all collectively borrowed money from their moms to fly god-forsaken Virginia (at least it wasn't Florida). To reiterate, my issue with your statement is that this statement can potentially give people who are reading it the idea that ANTIFA and Nazis are equivalent, and they are not. 

2 hours ago, August said:

Yes but the Left and the western governments are indirectly responsible for it. The censorship laws didn't do a dent to the far-right as they would just migrate to the dark corners of the internet. Pretty much sure that if they moved there they would be undetected and harder to track making their actions virtually invisible. Also the PC culture that is being promoted backfired at them since more and more people turned into the far right due to that.

Really? Because my understanding is that Nazis would be around regardless of whether or not there are censorship laws. There is only one way to make sure that there are no Nazis, and that's to put a bullet in their heads. Seeing as how we are a civilized nation that requires non-violent discourse in order to function, Nazis are here to stay. Again, I disagree with this notion that there are somehow more Nazis today than there were in the past, I don't know why you guys keep on insisting there are more white trash than the 100-200 dipshits in Charolettesville. 

[Sketchy]

1 hour ago, Caecus said:

Ah, you must have misunderstood me. I didn't think you didn't know there were Nazis before now, I'm saying that they aren't growing. We only hear of Nazis because of the spotlight. They are ultimately a very small minority, most certainly outnumbered by the overwhelming amount of people who aren't Nazis. 

I agree they are a small minority. Also to an extent I agree they themselves aren't growing all that much. Realistically the group who are a bigger threat are the sort of "Alt-Lite" or other types of groups who don't necessarily subscribe to the racial parts of their belief system but agree on enough more mainstream issues that they tend find similar common enemies and common ground. These are the types of people who inflate their numbers and are making the problem worse.

People should be denouncing both groups rather than making excuses for them because they share a common enemy. Although I don't expect that to happen.

1 hour ago, Caecus said:

I agree with this statement, just not with how its presented. Political violence, regardless of whether or not it is chucking a rock or a dipshit driving a car into a crowd, is intolerable. My issue with this statement is that it equates ANTIFA with the KKK and Nazis. Unlike the KKK or Nazis, ANTIFA has not used deadly force (to my knowledge). Besides, ANTIFA has a platform that 99.997% of the people can get behind, which is anti-fascism, albeit not everyone agrees with how they go about their political actions. On the other hand, KKK and Nazis have a platform that only appeals to the 100 white dudes who all collectively borrowed money from their moms to fly god-forsaken Virginia (at least it wasn't Florida). To reiterate, my issue with your statement is that this statement can potentially give people who are reading it the idea that ANTIFA and Nazis are equivalent, and they are not. 

This is sort of the narrative the media has been using as a defense rather than just calling them out for the problems they are.

Ideologically you could argue they are not equal, even historically their actions are obviously not equal. A counter argument could be that the people at the unite the right rally didn't start the fight, the ANTIFA people did, which is true.

Both arguments are irrelevant. Both factions are a problem, both should be denounced. How much of a problem they are, who is the bigger problem, all of that is just a distraction. 

Edited August 28, 2017 by Sketchy

[Rozalia]

When one side recruits for the identity politics war then they promote recruitment on the other end. The Nazi/White Nat forces have been known to be an irrelevance for a long time but it seems certain groups MSM and Progressives have conspired to promote them as existing in the millions or something (I mean, they got that Nazi Trump in the White House after all) which is fuelling Antifa and other such group's recruitment. Antifa for it's part loves to attack the reasonable people on the right, labelling them Nazis and White Nats (and thus free game for violence apparently) too, and some definitely will decide that if Antifa wants that war then they'll join the other side in full. Like how the Alt-Right attacks even the Alt-Lite as cucks and such for not being as racist as them, the Alt-Left attacks anyone on the left not supporting their violence as being weak, corrupt, and more increasingly, racist. 

All I know is the people that the Alt-Left supposedly hates all love them. The Alt-Right loves the extra attention and recruitment, they want a war to erupt on the streets as they know that in such things it is the meanest who win. The Corps and Globalists love the distractions too of course which is why you get many of them funding these groups on the left. Capitalists supporting Communists and Anarchists to give them cover. Pure comedy.  

12 hours ago, Caecus said:

Looking at it from their perspective, white police officers run around with the authority of the law behind them and shooting unarmed black people. The police officers are never charged with any serious crime, and usually show up the next day to work despite someone else being in the mortuary. There are famous superhero origin stories that pop out of scenarios like this, because using violence to correct corruption and injustice is not only ingrained in popular culture, but it is perhaps the most natural of urges that anyone can relate to. 

It takes a leader with true morality, patience, and charisma to convince people of non-violence. BLM is disorganized and dislocated, without a national leader. It has no overarching voice of reason or goal, only the disgruntled urge to fight. 

Lol, who invented racism then? Black people? Race is a social construct used to justify the enslavement of people obviously different characteristics by calling them "inferior." Correct me if I'm wrong, but the last time white people were enslaved, the Romans called them Gauls and freed them by giving them citizen rights upon the death of their masters. 

Also, it's "kowtow." It's a bastardization of Latinized Chinese, but it's still more appropriate to spell with a k. 

Ah yes. Unarmed black men as those physically assaulting officers. The poor innocent criminals angle has so been overused that any sympathy that may be given is quite used up. They have been driven to despise the police and thus resist. Those who resist often get put down. The level of hate and resistance leads to other officers being jumpy with black officers being the most jumpy (they kill black suspects at higher rates than white officers). As many smart black men have said before, or those "uncle Toms" as they are often called, respect the officer and even if you don't like it do as he commands. He wants you out of the car then get out. He wants to check you, your car, whatever, then let him. 

Now for the second bit. No one invented racism and if you want to talk who started it I'm sure you can go back further than white people. The Ancient Chinese saw all surrounding non-Chinese as lesser people for a start. Oh and white people were enslaved in the Arab Slave trade so you are laughably wrong in thinking that the Romans/Gauls were the last time they were enslaved. 

[ComradeMilton]

22 hours ago, August said:

As for the civil rights movement its a mix bag. Its success would be the anti discrimination policies towards POC. However it fails to tackle future racism and discrimination. If the civil rights movement in the 60's is successful in the method of violence (X) or peace (Luther King Jr.) how come organization like Black Lives Matter come to existence to protect the African American populace from police brutality. Violence never solves the problem in case of left right spectrum fighting. BLM isn't a group and the police have decided to avoid using Tasers just as a last resort to shooting and now uses it for pain compliance (because it's easier than working) and tons of recorded video for torture (this is also a popular use for other nations' torture programs.

 

22 hours ago, Sketchy said:

ANTIFA are domestic terrorists. No, they're not.

And yes they are very much a factor in the rise of the neo nazis and their ilk. White Identitarian movements were (and to an extent still are) reduce to fringe movements until the rise of identity politics of the left. So until the left (which doesn't exist in the United States) stopped their freedom to hate and kill minorities by avoiding violence and passing new laws to compensate? Kind of like a rape victim wearing clothes causing men to become uncontrollably filled with lust and they can't handle it so it's really the woman (victim's) fault?

 

21 hours ago, Crossbones said:

What the left is in itself, is a good enough recruitment tool for any right wing movement. They're a bunch of weirdo degenerates who are parasites and an overall drain on society. Traditional values aren't outdated or broken, you're broken. Simple as that. How many right wing American terrorists have been killed since, say, the year 2000? In that same time how many have right wing American terrorists killed? One plane crashed into a southern IRS office. Assassinating one of the three specialists we have in the United States able to have practiced a controversial and strictly regulated process when it's absolutely necessary? The shooting of a church in South Carolina?  The attack on the Holocaust Museum? The massacre at a Planned Parenthood? I can do this for quite a while. The left (as far as it even exists in the US) has killed zero.

 

15 hours ago, Sketchy said:

I'm fairly certain that isn't a prerequisite for a group to be considered domestic terrorists. There is. The Southern Poverty Law Center has regulations to determine who is or is not to keep track and the FBI has its own standards before using that terminology, thus they are domestic terrorists. Either way, I disagree with the premise that it'll help them, the problem has been for some time now, that the media and the Democratic Party have refused to denounce ANTIFA, often painting them in a positive light. The only people who would see it that way are people as radical as they are. Those mean people hurting no one and opposing fascism and white supremacy! They're so mean!

Feminism as a concept in its original sense (that continues) is literally a desire for women to be treated equally as men.

 

11 hours ago, Lightning said:

There is no wave of Nazi's or whatever, there is just a wave of idiotic leftists calling everyone Nazi's. There's nothing really racist about not wanting your neighborhood to turn to shit and for your country to lose what made it what it is. Diversity has always being a weakness throughout history. You've literally said there is no racism and then spouted several examples of racism to defend how there isn't racism. Maybe pick a side and stick with it?

 

[Sketchy]

8 minutes ago, ComradeMilton said:

The left (as far as it even exists in the US) has killed zero.

The guy who shot up the cops in Baton Rouge?

The guy who tried to kill the republicans at the baseball game? Oh I guess he doesn't count because hes not good at killing people.

I'm sure there is other examples, and if it were anyone else making the claim I'd probably try and find them, but I'm certain you'll just label them extremists or try and say they aren't on the left.

Either way its just another distraction from the real problem. You are clearly a far left ideologue so I doubt there is anything I'd say to convince you.

[Rozalia]

Milton is a Alt-Left extremist Sketchy. You're correct in nothing getting through to him. 

[Clarke]

7 hours ago, August said:

You actually believe that people like Andrew Anglin and Richard Spencer doesn't exist!? Or the fact that they were able to rally at Charlottesville?

Yes but the Left and the western governments are indirectly responsible for it. The censorship laws didn't do a dent to the far-right as they would just migrate to the dark corners of the internet. Pretty much sure that if they moved there they would be undetected and harder to track making their actions virtually invisible. Also the PC culture that is being promoted backfired at them since more and more people turned into the far right due to that.

They exist but they're less "racist" than me and I don't mind non-white people being alive or being treated equal. There's nothing racist about them at all. White countries shouldn't be subject to mass immigration that replaces the native population by taking up resources and via other means. The majority should stay the majority, anyone who wants to be become lesser is no more than a cuck. I don't know the Andrew guy so maybe he is dumb.

Immigration may actually lead to the death of all humans as the population increases in the country people are immigrating too and increases in the country they're leaving because resources are freed up leading to a nasty cycle of even more overpopulation

Quote

You've literally said there is no racism and then spouted several examples of racism to defend how there isn't racism. Maybe pick a side and stick with it?

You perceive it as racism when in fact its just logic, why would one willingly weaken their community by bringing in outsiders for the sake of diversity, nothing divides a community more, Evidence of this division is the fact topics like this exist, these topics exist because diversity is a weakness and divides people.

[Sketchy]

1 minute ago, Rozalia said:

Milton is a Alt-Left extremist Sketchy. You're correct in nothing getting through to him. 

Oh I know I wasn't going to respond at all until I noticed his response about no deaths on the left. 

[ComradeMilton]

3 hours ago, Sketchy said:

The guy who shot up the cops in Baton Rouge?

The guy who tried to kill the republicans at the baseball game? Oh I guess he doesn't count because hes not good at killing people.

I'm sure there is other examples, and if it were anyone else making the claim I'd probably try and find them, but I'm certain you'll just label them extremists or try and say they aren't on the left.

Either way its just another distraction from the real problem. You are clearly a far left ideologue so I doubt there is anything I'd say to convince you.

If you link to some news article (ideally a wire service like the Associated Press (accessible on Google News) or Reuters (accessible on their own website) identifying their political beliefs as either left or right I would have mentioned them. Unlike several others in this thread I'm not going to assume I know their political beliefs with so little information about them.

3 hours ago, Rozalia said:

Milton is a Alt-Left extremist Sketchy. You're correct in nothing getting through to him. 

Alt-Left isn't a thing. Rozalia again assigning me political beliefs after complaining about me not provi cding my actual political beliefs in another thread. Hilarious.

3 hours ago, Lightning said:

They exist but they're less "racist" than me and I don't mind non-white people being alive or being treated equal. There's nothing racist about them at all. White countries shouldn't be subject to mass immigration that replaces the native population by taking up resources and via other means. The majority should stay the majority, anyone who wants to be become lesser is no more than a cuck. I don't know the Andrew guy so maybe he is dumb.

Immigration may actually lead to the death of all humans as the population increases in the country people are immigrating too and increases in the country they're leaving because resources are freed up leading to a nasty cycle of even more overpopulation

You perceive it as racism when in fact its just logic, why would one willingly weaken their community by bringing in outsiders for the sake of diversity, nothing divides a community more, Evidence of this division is the fact topics like this exist, these topics exist because diversity is a weakness and divides people.

You suggested non-white people moving into your neighborhood or block would increase crime rates. Yes, that's racist. You are literally assuming solely on the basis of a hypothetical person or group of people are a bad, negative or dangerous consequence to tolerate because they're the wrong color.

2 hours ago, Sketchy said:

Oh I know I wasn't going to respond at all until I noticed his response about no deaths on the left. 

Have any of those had their political beliefs announced in any way?