Antifa [Mod Warning on post #1 - updated 08/08/19]

markodaly

FTA69 wrote: »

I don’t agree with no borders at all, I believe in a planned economy where all economic factors are regulated. That having been said I’m savvy enough to know that some Jamaican cleaner isn’t my enemy, and I’ve more in common with them than I do Nigel Farage.

When do you ever see the far-right campaigning against landlordism, for rent controls, for state built housing and for unionisation?

All you lot do is moan about some Muslim taxi driver and melt your own heads with conspiracy theories.

Again, look further afield in places like Sweden and the Swedish Democrats.
Hell, even the Nazi party were economically at least in the early 1930's very much left-wing economically.

stefanovich

FTA69 wrote: »

The only force that can resist the excesses of capitalism is an organised working class.

The excesses that you currently enjoy. Have fun on your next outing. Be sure to bring your iphone and expensive riot gear.

I'm working class. I work. I get more than enough money and I am happy. You are raging against nonexistent fascist because, I presume, you are a bored youth with more time than sense. Wait until you get a job and start paying taxes, you'll also turn far right and start voting FG.

markodaly

FTA69 wrote: »

The far right may moan about that stuff but their blame always, always ends up falling on ordinary migrant workers instead of the actual power brokers in society. And even in the rare occasions they do look up they bang on about elites in silly conspiratorial terms as opposed to having actual class analysis. As for activism on issues of housing and pay etc, I’ve spent the past six years organising workers to militantly challenge for pay rises and without fail in every bus garage, building site and canteen there’s some dopey Tommy Robinson type f*cker saying “I ain’t joining no lefty union” etc etc. All they are is scabs and bosses’ mates, same as the far right always were.

Your claims about socialism are **** to put it lightly, immigrants are often to the forefront of fighting for better pay and conditions. We had a strike of African hospital cleaners here in 2017 that went on 24 days while the cockney porters (with some exception) scabbed every single day and supported the private company in breaking the strike.

Working class people can easily unite past religious and racial lines; the USSR had hundreds of ethnicities, Yugoslavia was a lot better off when all that other nonsense was disregarded.

The very fact you’re talking about immigrants in Ireland as the main issue as opposed to a lack of public housing or an unregulated cabal of bankers screwing the rest of us shows how short-sighted and redundant your view is.

Erm, if you want to make a point about how 'great' socialism is as a uniting force, perhaps best not mention the historical elephant in the room that was the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was kept together by force, violence, tyranny, and authoritarianism. The gulags did not discriminate between race perhaps but they still killed indiscriminately. Again, let's not pretend that is was all kumbaya around a campfire. When the Soviet system fell, the countries that made it up, became independent. People often revert to type.

Look, I get what you are saying, Capitalism has gone too far, and maybe it has. But to evoke weepy-eyed romanticism of some yesteryear socialism and how great it can be is also just nonsense. There is serious serious issue with that -ism as well and many people rightly do not trust it.

20Cent

stefanovich wrote: »

I am struggling to see who the enemy of antifa are? Everyone who isn't a full blown commie is a fascist according to them.

That's BS, "anyone who isn't a fully blown commie is a fascist to them" . They would be protesting non stop if that was true.

markodaly

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You say that but the problem with that is that you are effectively asking sections of society to tolerate extremists who ultimately resent their existence or even desire their extermination which doesn't seem fair to me.

I don't condone violence but I really can't sympathise with the sort of scum who endorse white ethnic nationalism given that we know where that road ends.

People have short memories.

Does anyone remember the time Nick Griffen of the BNP fame went on BBC's question time?
It was very controversial at the time, as people used the same point as FTA uses now. The 'you cannot debate with fascists' narrative.

Well the BBC did, and Nick Griffen made a fool of himself. They were proved correct as well as it was the end of the BNP and Nick as a political force.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guhoktingNs

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

johnnyskeleton

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You say that but the problem with that is that you are effectively asking sections of society to tolerate extremists who ultimately resent their existence or even desire their extermination which doesn't seem fair to me.

I don't think ignoring and tolerating are the same thing. As I said, if you can't ignore them, then debate them calmly and rationally. That's hardly tolerating their views.

The problem is that if you sink to their level, you are disputing their message but endorsing their methods so open to being accused of being just as bad.

Plus, if they are so extreme that they preach the extermination of groups of people, then it is no longer a matter for political discussion, and becomes a matter for An Garda Siochana.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't condone violence but I really can't sympathise with the sort of scum who endorse white ethnic nationalism given that we know where that road ends.

Speaking of where that road ends, Hitler came to power in the context of their being pitched battles between his party and socialists and communists. There was a lot more to it than that, and there were very different political circumstances, but insofar as they did anything, the people who went out and attacked the Nazis only made them stronger politically.

So maybe I'm deeply cynical, but I suspect groups like Antifa aren't interested in demonstrating the errors in the views of ethnic nationalists or winning the argument, they are interested in recreating the febrile atmosphere that led to dictators, of varying hues, coming to power in the 1930s.

Pegida may want to set up a white ethno state, but they won't succeed in that unless they have mass appeal. Antifa want to set up a socialist paradise, and they suffer from the same major impediment.

The worst trick that these groups play on people, is that they try to force people to take a side. If you don't punch nazis, you are a nazi, etc etc. I refuse to take a side as I'm firmly of the belief that a moderate, middle of the road, mildly incompetent but fundamentally fair government is the way to go.

20Cent

Antifa don't want to set up a " socialist state" or anything like that. They don't run for election or campaign on issues they simply confront fascists. This is part of the "both sides" narrative designed to give cover to the far right.

markodaly

20Cent wrote: »

Antifa don't want to set up a " socialist state" or anything like that. They don't run for election or campaign on issues they simply confront fascists. This is part of the "both sides" narrative designed to give cover to the far right.

So their modus operandi is a rent a mob and to beat people up in organised street violence.
Yet, you wonder why some people have an issue with them.

20Cent

markodaly wrote: »

So their modus operandi is a rent a mob and to beat people up in organised street violence.
Yet, you wonder why some people have an issue with them.

The violence is very rare.
They offer an opposition to far right events and will protect regular protesters if needed.

johnnyskeleton

FTA69 wrote: »

As for activism on issues of housing and pay etc, I’ve spent the past six years organising workers to militantly challenge for pay rises and without fail in every bus garage, building site and canteen there’s some dopey Tommy Robinson type f*cker saying “I ain’t joining no lefty union” etc etc. All they are is scabs and bosses’ mates, same as the far right always were.

Bit extreme to say that just because a person doesn't agree with a militant strike (I assume you don't mean an official union strike in accordance with our system of industrial disputes) or don't want to join a union, that it makes them a Tommy Robinson type, a scab, a bosses' mate or a member of the far right. In fact, the attempt to tar anyone who doesn't agree with you as part of the evil, hated "other" is quite an authoritarian view to take.

Working class people can easily unite past religious and racial lines; the USSR had hundreds of ethnicities, Yugoslavia was a lot better off when all that other nonsense was disregarded.

Again, "disregarded" is such a strong way of saying "put in jail by an oppressive regieme":

https://mfa.gov.ua/ua/media/deportation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification#Late_1930s_and_wartime:_Russian_comes_to_the_fore

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_protests_in_Kosovo

Brian?

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Cathy Newman? That you? The mind of a simpleton?

Why bother posting if it’s all going to be childish nonsense?

Brian?

stefanovich wrote: »

Well, it matters when the moderators are overtly biased and their moderation is influenced by their politics.

I really don’t understand how political bias can influence my moderation of the fitness forum.

markodaly

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Again, "disregarded" is such a strong way of saying "put in jail by an oppressive regieme":

Or put simply, a Socialist system is better, once you ignore the abject poverty, mass starvation, genocide, ethnic cleansing, tyranny, secret police, kangaroo courts, dictatorship, mass incarceration, censorship, corruption, coverups, and environmental disasters.

FTA69

markodaly wrote: »

You are normally a decent poster FTA but come on. Hitting someone over the head with a piece of iron?

Liberal you are not.

I’m not liberal at all. No time for liberalism.

FTA69

stefanovich wrote: »

The excesses that you currently enjoy. Have fun on your next outing. Be sure to bring your iphone and expensive riot gear.

I'm working class. I work. I get more than enough money and I am happy. You are raging against nonexistent fascist because, I presume, you are a bored youth with more time than sense. Wait until you get a job and start paying taxes, you'll also turn far right and start voting FG.

Lol, I’m 32 and I spent my entire late teens and most of my 20s working my b*llocks off in construction and low-paid jobs. Went to university and worked a full time job as a nightclub doorman to put myself through it. Not that I’ve to explain myself, but it’s because I’ve worked hard and spend my time organising other people who are struggling on low or stagnant wages paying a fortune in rent is exactly why I can see the contradictions of capitalism.

This whole ‘you have a phone and shoes hurr hurr’ argument isn’t stupid; it’s not about privation it’s about recognising that the bulk of working people are being screwed over by a small elite of wealthy establishment types and that we can do better as a society.

Likewise the idea that the far-right or actual fascists are “non existent” is nonsense. The fact that they don’t identify themselves as far-right or reject the label doesn’t mean that political trend has ceased to exist.

Danzy

Saw a group of **** sacks who went on a rampage on the Luas got suspended sentences.

If they were regular people doing that would they have gotten away so lightly.

Licence to rampage when you have friends to look after you.

stefanovich

Brian? wrote: »

I really don’t understand how political bias can influence my moderation of the fitness forum.

You may be an exception.

FTA69

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Bit extreme to say that just because a person doesn't agree with a militant strike (I assume you don't mean an official union strike in accordance with our system of industrial disputes) or don't want to join a union, that it makes them a Tommy Robinson type, a scab, a bosses' mate or a member of the far right. In fact, the attempt to tar anyone who doesn't agree with you as part of the evil, hated "other" is quite an authoritarian view to take.



Again, "disregarded" is such a strong way of saying "put in jail by an oppressive regieme":

https://mfa.gov.ua/ua/media/deportation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification#Late_1930s_and_wartime:_Russian_comes_to_the_fore

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_protests_in_Kosovo

No when I say militant strike I just mean a strike. There is a small section of the working class here that is inherently reactionary, whose priority is disliking immigrants and who is incapable of solidarity in the workplace. I’ve met them, debated and chatted with them. I meet them on a weekly basis. People who will deride their baggage handling colleagues in the airport as “those f*cking Indians” and have an ideological opposition to unions and challenging the boss despite being on sh*t wages themselves. People in this context who undermine the collective effort are indeed scabs, they are definitely aiding the boss. And yes, lots of them do happen to have sympathies with the far-right. These people exist like.

Disliking someone who is a rank individualist who is willing to break a strike isn’t “authoritarian” necessarily, it’s a natural reaction to people who couldn’t give a f*ck about anyone else.

Tasfasdf

Danzy wrote: »

Saw a group of **** sacks who went on a rampage on the Luas got suspended sentences.

If they were regular people doing that would they have gotten away so lightly.

Licence to rampage when you have friends to look after you.

At least they were named and shamed so you know if that tramps live near you.

stefanovich

FTA69 wrote: »

Lol, I’m 32 and I spent my entire late teens and most of my 20s working my b*llocks off in construction and low-paid jobs. Went to university and worked a full time job as a nightclub doorman to put myself through it. Not that I’ve to explain myself, but it’s because I’ve worked hard and spend my time organising other people who are struggling on low or stagnant wages paying a fortune in rent is exactly why I can see the contradictions of capitalism.

This whole ‘you have a phone and shoes hurr hurr’ argument isn’t stupid; it’s not about privation it’s about recognising that the bulk of working people are being screwed over by a small elite of wealthy establishment types and that we can do better as a society.

Likewise the idea that the far-right or actual fascists are “non existent” is nonsense. The fact that they don’t identify themselves as far-right or reject the label doesn’t mean that political trend has ceased to exist.

I agree that people sometimes need a leg up but we have a fairly generous social welfare system here. Doesn't mean you need to don black garbs and assault people.

johnnyskeleton

FTA69 wrote: »

No when I say militant strike I just mean a strike. There is a small section of the working class here that is inherently reactionary, whose priority is disliking immigrants and who is incapable of solidarity in the workplace. I’ve met them, debated and chatted with them. I meet them on a weekly basis. People who will deride their baggage handling colleagues in the airport as “those f*cking Indians” and have an ideological opposition to unions and challenging the boss despite being on sh*t wages themselves. People in this context who undermine the collective effort are indeed scabs, they are definitely aiding the boss. And yes, lots of them do happen to have sympathies with the far-right. These people exist like.

Just to clarify, is "here" somewhere in the UK? It may be that I took you up wrong. I'm sure such people exist. My point is that it is wrong to tar them as such just because they don't agree with a strike. Maybe that wasn't what you were saying.

Disliking someone who is a rank individualist who is willing to break a strike isn’t “authoritarian” necessarily, it’s a natural reaction to people who couldn’t give a f*ck about anyone else.

It's authoritarian to dislike them because they refuse to join your cause/union on ideological grounds.

FTA69

Yes here is the UK for me.

Again, if someone ideologically decides to be a scab and won’t join a union because it’s perceived as hostile to the far-right or because their priority is disliking immigrants then they’re a nasty piece of work in my eyes.

Scabs are bastards as a rule in my book, I’ve no time for them and they deserve to be admonished and shunned in the workplace.

ancapailldorcha

markodaly wrote: »

People have short memories.

Does anyone remember the time Nick Griffen of the BNP fame went on BBC's question time?
It was very controversial at the time, as people used the same point as FTA uses now. The 'you cannot debate with fascists' narrative.

Well the BBC did, and Nick Griffen made a fool of himself. They were proved correct as well as it was the end of the BNP and Nick as a political force.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guhoktingNs

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

I have no issue with TV appearances. I do have an issue with roaming mobs on the street.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I don't think ignoring and tolerating are the same thing. As I said, if you can't ignore them, then debate them calmly and rationally. That's hardly tolerating their views.

The problem is that if you sink to their level, you are disputing their message but endorsing their methods so open to being accused of being just as bad.

Plus, if they are so extreme that they preach the extermination of groups of people, then it is no longer a matter for political discussion, and becomes a matter for An Garda Siochana.

Well, it's hard to ignore them if they take some sort of issue with you and get violent. It just confuses me why only one side here is expected to be tolerant. Why don't the Neo-Nazis have to be tolerant?

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Speaking of where that road ends, Hitler came to power in the context of their being pitched battles between his party and socialists and communists. There was a lot more to it than that, and there were very different political circumstances, but insofar as they did anything, the people who went out and attacked the Nazis only made them stronger politically.

So maybe I'm deeply cynical, but I suspect groups like Antifa aren't interested in demonstrating the errors in the views of ethnic nationalists or winning the argument, they are interested in recreating the febrile atmosphere that led to dictators, of varying hues, coming to power in the 1930s.

Pegida may want to set up a white ethno state, but they won't succeed in that unless they have mass appeal. Antifa want to set up a socialist paradise, and they suffer from the same major impediment.

The worst trick that these groups play on people, is that they try to force people to take a side. If you don't punch nazis, you are a nazi, etc etc. I refuse to take a side as I'm firmly of the belief that a moderate, middle of the road, mildly incompetent but fundamentally fair government is the way to go.

I have nothing to do with Antifa and I neither support nor condone them. I just find it extremely difficult to muster any sympathy for professional provocatuers with Neo-Nazi views when they get attacked. As you say, this is for the Gardai to handle.

You say that groups like Pegida won't succeed. I agree but that's not to say that they won't do any harm either. Far right terrorism is a real threat like radical Islam. From The Economist:

James Brown

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Vague

That's the entire agenda isn't it? Do away with antifacism and any sense of social decency, say the word 'racism' is over used, then all the alt-right scumbags have free reign.
It's a sad state off affairs when people are actively attacking antifacism and trying to pass it off as being socially helpful. Nobody is buying it except them that want to. No decent person is being fooled by the agenda.

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

Ironically, European fascism in the 30's was very much that but it didn't work out so well.
Left wing organisation against capitalism ala Soviet Union didn't work out so well either.

TBF, they turned into dictatorships. N. Korea or China are hardly communist. Russia is a good example (and to a lesser extent the U.S.). Putin uses the power of the state for personal gain and kills or imprisons rivals. Still passes itself off as a democracy, but isn't in practice IMO.

I don't think the unions have my interests at heart, I'm not in any at the moment. They look after their members, that's their job. Supporting striking workers is all regular people have. I'd never cross a picket.

Brian?

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Just to clarify, is "here" somewhere in the UK? It may be that I took you up wrong. I'm sure such people exist. My point is that it is wrong to tar them as such just because they don't agree with a strike. Maybe that wasn't what you were saying.



It's authoritarian to dislike them because they refuse to join your cause/union on ideological grounds.

That's not authoritarian. It's authoritarian if you believe it's ok to force them in line. Everyone should be free to dislike whomever they please as long as they treat them fairly. I'm surprised that has to be said.

20Cent

After trump was elected the far right felt they got a huge boost and he has delivered on some of what they want. Richard Spencer felt emboldened enough to say Heil trump at an event celebrating his innoguration. They planned to have marches and events across the US, particularly targeting liberal cities and universities.
The idea was to normalise their fascism, make discussion about race normal, make increase division and hatred of immigrants and minorities. These ideas were resisted by normal citizens, students and anti fascists. They said this should not be normalised. Far right marches and events should not be considered the same as normal protests. They should be countered and not allowed become regular things that could grow.
The counter protesters have become so successful the far right have dropped this policy and events have been greatly reduced because it's so much hassle. This didn't come about because of"free and open debate" with them. They have no interest in debate anyway. It came about because communities including antifa got together and refused to allow it to happen.
The only recourse left for the far right is to demonise their opposition. Paint them as the aggressors in order to have legislation passed which could stop the opposition to them. This is why so many people think antifa are a terrorist organisation or want to make the US socialist or similar. Right wing grifters are helping the far right with this cause exaggerating antifa violence and downplaying far right threats.

This is what we are seeing at the moment. I think the majority can see through this and the grifters are losing their influence. Hopefully there will be no need for antifa soon enough.

paleoperson

Maybe if the left stopped with their stupid sjw crusades such as 81 genders and borderless immigration many on the right or even alt right could be persuaded to their side. Plenty on the right are highly disgruntled by large corporate culture and starting to support Yang in the next US presidential election, you just have to give them something that works and won't give away their entire country.

20Cent

paleoperson wrote: »

Maybe if the left stopped with their stupid sjw crusades such as 81 genders and borderless immigration many on the right or even alt right could be persuaded to their side. Plenty on the right are highly disgruntled by large corporate culture and starting to support Yang in the next US presidential election, you just have to give them something that works and won't give away their entire country.

Who wants borderless immigration?
No one seriously does yet it is proposed as if they is something "the left" want. This is because far right lie about it to make their own racist policies sound acceptable.
How does the gender of others effect anyone else why not live and let live?

Brian?

paleoperson wrote: »

Maybe if the left stopped with their stupid sjw crusades such as 81 genders and borderless immigration many on the right or even alt right could be persuaded to their side. Plenty on the right are highly disgruntled by large corporate culture and starting to support Yang in the next US presidential election, you just have to give them something that works and won't give away their entire country.

This a common flim glam by the alt right/far right. A tiny minority of people on the left believe in open borders and even fewer are involved in gender politics.

The pervasive attitude on gender politics is to simply let people decide for themselves.