Antifa rocks!

[Patine]

We're talking about those organizations, so footage of other people predating them is another subject.

You can't keep a consistent argument, context, or perspective. You keep changing the parameters of your point wildly and overtly as each previous aspect is debunked. You always do this that I've witnessed on these forums. It's not at all a credible or respectable form of debate or rhetoric. Sadly, it may well work in modern politics, but that is moreso a statement on the sad state of political discourse and voter awareness and discernment.

 

[Estebonrober]

Aside from the militias and gun rights folk who are in the habit of bringing guns to rallies, the right only started bringing weapons after Antifa began attacking them. I saw video of 3 militia types in fatigues with their 'assault weapons' at Charlottesville keeping the peace in their vicinity as Antifa gave them a wide berth.

"Aside from all the people threatening libruls with purges and subjugation the right only really started threatening purges and subjugation when the left started reacting to the right wingers threatening purgers and exterminations." Got it.

 

[Imaus]

"Aside from all the people threatening libruls with purges and subjugation the right only really started threatening purges and subjugation when the left started reacting to the right wingers threatening purgers and exterminations." Got it.

I think what he wants is proof or news of the right-wing bringing guns to protests before 2017.

To that I say 'Greensboro , 1979', but maybe that doesn't work. The Klan was just driving around with guns in tow, and those protesters started it by hitting the cars. So, what about when Obama visited Texas in 2016 and was met with open-carry handguns and rifles? Not a protest, maybe? Or 2009 (sans handguns, apparently?) The Oath Keepers at Fergunson, maybe? Or is that just a racial thing and not a left-political thing? Or those armed guys who protest mosques while strapping...hmm...

We got Todd Kelsay at June 2017 in Portland; armed 'patriot' group there throughout. Surely some of the oldies here, or around the net, can point out when rightists came to leftist protests with guns since, oh, maybe even the Socialist Party days. Depends on what criteria is needed or wanted to check off the boxes.

 

[Broken_Erika]

"Aside from all the people threatening libruls with purges and subjugation the right only really started threatening purges and subjugation when the left started reacting to the right wingers threatening purgers and exterminations." Got it.

Duh! Everyone knows only lefties ever threaten people or use violence.
Antifa was created by Hillary, Soros, Obama and Mr. Banghazi during a child porn session in the seekrit hidden basement of that pizza parlor!
The Truth is out there..................In her emails!

 

[Berzerker]

You can't keep a consistent argument, context, or perspective. You keep changing the parameters of your point wildly and overtly as each previous aspect is debunked. You always do this that I've witnessed on these forums. It's not at all a credible or respectable form of debate or rhetoric. Sadly, it may well work in modern politics, but that is moreso a statement on the sad state of political discourse and voter awareness and discernment.

Here's what I said:

Aside from the militias and gun rights folk who are in the habit of bringing guns to rallies, the right only started bringing weapons after Antifa began attacking them.

You changed the subject to unidentified events that happened decades ago when the context of my post was Antifa and their campaign against the right.

"Aside from all the people threatening libruls with purges and subjugation the right only really started threatening purges and subjugation when the left started reacting to the right wingers threatening purgers and exterminations." Got it.

The right didn't show up at Antifa rallies to protest them much less with weapons. They only started bringing weapons to their own rallies after Antifa was showing up to attack them.

I think what he wants is proof or news of the right-wing bringing guns to protests before 2017.

The gun rights crowd have been bringing guns to their protests for years, I'm talking about the 'melee' weapons both sides use in these brawls. Antifa made those popular.

 

[Estebonrober]

Here's what I said:



You changed the subject to unidentified events that happened decades ago when the context of my post was Antifa and their campaign against the right.



The right didn't show up at Antifa rallies to protest them much less with weapons. They only started bringing weapons to their own rallies after Antifa was showing up to attack them.



The gun rights crowd have been bringing guns to their protests for years, I'm talking about the 'melee' weapons both sides use in these brawls. Antifa made those popular.

The current context was that of say brietbart internet warriors threatening to purge america of its librul problem and how that has been a theme for about 20 years now in the comments sections and forums across the interwebs. I'm not talking about just showing up to protests armed to the teeth, but about "preparations being made" talk by its little internet warriors. I'd love to see a BLM protest with the entire male population of that protest armed with AR 15s though, that would be a great day in America. I wonder if any of them could get a Today show interview explaining themselves. ffs

 

[Traitorfish]

Aside from the militias and gun rights folk who are in the habit of bringing guns to rallies, the right only started bringing weapons after Antifa began attacking them. I saw video of 3 militia types in fatigues with their 'assault weapons' at Charlottesville keeping the peace in their vicinity as Antifa gave them a wide berth.

I know that libertarians are generally sceptical of the police, but if you think that a reasonable alternative is roving white supremacist militias, then maybe you're... not a libertarian?

 

[Imaus]

I know that libertarians are generally sceptical of the police, but if you think that a reasonable alternative is roving white supremacist militias, then maybe you're... not a libertarian?

I remember rolling my eyes at those guys.

They say they're there not on political grounds but just to keep the peace, make sure everyone is civil, yadda yadda.

Then...drop the guns, stay home, and let the COPS do that job? If the cops can't do it, they call in more cops, and if those cops can't do it, the Nat Guard arrives, and if the Nat Guard can't do it you don't have a protest, you have a siege or a rebellion.

All they did was look like a fifth column or reinforcements for the right. An organized group of people with guns does nothing to the atmosphere of a protest but make it even more stiff and on edge. I personally don't believe them for a second that they were just there for moderation or some other excuse, but w/e.

 

[sophie]

I know that libertarians are generally sceptical of the police, but if you think that a reasonable alternative is roving white supremacist militias, then maybe you're... not a libertarian?

They aren’t skeptical of the police, they’re just annoyed that the police only cater to actual capitalists, and don’t extend those privileges to temporarily embarrassed capitalists.

 

[Patine]

They aren’t skeptical of the police, they’re just annoyed that the police only cater to actual capitalists, and don’t extend those privileges to temporarily embarrassed capitalists.

Well, since Ayn Rand and other major Libertarian ideologues praise capitalism and the acquisition of wealth as the greatest sign of merit and worth of a person, and believe that all powers and responsibilities taken from "Big Government" that are still too onerous and large in scale for the "individual freeman" to manage should be entrusted entirely to big corporations instead - and, consequently, a true Libertarian government, if one actually got off the ground, would be the easiest stepping for those horrible, undisguised corporate dictatorships that were very popular as a form of near-future dystopian science fiction, mostly produced in the '80's - it's probably no wonder such a double-standard actually exists.

 

[Berzerker]

The current context was that of say brietbart internet warriors threatening to purge america of its librul problem and how that has been a theme for about 20 years now in the comments sections and forums across the interwebs. I'm not talking about just showing up to protests armed to the teeth, but about "preparations being made" talk by its little internet warriors. I'd love to see a BLM protest with the entire male population of that protest armed with AR 15s though, that would be a great day in America. I wonder if any of them could get a Today show interview explaining themselves. ffs

Maybe we're just talking past each other, the context of my post was Antifa and the people they're protesting and which of them started the arms race at these brawls. Patine wandered off into the past decades ago long before Antifa started raiding other people's protests with their weapons. Thats when the right responded to Antifa by arming themselves. Of course the right hasn't always been pro-gun, the KKK wanted to keep guns out of the hands of their victims and Ronald Reagan and California Republicans were quick to write more gun laws when the Black Panthers were showing up at protests armed. Gun control was popular under Jim Crow.

I know that libertarians are generally sceptical of the police, but if you think that a reasonable alternative is roving white supremacist militias, then maybe you're... not a libertarian?

The common motivation for the militia/gun rights crowd are the 2nd and 10th Amendments, not white supremacy. Didn't you post that pic of 3 militiamen forming a triangle with their guns at Charlottesville? They weren't roving or playing cops, they didn't shoot or arrest anyone. They were at a protest/rally that turned violent and they created a safe space for anyone who didn't want to get attacked. They were defending themselves and in so doing, defending others. Yeah, libertarians should approve. I didn't see any cops in that pic or video, so if the alternative is nobody keeping the peace, which would you prefer?

 

[AmazonQueen]

Well, since Ayn Rand and other major Libertarian ideologues praise capitalism and the acquisition of wealth as the greatest sign of merit and worth of a person, and believe that all powers and responsibilities taken from "Big Government" that are still too onerous and large in scale for the "individual freeman" to manage should be entrusted entirely to big corporations instead - and, consequently, a true Libertarian government, if one actually got off the ground, would be the easiest stepping for those horrible, undisguised corporate dictatorships that were very popular as a form of near-future dystopian science fiction, mostly produced in the '80's - it's probably no wonder such a double-standard actually exists.

And went all the way back to EE Doc Smith who Heinlein always cited as a major influence. Enlightened self-interest was a direct forerunner of their ideas.

 

[Estebonrober]

Maybe we're just talking past each other, the context of my post was Antifa and the people they're protesting and which of them started the arms race at these brawls. Patine wandered off into the past decades ago long before Antifa started raiding other people's protests with their weapons. Thats when the right responded to Antifa by arming themselves. Of course the right hasn't always been pro-gun, the KKK wanted to keep guns out of the hands of their victims and Ronald Reagan and California Republicans were quick to write more gun laws when the Black Panthers were showing up at protests armed. Gun control was popular under Jim Crow.

I agree with most of this this sort of, strangely lol. This has been a weird day.

 

[Traitorfish]

The common motivation for the militia/gun rights crowd are the 2nd and 10th Amendments, not white supremacy. Didn't you post that pic of 3 militiamen forming a triangle with their guns at Charlottesville? They weren't roving or playing cops, they didn't shoot or arrest anyone. They were at a protest/rally that turned violent and they created a safe space for anyone who didn't want to get attacked. They were defending themselves and in so doing, defending others. Yeah, libertarians should approve. I didn't see any cops in that pic or video, so if the alternative is nobody keeping the peace, which would you prefer?

Where were these freedom-nuts at OWS? At BLM protests? On picket lines? If their enthusiasm for the Bill of Rights extends only to upholding it on behalf of white supremacists, then we're again left wondering if they might not have something in common with white supremacists beyond a shared enthusiasm for sad macho posturing.

 

[Estebonrober]

Where were these freedom-nuts at OWS? At BLM protests? On picket lines? If their enthusiasm for the Bill of Rights extends only to upholding it on behalf of white supremacists, then we're again left wondering if they might not have something in common with white supremacists beyond a shared enthusiasm for sad macho posturing.

I wish wish BLM protests were covered with AR 15s so we could see the outrage at the audacity of those people carrying rifles around. Of course at the time I think they were focused on trying to be and appear peaceful.

 

[Patine]

I wish wish BLM protests were covered with AR 15s so we could see the outrage at the audacity of those people carrying rifles around. Of course at the time I think they were focused on trying to be and appear peaceful.

Well, look what happened in the late '60's when the Black Panthers walked into the California legislative building armed to the teeth to protest a law being debated at that very time, in that very building, to limit gun laws by an essentially racial qualifier. The FBI, National Guard, and State Troopers were summoned instantly - and in large number - and the Panthers didn't even fire a shot or utter a direct threat to anyone!

 

[Senethro]

Where were these freedom-nuts at OWS? At BLM protests? On picket lines? If their enthusiasm for the Bill of Rights extends only to upholding it on behalf of white supremacists, then we're again left wondering if they might not have something in common with white supremacists beyond a shared enthusiasm for sad macho posturing.

This is actually a pretty useful rule of thumb for this situation. Its a little like how the bad MRAs never do anything to support gay men, transmen or any of the "wrong" sorts of men.

Compare with the SPLC which really does materially support free speech for all including the despicable.

 

[metatron]

Its a little like how the bad MRAs never do anything to support gay men, transmen or any of the "wrong" sorts of men.

Whenever your "feminist" allies screw up, reknowned collumnists, editors, "academics", political leaders, you and the gang are reliably ready to no-true-scotsman the feces out of it. Yet supposedly the proptotype of the "MRA" is reliably some PUA teenager nobody in the MRM has ever heard of.

Compare with the SPLC which really does materially support free speech for all including the despicable.

Outside the bubble the SPLC is widely regarded as a farce by now.

 

[Senethro]

And who are these sensible people outside the bubble who say these things?

 

[Estebonrober]

Well, look what happened in the late '60's when the Black Panthers walked into the California legislative building armed to the teeth to protest a law being debated at that very time, in that very building, to limit gun laws by an essentially racial qualifier. The FBI, National Guard, and State Troopers were summoned instantly - and in large number - and the Panthers didn't even fire a shot or utter a direct threat to anyone!

Yea this is what I was actually agreeing with @Berzerker about in his post. The right used to be anti-gun to some extent of course that extent largely revolved around racism and fears about reciprocity from black Americans.