Antifa rocks!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rogan does like to platform people who are considered alt-right, most interestingly of all he's platformed the leader of the proud boys.

I would certainly call Rogan fash-adjacent, infact he goes far as to monetize it.

There you go, silencing 'fascists' includes silencing anyone who talks to them. Wasn't that Joe McCarthy's logic when it came to the commies? I'd much rather see Joe Rogan debate a neo-Nazi than you debate them, his reasonableness contrasted with their vitriol would win the day whereas you'd just shout at each other.

I think Rogan's shows are free, Jimmy Dore complains a lot about how his shows are demonetized by google and youtube. Dore is a progressive who believes in free speech and he's been on Rogan's show too. They're both comedians so thats not surprising, most of Rogans guests are people into martial arts and MMA, comedians, or people in his industry like Jones. I got introduced to Rogan because he interviews people researching the past like Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson.
 
Rogan's show apparently has a massive audience (going by youtube views). He also had guests like the founder of that Tesla car company and that afro-american astro-physicist (I am not good with names :) ).
Dore's show is considerably smaller, but I watch it more often. I do wish he wouldn't stop the videos he is commenting on every 2 seconds, though.
 
Alex Jones is no skeptic, he's all kinds of something else, but he's also not what people say he is. I'm no fan.

Remember when you described luiz as center-left?
luiz describes himself as center right, and I would agree. And no, I never said that. I did say luiz hasn't really been right wing despite his attempts to keep up appearances. He's no ally but on most social issues he's always lagging but with the progressives like any good capitalist.

This is exactly the problem we're dealing with. How can you guys trust secondary sources giving you analysis, given that you on CFC are better than the journalists/activists you read, and you still mischaracterize unfairly. I pretty much argue with @luiz whenever he shows up, starting with my very firsts posts on CFCOT some 15+ years ago. I would never describe luiz as leftwing, which includes the centerleft, but I sure as hell can see that a) he's been agreeing with many of the main up-for-vote political issues the CFC left support. Where he disagrees is important, and I agree with Traitorfish (in the same thread that you harken to) that luiz is a motivated "anti-leftist". (TF also called him a "cosmopolitan liberal" and therefore enemy to the fascist). And I agree with you, gotta stop the fascists early, and stop them how they want to be stopped (for them to accept defeat), which is even sometimes with force. So we gotta stop the fascists before they can activate anti-leftist center-right. Because luiz in the end backs the bad guys in places like Brazil he fears the left so much.

But right now anti is taking up the attention of anti-authoritarians. Preemptive violence is highly authoritarian. While I strongly care about the plight of our migrants in concentration camps, as well as individuals harmed and murdered by the numerous, aligned, but still disorganized rightwing terrorists, I do feel given where I live, what I do, etc. I think I have a higher chance of getting head trauma from some 19 year old antifa person than the bad guys. Unless, that is, I "do nothing" and sit it all out. @cardgame, you want me to stick my nick out for @Cloud_Strife ? Hell yeah I'm down. Cloud's my homey. Ooh but antifa will show up and then if I don't follow their lead, they might mistake me for the enemy, and then attack me. So I better just get out their way. Dammit @cardgame pick a side, mass participation or leftwing terrorists freedom fighters?

Here's my bit. I know MLK was unpopular in his time, no need to wait for popularity to push buttons and disturb some "peace." I know heroic radicals like Malcolm X really helped move things along correctly. And I know after the dust settled team MLK and team "getting in the way moderates" signed the deal. Young white people like to say "today is as racist as ever" but forever etched in my soul was the 70-something leftwing black man who rebuked me strongly when I made such a claim, thinking a) it was true b) that was helpful.

If Cloud is reacting to right wing terrorism as they hope Cloud is (fearing safety (Cloud what's your pronoun?)) then I am 100% okay with Cloud focused on that. But! The same logic applies to domestic terrorism as it does to foreign terrorism. So Cloud, do we preemptively drone strike and support hitting civilians? "No that's wrong that's imperialism and evil." Okay I agree, but we think that in large part thanks to our distance and ability to keep cool about this. My family is very queer. My immediate family. They're not personally that threatened, (though I'll ask) but not everyone has to be for it to matter. I'm fruity enough that if the fascists were as indiscriminate as antifa, they would definitely attack me after seeing my pink iphone (rose gold my as, b*es). Because antifa attacks people based on colors of clothes without you guys policing that. I had gender fluid period, maybe a bit dysphoric, far too short lived to be anything other than cis-privileged however so I don't claim it. My first party I'm promoting in YEARS is a de facto gay party, because that's what is up. But it doesn't matter, I'm not saying this as an LGBTQI insider but a cis-het-white-educated-male-man. What matters is Cloud and other people are already feeling enough of a threat, and there's kids in cages, and money laundering child rapist racist gangsters run the executive branch appointing judges(!!!), and hate crimes/right wing terrorism are on the rise.

So the widespread threat is them, not antifa. This is but one reason I'm not saying "Cloud don't act this way." But I am holding down my values, and what I think is good. And I'm telling you now, while I have a high tolerance for anxious people expressing grievances, which is why I don't ask Cloud to stop or say things like "what you do is only counter productive," I have almost no tolerance for anxious indiscriminating people with fuzzy enemy math dictating what's next. And I have zero tolerance for antifa, a combat group, setting any agenda or telling us how to behave. I'll trust them at rallies I go to if they start apologizing for all the friendly fire they cause, bashing non-fascists with weapons and causing head injuries, and cut it out. Unless we storm the concentration camps, I wouldn't leave that fight if they show up.
 
Idk personally I think the best approach is to troll the right into shooting themselves in the head or perhaps drinking bleach en masse to own the libs. That is the simplest approach logistically, and presents the fewest ethical problems.
 
Seriously though preemptive violence is just sort of self-defeating. If we have the power to have the state purge fascists (and leaving aside the debate about what a fascist is and how it is decided) then, obviously, by the nature of things, we had all the power, and we didn't need to purge anyone.

OTOH if you want to talk about resisting ICE and border patrol what's needed is intelligence, (in the sense of valuable actionable information, not smartness) not a willingness to do violence. Remember how ICE pulled back and didn't do anything this past weekend because Trump blew up their spot beforehand? If we can get some kind of information pipeline so that people's phones are blowing up with "ICE RAID IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD" before they even start that would be a lot better than performative acts of violence against ICE agents or the likes of Andy Ngo. Kind of like how (IIRC anyway) in the Blitz, radar warning with air raid sirens and underground shelters saved more British lives than any other single measure.
 
It's interesting to me that the most popular argument against physical force anti-fascism isis not ethical, that it is wrong, or that it is practical, that it is bad politics, but epistemological: "How do you know who is a fascist?"

I'm not sure I agree with everything Hygro says above, but I appreciate that he's grounding this epistemological pickle in praxis: insufficient rigour in answering the question "who is a fascist?" is not a problem because you might turn out to be Wrong On The Internet, but because it produces bad politics.
 
Rogan's show apparently has a massive audience (going by youtube views). He also had guests like the founder of that Tesla car company and that afro-american astro-physicist (I am not good with names :) ).
Dore's show is considerably smaller, but I watch it more often. I do wish he wouldn't stop the videos he is commenting on every 2 seconds, though.

Elon Musk? He got in trouble with the feds for smoking pot on Joe's show. I agree Dore does overdo the interrupting analysis but that gives me time to absorb the information. Neil Degrasse Tyson... I keep getting him confused with Michael Eric Dyson, or is that Eric Michael Dyson.
 
but epistemological: "How do you know who is a fascist?"

Part of it is also the contingent nature of fascist identification, right? I mean, some people are just psychopaths, some are irredeemable, whatever, but people can be turned away from fascism and against it. If you don't generally hold on to the belief that people can be redeemed, that, in the words of Mos Def, "we gon get it together right?" what kind of leftist are you?

In practice that idea needs to be balanced with the consideration that if the fascists are stuffing you onto the cattle car it doesn't really matter in that moment if they can be redeemed or not.
 
Antifa has expanded beyond just the National Socialists or Fascists, because in the US, they're a pathetic few. (Unlike in Europe where groups have thousands of members with youth and paramilitary wings).

Do Western Chauvinists fall under purview? The PBs started some **** in NYC and elsewhere. White Supremacists? Of course. Ethno-Nationalists - related to that. National Conservatives? Ehhh, not so much, that becomes grandmaw and grandpaw; but then also ties into Confederate Statues and Revisionism and MAGA hats.

My stance has always, and still is, organised and resilient self-defense. Let the Fash march around and start attacking first. Is it risky? Does Antifa 'lose' at times? Sure. But we have 66 pages of people going on and off about how it's a PR issue, and I think it's better for the Fashs to show off their numbers and strike and beat that down than trying anything pre-emptive - but that's just a personal view I try to share with, and cannot impose, on any other Antifa. While at times it seems society is on the edge, it's more of a gradient with a slim line at each end of radicals and those-willing-to-do-much-of-a-damn, and we can go about our daily lives seeing little more than MAGA hats or Black Bloc bike couriers. The Fash must be opposed, but when they start first - from the election box to the streets.

The thing is, of course, by nature, Antifa is a disorganized beast composed of sets and cells of friends and ad-hoc groups of anonymous people. The state has forced it to be so; so trying to enforce any discipline or control over Antifa relies on singular charisma and a culture everyone draws from - and that's it. Even OWS had more of a structure at times as self-proclaimed Anarchists wrangled the General Assembly for their own ends - and that just got them on police lists.
 
Joe Rogan interviews all sorts of people and Alex Jones is his friend, so Rogan gets labeled alt-right and he'd be silenced even though he describes himself as left/liberal. Hey, Rogan gave Ngo a platform to speak for over an hour, Joe must be at least fascist-adjacent. Rogan also lets people with left wing ideologies on his show, but I dont see the left or the right making a fuss about it. That tells me something about the left and the right, neither may believe in free speech but its the left that takes to the streets to make sure the other 'side' is silenced.
You ever read the comments? Definitely the right start whining when someone left-leaning is interviewed.

I would certainly call Rogan fash-adjacent, infact he goes far as to monetize it.
Lol if that's you're definitely the whole media is fash-adjacent cuz they're raking in billions off of Trump news.

The fact that most people are afraid to even speak to someone across the aisle is part of the problem here. Not that there is any excuse to have Alex Jones on the show but everyone is entitled to a few nutball friends (although why he'd want to have a conservation with this guy for hours is beyond me).
 
Joe's brain has been fried by DMT or something, that's my theory. I'm giving him all the benefit of the doubt but there's a pattern to his show, a pattern in his audience, and at best he's a useful idiot. It would be one thing to have these people on your show to do interviews but he just lets them talk and doesn't challenge their bull.
 
Somebody from CNN is being accused of promoting the Antifa group called home by the guy who attacked the detention center in Washington state. The CNN contributor/reporter interviewed a woman from the group, approvingly checked out her weapons, then urged people to support the good guys. Andy Ngo saw the same man who got killed in Tacoma in the CNN trailer advertising the episode.

Aint guilt by association fun?
 
Joe's brain has been fried by DMT or something, that's my theory. I'm giving him all the benefit of the doubt but there's a pattern to his show, a pattern in his audience, and at best he's a useful idiot. It would be one thing to have these people on your show to do interviews but he just lets them talk and doesn't challenge their bull.
He's smart and just hangs out with people and wants them to say what they're good at saying. I really appreciate this. I appreciate other things about the show as well. I find it a really nice balance because mostly I'm seeing people either being described by others or seeing them in less favorable contexts, which helps in its own way. But I really just want to know what someone is like/what they say when they hang out with a professional chiller for few hours.

I learned a lot about Ben Shapiro that way. He has a huge stick up his butt, but he's also a paleoconversative of the new era. (Gotta stop the fascists before they activate him.)

Rogan won't join the fascists, obviously, but he will react to things that leftwingers care less about.
 
Last edited:
Weren't there like... 2 or 3 pages of whining about misgendering this person by referring to them as male (despite lmaus also doing that in the first post on the subject), and now there's a manifesto containing the phrase "I'm a man". So what was all that about?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom