Punching Nazis

[Synobun]

Guys, don't get on bandwagons of violence.

Spoken like a true Nazi sympathizer.

 

[Hygro]

They were the ultimate bandwagon of violence.

 

[Flying Pig]

Moderator Action: Troll sent back under the bridge, where it belongs.

 

[jackelgull]

Martin Luther King was successful because he offered a contrast to the "race war" that the white people were terrified of, and that seemed to be offered up any day by Malcolm X. So saying "look how great passive resistance is" as if it happened in a vacuum is disingenuous at best and open fraud at worst.

Gandhi was facing an entirely different issue that has no applicability to any current situation that I can think of off the top of my head.

Gandhi was also not really what drove the British out of India. He was important for building a national conciousness and ensuring that Indians thought of themselves as Indians - but the British realized they lost India when they could no longer count on the Indian Army to act as their colonial police. The costs of garrisoning a non native Indian force to keep control of India was untenable, so the British decided to wash their hands of India rather than facing the embarrassment of losing it.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Gandhi was also not really what drove the British out of India. He was important for building a national conciousness and ensuring that Indians thought of themselves as Indians - but the British realized they lost India when they could no longer count on the Indian Army to act as their colonial police. The costs of garrisoning a non native Indian force to keep control of India was untenable, so the British decided to wash their hands of India rather than facing the embarrassment of losing it.

Which is what makes it an entirely different issue that has no applicability to any current situation that I can think of off the top of my head...or even in the deeper regions of my head.

 

[Traitorfish]

The problem with all the comments to the effect of "punching Nazis could have prevented them from reaching power" is that there were lots of left-wing people punching Nazis in street battles in the years before their seizure of power. It didn't help, because the Nazis were better at violence than the Communists and they were clearly preferred over them by the people with power in late Weimar Germany.

The liberal policy of refusing to punch Nazis didn't prevent their rise to power, either. At least the Reds put up a fight.

Nazis are human beings

Well that's plainly untrue.

 

[Synobun]

Well that's plainly untrue.

Whatever helps you justify it, I guess.

 

[Traitorfish]

Whatever helps you justify it, I guess.

Word of advice, pal, you abandoned the moral high ground the moment you appealed to the community humanity of the murdered Jew and the SS trooper who killed him. Don't imagine that you can fool us with a condescending tone.

 

[Hygro]

Nazis are bad people. They are people. Some of them were good people who became bad people. If they weren't people they would be a lot less dangerous.

 

[Berzerker]

I can point you to whatever number of trials that have failed to reflect the actual facts as you need to get over the idea that "since it was determined at trial it is what really happened."

As to "were you there, that was easy"...I'm not pretending to have knowledge of what happened thousands of miles from where I was. That would be you.

So you have no knowledge or you do? What is your gripe based on if you're not claiming to know what happened? That was a silly criticism, my knowledge came from the same place yours did - the trial. But for some reason you think I had to be there, not you, or Lexicus who said Martin was killed for walking.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Word of advice, pal, you abandoned the moral high ground the moment you appealed to the community humanity of the murdered Jew and the SS trooper who killed him. Don't imagine that you can fool us with a condescending tone.

I'm never fooled by a condescending tone. The person using it is invariably being condescending, not trying to fool anyone. Being condescending, when I note myself doing it, I know justifies any punches in the face I might be catching.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So you have no knowledge or you do? What is your gripe based on if you're not claiming to know what happened? That was a silly criticism, my knowledge came from the same place yours did - the trial. But for some reason you think I had to be there, not you, or Lexicus who said Martin was killed for walking.

I have no knowledge, and claimed none. You on the other hand are staking your own word in the matter retroactively on the very dubious source of "well the trial found this," and did so as if your word brooked no argument.

 

[Synobun]

Word of advice, pal, you abandoned the moral high ground the moment you appealed to the community humanity of the murdered Jew and the SS trooper who killed him. Don't imagine that you can fool us with a condescending tone.

I'm sorry. I won't try to fool you again with the claim that both a Nazi and a Jew are human beings. You're far too intelligent for me to pull a trick like that on you.

 

[Hygro]

There's a practical side to this discussion. I would have never known who Richard Spencer was had there not been a big celebration that he was twice punched. Spencer is a fringy cringy media figure whose entire power comes from attention. The more you and I devote attention to him, the bigger sway he has over others.

There are an untold number of hateful nuts trying to get their message out. Most of them serve to remind us that being a good person with good beliefs is not a given, nor should be a surprise. But most of them are irrelevant and forgotten and thus have no platform for their heinous ways. They are media, talkers, hoping to gain validation and recognition. Why would we give them what they want? Wouldn't it be better to let them suffer until either they petrify as ornery old men or leave their niche behind for the warmer values of the mainstream?

 

[aelf]

I don't think many people who remember the actual Nazi regime and the Holocaust would actually advocate not resisting Nazis with any means possible.

Some Jews living in Europe pre-Nazi government days didn't survive because they refused to punch Nazi thugs around their neighbourhoods. I'm sure some keyboard intellectual would smugly shake their finger at Imi Litchenfield, but I don't think he would have had time for that kind of high-minded delusional argument.

 

[Hygro]

Giving Nazis a platform isn't resisting them. Leaving them out in the cold is resisting them.

Contrast with Berkeley protest "black bloc." Alt-right Milo Y is a growing, influential, increasingly mainstream figure. He's not a Nazi but if he had to play the part, I would expect him to. Milo already has a large platform, and talent at turning anything into positive attention his way. The militant wing of protest had the effect of canceling his speech, one he could use to cause specific harm to specific students. The militant wing did not meaningfully increase his long term brand, but they did stop him from talking to Berkeley. Success, at least on that dimension. Richard Spencer is not Milo. Spencer would have stayed anonymous and fringe.

The practical issue here is very important: if punching them increases their power, you aren't exercising your "any means necessary."

 

[aelf]

So the thread is really about punching Nazis in quite specific situations where they can be safely avoided, which only serves to confuse people with reasonable ideas on when it's acceptable to resist violently?

 

[Hygro]

The thread is about "punching nazis" which has different meanings. The most current is the meme of punch nazis, which has so far meant punch Richard Spencer and anyone on his team, and celebrate that. None of us are going to time travel, but certainly the history of England's violent treatment of fascists should be considered, but considered carefully and with care to our current historical moment.

 

[aelf]

Yeah, well, the problem is it's hard to say for sure when it would've been very important to punch Nazis. By the time you begrudgingly admit that Nazis should be violently resisted, it might be too late. We have the historical precedence to know that Nazis are evil and dangerous, and that by the time it comes to all out street battles it was difficult to stop them.

I don't know if punching Richard Spencer now is the correct thing to do, but I suspect discussing it is an academic exercise. Broadly, I think punching Nazis is acceptable, but I don't think the act of punching someone lends itself well to intellectual or cost/benefit analysis anyway.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

If it hadn't been Richard Spencer it would have been some other troll. Just like MIlo, they are all out there pushing until they get the response that gets them a headline on Breitbart. Saying "don't punch him, don't give him the headline" is at best a delaying tactic.