• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Domestic Terrorism (1 Viewer)

Loulit01

Leftist Filth
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
19,008
Reaction score
26,400
Location
Location, Location
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Five part series: Extremism in America explores the roots and rise of domestic terrorism. The Biden Administration has issued the first national strategy to combat domestic terrorism, warning that domestic extremists pose the most significant threat to the country. But for decades, there have been warning signs that far-right extremist beliefs were spreading and followers were growing dangerous


Antifa is not the problem.
 
Five part series: Extremism in America explores the roots and rise of domestic terrorism. The Biden Administration has issued the first national strategy to combat domestic terrorism, warning that domestic extremists pose the most significant threat to the country. But for decades, there have been warning signs that far-right extremist beliefs were spreading and followers were growing dangerous


Antifa is not the problem.

We'd have to define 'the' problem, firstly.

But, I think it's fair to say Antifa is 'a' problem!
 
We'd have to define 'the' problem, firstly.

But, I think it's fair to say Antifa is 'a' problem!
"The" problem is the rise in domestic terrorism. Note: it's the thread title.

To whom is Antifa a problem?
 
We'd have to define 'the' problem, firstly.

But, I think it's fair to say Antifa is 'a' problem!
You capitalize antifa like it's an organization. Where can I get in touch with them? Antifa is an idea, not a thing.
 
"The" problem is the rise in domestic terrorism. Note: it's the thread title.

To whom is Antifa a problem?

Ah, maybe we're on to a subject easier for us to discuss! ;)

Fair enough, in defining "domestic terrorism" as 'the' problem being discussed.

But the OP brought Antifa into the conversation, and they often use violent tactics themselves, including against government structures, government personnel (cops), and personal individuals & property.

So I believe Antifa is a problem too, and don't believe they should be brought-in as what appears to be some type of foil to the other groups defined in the OP.
 
You capitalize antifa like it's an organization. Where can I get in touch with them? Antifa is an idea, not a thing.

I used the same nomenclature the OP did.

I think we're all pretty familiar with the 'dressed in black' punks. I'd hope you decry their actions, as I do.
 
Five part series: Extremism in America explores the roots and rise of domestic terrorism. The Biden Administration has issued the first national strategy to combat domestic terrorism, warning that domestic extremists pose the most significant threat to the country. But for decades, there have been warning signs that far-right extremist beliefs were spreading and followers were growing dangerous


Antifa is not the problem.

So ... good, a Democratic president has decided Republicans are domestic terrorists.
 
Five part series: Extremism in America explores the roots and rise of domestic terrorism. The Biden Administration has issued the first national strategy to combat domestic terrorism, warning that domestic extremists pose the most significant threat to the country. But for decades, there have been warning signs that far-right extremist beliefs were spreading and followers were growing dangerous


Antifa is not the problem.
Is that still Americas #1 threat?

Asking for a friend.
 
We'd have to define 'the' problem, firstly.

But, I think it's fair to say Antifa is 'a' problem!
Really? You think "antifa" poses even "a" problem? Ok.

Personally, I haven't seen much evidence of that. Have you?

I'd say that, if anything, "antifa" qualifies as "a problem" in the fight against domestic terrorism in the same way that a penny is part of a dollar. It hardly merits mentioning.

Clearly, "the" problem in domestic terrorism in this country, by and large, is rightwing, white-nationalist/white-supremacist/anti-government violence. Not "antifa". Not "Islamic extremists". Not eco-terrorists. etc. etc.
 
We'd have to define 'the' problem, firstly.

But, I think it's fair to say Antifa is 'a' problem!

One that is so amorphous as to not well classify as a problem. From what I gather, it's not some kind of official organization. Anyone can call themselves ANTIFA, dress up in black, and loot/vandalize/attack. It's only an organization to the extent there are some local groups that call themselves the local ANTIFA, with loose contact with others who call themselves ANTIFA.

That people loosely band together to be assholes with chips on their shoulder, some calling themselves anarchist, some calling themselves all sorts of other things, is indeed a problem. But, it's not quite as big of one, both in terms of severity of violence and in terms of unity of idea. I'm not sure what we'd target to dissuade people from it.

White supremacy seems to be far more aligned in motivation, beliefs, etc.
 
The problem seems to be people with guns. When they own guns they think it's okay to use them in defense of their lives and property.
 
Really? You think "antifa" poses even "a" problem? Ok.

Yes. Violence is always a problem.

Personally, I haven't seen much evidence of that. Have you?

Well, there's items such as this below:




I'd say that, if anything, "antifa" qualifies as "a problem" in the fight against domestic terrorism in the same way that a penny is part of a dollar. It hardly merits mentioning

I never claimed "equality".

I claimed, 'a problem'.

Clearly, "the" problem in domestic terrorism in this country, by and large, is rightwing, white-nationalist/white-supremacist/anti-government violence. Not "antifa". Not "Islamic extremists". Not eco-terrorists. etc. etc.

Perhaps.

But the OP threw his 'Antifa is not the problem' statement into his OP as an apparent 'foil' of some sort, while I do not believe violence should be absolved.
 
One that is so amorphous as to not well classify as a problem. From what I gather, it's not some kind of official organization. Anyone can call themselves ANTIFA, dress up in black, and loot/vandalize/attack. It's only an organization to the extent there are some local groups that call themselves the local ANTIFA, with loose contact with others who call themselves ANTIFA.

I might agree.

In fact, I may start using the term, 'antifa-adherents'.

But we know who they are; the punks in black with hoods & masks, and weapons & shields.

I earlier posted the video below, as an example:




That people loosely band together to be assholes with chips on their shoulder, some calling themselves anarchist, some calling themselves all sorts of other things, is indeed a problem. But, it's not quite as big of one, both in terms of severity of violence and in terms of unity of idea. I'm not sure what we'd target to dissuade people from it.

I never claimed 'equality'

I'm simply rebutting the OP's claim that 'Antifa is not the problem'.

Well, they 'are' a problem.

White supremacy seems to be far more aligned in motivation, beliefs, etc.

Perhaps.

But then again, I decry violent BLM protestors & looters - too.

I have little tolerance for violent individuals.
 
Perhaps.

But then again, I decry violent BLM protestors & looters - too.

I have little tolerance for violent individuals.

"BLM protestors and & looters" . . .

That suffers from the same problem. If someone stands with a sign saying "Black Lives Matter!" for a bit, then when things pick up slips back to loot a store, is that a BLM protestor or is it someone who held a sign using the slogan, then used the actual protestors as shields while they went to loot stores?

There's some Venn overlap, no doubt. I even saw an article penned on Slate about how some kid stealing shoes was just reparations for slavery and racism.



Point being, the problem seems to me much more about the existence of people willing to hijack a claimed cause. It's the violent crime, looting, and people drawn to them that are the problem. The organizations are hardly organizations. I suppose that to the extent an organization is a problem, ANTIFA is more of one simply by virtue of who happens to be drawn to it.

And I, too, "decry" violent individuals. My posts are just about what does it mean to call "them" "a" problem when the problem actors are in such decentralized organizations. We can contrast white supremacists. They think white people are the master race and everyone else can do something between ****ing off and dying.
 
"BLM protestors and & looters" . . .

That suffers from the same problem. If someone stands with a sign saying "Black Lives Matter!" for a bit, then when things pick up slips back to loot a store, is that a BLM protestor or is it someone who held a sign using the slogan, then used the actual protestors as shields while they went to loot stores?

There's some Venn overlap, no doubt. I even saw an article penned on Slate about how some kid stealing shoes was just reparations for slavery and racism.



Point being, the problem seems to me much more about the existence of people willing to hijack a claimed cause. It's the violent crime, looting, and people drawn to them that are the problem. The organizations are hardly organizations. I suppose that to the extent an organization is a problem, ANTIFA is more of one simply by virtue of who happens to be drawn to it.

These are good points.

I admit, the problem is hard to define.

But when someone comes out dressed in black with antifa-type weapons, shields, and other gear, it's hard not to suspect them of trouble. At the very least, they are trying to intimadate.

And I, too, "decry" violent individuals. My posts are just about what does it mean to call "them" "a" problem when the problem actors are in such decentralized organizations. We can contrast white supremacists. They think white people are the master race and everyone else can do something between ****ing off and dying.

I believe organized White Power groups are likely more organized, leading to the likelihood of their being more dangerous.

But the antifa crowd in my video was fairly organized too, including having hierarchy (according to the reporters on the ground).

But, let's not delude ourselves into believing ideology without hierarchy is without negative consequence. Remember, Al Qaeda is largely ideological, non-hierarchical, and autonomous. Despite that, they pulled-off the worst attack ever accomplished on American soil.

In fact, the Weather Underground became autonomous, as well. Look at the things they did? Decentralized autonomous ideology is still very capable of troublesome actions.
 
DOMESTIC terrorism eh ...........

ALEC, Erik Prince, the GOP, Trump/Bush and associates as well as Jan 6th attendees come to mind.....
 
I used the same nomenclature the OP did.

I think we're all pretty familiar with the 'dressed in black' punks. I'd hope you decry their actions, as I do.
I have black outfits. I judge actions individually, so no I don't decry 'their' actions. Some I would.
 
I have black outfits. I judge actions individually, so no I don't decry 'their' actions. Some I would.

So does Johnny Cash.

But, do you don a helmut, club, facemask, and inject yourself into public demonstrations in a threatening 7 violent manner?

Context matters, mrjurrs.

How would you judge these fine lads, below?

90
 
So does Johnny Cash.

But, do you don a helmut, club, facemask, and inject yourself into public demonstrations in a threatening 7 violent manner?

Context matters, mrjurrs.

How would you judge these fine lads, below?

90
1-Which side are you calling fine lads? The only people I see with helmets, facemasks and clubs are law enforcement.
2-What is the protest for, and what happened to lead to this photo?

So, no I don't automatically defend the police.
 
1-Which side are you calling fine lads? The only people I see with helmets, facemasks and clubs are law enforcement.
2-What is the protest for, and what happened to lead to this photo?

So, no I don't automatically defend the police.

I posted that pic as an example of the type of dress you're defending.

Are you claiming these punks in the picture in my post above, are not dressed for trouble? Because they surely were!

The guys you are defending, while you concurrently seem to be demeaning the cops, were indicted for various acts of violence, and collectively charged with conspiracy. At least 11 individuals charged, each one committing an act of violence or conspiring to commit violence.

Here's what these fine boys did on their Sunday, below, in case you're interested:

Their alleged crimes include assault with a deadly weapon other than a firearm, assault likely to produce great bodily injury, animal cruelty, vandalism and the use of tear gas not for self-defense.

 
I posted that pic as an example of the type of dress you're defending.

Are you claiming these punks in the picture in my post above, are not dressed for trouble? Because they surely were!

The guys you are defending, while you concurrently seem to be demeaning the cops, were indicted for various acts of violence, and collectively charged with conspiracy. At least 11 individuals charged, each one committing an act of violence or conspiring to commit violence.

Here's what these fine boys did on their Sunday, below, in case you're interested:



Which punks are you referring to? Only one side has everyone armed.

You mean dressing for conflict? Which side isn't?

How do you know that some of those cops shouldn't have been indicted as well? Do you deny the history of armed leo's beating protesters beyond their threat level?

Here's a quote from your source that puts lie to the headline, my bold added
"When San Diego prosecutors charged a group of individuals this week with conspiracy to commit the crime of riot, it was believed by experts who study domestic extremism to be the first time nationwide that a conspiracy charge has been used specifically to prosecute alleged anti-fascists, or “antifa supporters” as prosecutors described them."
 
Yes. Violence is always a problem.
Agreed.

I just think you are misinterpreting the OP.

Well, there's items such as this below:


First I've heard of this "Black Bloc" movement/group. They're antigovernment and generally far-left, but apparently not related to Antifa.

Thanks.


I never claimed "equality".
Yes. I didn't claim you did, and certainly didn't intend to imply that.

I claimed, 'a problem'.
That's what you said previously, to which I agreed. Again, I agree that "antifa" can be called "a problem" (in the sense that a penny is part of a dollar), but that seems like a misreading of the message of the OP, which said that antifa is not THE problem.

Right wing extremists have been directly implicated in about 330 murders/killings over the last 25 years.

Antifa, to my knowledge, has been directly implicated in exactly ONE murder over the last quarter century (i.e. last July).

That's how I interpreted the OP.


Not "perhaps". Absolutely. By any objective measure, right wing extremism is about 75-80% of all acts of domestic violence. Islamic extremism is responsible for about 15-20% of the remainder, and "far-left" terrorism (i.e. eco-terrorists, antifa, etc.) accounts for less than 5% (combined).


But the OP threw his 'Antifa is not the problem' statement into his OP as an apparent 'foil' of some sort, while I do not believe violence should be absolved.
I didn't take it that way at all. If he'd said "Antifa is not A problem"....I'd agree with you. He said Antifa is not THE problem, which implies (to me) that the vast majority of domestic terrorism in this country comes from the far-right (i.e. white nationalist types, Christian Identity types, Anti-abortion types, Anti-government/Sovereign Citizen types, etc.).

We're just debating semantics, at this point. I understand your argument. Appreciate the discourse.
 
Which punks are you referring to? Only one side has everyone armed.

You're beyond, here. Of course the cops are armed; They're dealing with criminals.

You mean dressing for conflict? Which side isn't?

You're advocating armed conflict against the cops?


How do you know that some of those cops shouldn't have been indicted as well? Do you deny the history of armed leo's beating protesters beyond their threat level?

Here's a quote from your source that puts lie to the headline, my bold added
"When San Diego prosecutors charged a group of individuals this week with conspiracy to commit the crime of riot, it was believed by experts who study domestic extremism to be the first time nationwide that a conspiracy charge has been used specifically to prosecute alleged anti-fascists, or “antifa supporters” as prosecutors described them."

Agreed.

I just think you are misinterpreting the OP.


First I've heard of this "Black Bloc" movement/group. They're antigovernment and generally far-left, but apparently not related to Antifa.

Thanks.



Yes. I didn't claim you did, and certainly didn't intend to imply that.


That's what you said previously, to which I agreed. Again, I agree that "antifa" can be called "a problem" (in the sense that a penny is part of a dollar), but that seems like a misreading of the message of the OP, which said that antifa is not THE problem.

Right wing extremists have been directly implicated in about 330 murders/killings over the last 25 years.

Antifa, to my knowledge, has been directly implicated in exactly ONE murder over the last quarter century (i.e. last July).

That's how I interpreted the OP.



Not "perhaps". Absolutely. By any objective measure, right wing extremism is about 75-80% of all acts of domestic violence. Islamic extremism is responsible for about 15-20% of the remainder, and "far-left" terrorism (i.e. eco-terrorists, antifa, etc.) accounts for less than 5% (combined).



I didn't take it that way at all. If he'd said "Antifa is not A problem"....I'd agree with you. He said Antifa is not THE problem, which implies (to me) that the vast majority of domestic terrorism in this country comes from the far-right (i.e. white nationalist types, Christian Identity types, Anti-abortion types, Anti-government/Sovereign Citizen types, etc.).

We're just debating semantics, at this point. I understand your argument. Appreciate the discourse.

Agreed to the bolded. And, ditto!
 
You're beyond, here. Of course the cops are armed; They're dealing with criminals.



You're advocating armed conflict against the cops?






Agreed to the bolded. And, ditto!
At what point did the protesters become criminals? Were the police armed that way at the beginning? If we have learned anything in the last three years it is that all police do not deserve our unqualified support.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom