- Joined
- Mar 30, 2021
- Messages
- 17,145
- Reaction score
- 23,003
- Location
- Alone in the Pale Moonlight
- 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
Extremism In America
Exploring Hate and Retro Report examines 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...www.thirteen.org
Antifa is not the problem.
"The" problem is the rise in domestic terrorism. Note: it's the thread title.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.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?
You capitalize antifa like it's an organization. Where can I get in touch with them? Antifa is an idea, not a thing.
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
Extremism In America
Exploring Hate and Retro Report examines 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...www.thirteen.org
Antifa is not the problem.
Is that still Americas #1 threat?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
Extremism In America
Exploring Hate and Retro Report examines 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...www.thirteen.org
Antifa is not the problem.
Really? You think "antifa" poses even "a" problem? Ok.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!
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.
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.
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.
I have black outfits. I judge actions individually, so no I don't decry 'their' actions. Some I would.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.
1-Which side are you calling fine lads? The only people I see with helmets, facemasks and clubs are law enforcement.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?
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.
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.
Which punks are you referring to? Only one side has everyone armed.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:
Experts say San Diego case likely first to use conspiracy charges against antifa
Case against anti-fascists stemming from counterprotest of Jan. 9 'Patriot March' in Pacific Beach appears to be first alleging 'Antifa' conspiracywww.sandiegouniontribune.com
Agreed.Yes. Violence is always a problem.
First I've heard of this "Black Bloc" movement/group. They're antigovernment and generally far-left, but apparently not related to Antifa.Well, there's items such as this below:
Yes. I didn't claim you did, and certainly didn't intend to imply that.I never claimed "equality".
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.I claimed, 'a problem'.
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).Perhaps.
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.).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.
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."
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.
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.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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?