Blame on both sides

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't know who said that. I said "happily accept".

Yes. Thinking violence to suppress speech is not a good thing is different to happily accepting a Nazi march.

Also, no labelling is necessary . There were people in that demonstratation wearing nazi arm bands and waving nazi flags.[/QUOTE]

And many more who weren't. And many in other cases at other events that have been falsely labelled as such. That is my point.
 
Incidentally, I am now done with this thread. It is not a good use of my time and achieves little as I don't think many honestly are open to debate.
 
I don't think that the anti-fascists have ever self-identified as being tolerant. They're not liberals and consider the word liberal to be just as much as a slur as anyone on the right.

Very true they have not self-identied as being tolerant, i was just brushing with the left brush. They are certainly not liberal and think that people with a classical liberal views to be right wing, when they are not.
 
Incidentally, I am now done with this thread. It is not a good use of my time and achieves little as I don't think many honestly are open to debate.

Fair enough that you have enough of this thread and i can see why. But one of the issues as you have pointed out is that neither of the far sides are willing to debate, it there way or the highway.
 
Such a difficult topic to discuss. Trumps remarks are as void of nuance as they've always been. If the man could communicate like an adult, then he may almost have a few valid points. As it stands, he just comes across as a petulant little boy trying to keep his friends on side.

I do find myself leaning more to defending the 'left' side here though. I haven't had the time to read extensively on the subject yet so please point out any factual floors here, but it seems the majority of the 'left' protestors where really just there to provide a counter demonstration against the 'right'. I find it VERY difficult to side with the people who actively encourage hate speech and knowingly align themselves with Nazi and KKK sympathisers.

I'm not defending the actions of far left here either. They're proving themselves to be equally as vile in there demonstrations as the far right. But as a liberal myself, I will always be slightly bias against the side that proves themselves to be the most bigoted.
 
Yes. Thinking violence to suppress speech is not a good thing is different to happily accepting a Nazi march.

So do you begrudgingly accept it then? Or are you indifferent about it?

Do you think it is not a problem (people aligning themselves with nazi ideologies and proudly parading around with nazi symbols and flags)?
 
The nazis and other right wing protestors had a permit for their protest

True.

had to get through a larger group of antifa and counter protestors, various scuffles/mace incidents... both sides armed with shields/bats etc.. and using them.

Well... sorta. The white supremacists ignored the agreed path to their protest, and started pouring in from all sides, deliberately confronting the counter-protesters.

The whole point of the antifa presence was to try and forcibly disrupt the protest that had a federal court order allowing it to go ahead

True. Incidentally, does anyone know how many Antifa member were actually present? I haven't seen any footage that actually shows people who identify as Antifa.

the local police and the mayor didn't want it to go ahead

For obvious reasons. But they still granted the permit.

and unsurprisingly the local police didn't do a whole lot to separate both sides

False. 'Charlottesville Police chief defendes officers, police response at violent rally.'

- a state of emergency was then called forcing the previously permitted protest to disperse

BECAUSE OF THE VIOLENCE IT HAD SPARKED.

of course then there was more violence.

Of course.
 
State control of business

That's economic.

central party, necessity of revolution.

Communism says nothing about a central party. Marx believed revolution was necessary for a transition to communism, because he lived in a backward feudal state called Russia, which today is a backward oligarchy. He had virtually no experience with democracy, or all the other benefits we enjoy in the civilised West. Marx was just some random Russian peasant with a chip on his shoulder about the distribution of wealth.

Communism is a political ideology of how to control a country.

No. Communism is primarily an economic model intended to shape society into a more equitable one by reshaping the balance between workers and employers, and restructuring the means of supply and demand. It does have political and social elements, but it is primarily about economics.

Communism doesn't work because it's idealistic, impractical, and based on hopelessly outdated 19th century conceptions of society, economics, and government.

You just go to No True Scotsman as a reflex. You've already had Left Wing totalitarian regimes listed out for you. Pretty large and destructive ones.

No, the regimes you've listed were a blend of right wing and left wing elements, with right wing ideology prevailing in their politics and left wing ideology prevailing in their economics.

Have communist regimes been responsible for holocausts? Yes, absolutely. Were those regimes purely communist? No, absolutely not.
 
The footage of him at the rally doesn't show an assault rifle as far as I can see - can you show otherwise? He's just filmed showing them off in his hotel room.

I'm going to ask you again: are you claiming he did not bring those firearms to the march?
 
Many of the more extreme alt-left activists are only too happy to oppress anyone with a different opinion to themselves and incriminate reason often while hiding behind the moral high ground or using it to try and shut down differing views, etc. while trying to impose arbitrary restrictions or redefine what is normal in pursuit of "social justice" which just as much applies to your post.

It seems as though you're sort of skirting around the edges of what's actually happening here.

If you have a society, where it's apparently legitimate to obtain a permit - that allows people to openly call for the mass killing of black people and jews - as the KKK and nazis were doing, according to their so called '1st amendment rights' under the guise of freedom of speech, what sort of response do you expect from people? For them to stand by obediently, as the calls for death and killing of blacks and jews ring out? for not a single rock to be thrown or punch to be thrown?

I also don't think this is freedom of speech at all, it's freedom of speech being hijacked and used to legally incite racist killing, which might be allowed under 1st amendment rights, but that doesn't mean people should stand by and accept it.
 
Here's part of a report from the local Jewish community:

On Saturday morning, I stood outside our synagogue with the armed security guard we hired after the police department refused to provide us with an officer during morning services. (Even the police department’s limited promise of an observer near our building was not kept — and note, we did not ask for protection of our property, only our people as they worshipped).

Forty congregants were inside. Here’s what I witnessed during that time.

For half an hour, three men dressed in fatigues and armed with semi-automatic rifles stood across the street from the temple. Had they tried to enter, I don’t know what I could have done to stop them, but I couldn’t take my eyes off them, either. Perhaps the presence of our armed guard deterred them. Perhaps their presence was just a coincidence, and I’m paranoid. I don’t know.

Several times, parades of Nazis passed our building, shouting, “There's the synagogue!” followed by chants of “Seig Heil” and other anti-Semitic language. Some carried flags with swastikas and other Nazi symbols.

A guy in a white polo shirt walked by the synagogue a few times, arousing suspicion. Was he casing the building, or trying to build up courage to commit a crime? We didn’t know. Later, I noticed that the man accused in the automobile terror attack wore the same polo shirt as the man who kept walking by our synagogue; apparently it’s the uniform of a white supremacist group. Even now, that gives me a chill.

When services ended, my heart broke as I advised congregants that it would be safer to leave the temple through the back entrance rather than through the front, and to please go in groups.

This is 2017 in the United States of America.
 
Snip

I also don't think this is freedom of speech at all, it's freedom of speech being hijacked and used to legally incite racist killing, which might be allowed under 1st amendment rights, but that doesn't mean people should stand by and accept it.

Indeed. I think people confuse "freedom of speech" with "freedom to speak without any consequence".
 
Here's part of a report from the local Jewish community:

Someone a few pages back linked a video showing some of the nazis in what appeared to be their hotel rooms, openly talking to a VICE reporter, whilst sorting out assault rifles, pistols, vests, knifes...

totally insane.
 
Indeed. I think people confuse "freedom of speech" with "freedom to speak without any consequence".

And also, I forgot to add - what sort of general environment will it create, if you allow this sort of thing to go on, for these groups to exist for years and decades, for their views to be aired. You're ultimately going to end up with a very serious and violent problem, where if the government won't stop them - ordinary people will step in and try, as they probably should in my opinion. Not because the "ordinary people" or "alt-left" or whatever alias you assign them, are bloodthirsty maniacs who are just as bad, but because they think it's totally wrong for these nazi/kkk groups to legally voice their calls for mass racial killing, under the guise of 1st amendment rights/freedom of speech.

It seems as though freedom of speech at any cost, ultimately ends up with "freedom to preach murder racism and hatred" which is going to end in tears.
 
What are people's thoughts on this? is there truly blame on both sides - if so why?

Yes.

Because antifa has been blanket attacking trump supports / anyone who disagrees for a long time. This case it was some neo nazis but i'm also willing to bet there were just some normal people there too. Violence in that form is NOT ok. Attacking people for supporting their president lol?

They're derranged morons who need to be shut down too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom