Blame on both sides
- Thread starter Felon
- Start date
- Status
Wait, you think the entire far right community wants to exterminate all blacks and Jews? Media gone and done a good number on you.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,013
No, I think all the KKK and Nazi members there want to...
I'm sure there are a tiny minority of racist black people who are part of BLM
But they weren't set up to kill white people, nor will you find anything on their website about black people being the supreme race. They were predominantly formed because of extrajudicial killing of black people by police which has been going on for years.
That's a bit of a non statement. That's like me saying "woah there, the black panthers don't like white people!!!11". ...Really? What's your point?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,013
My point is the Tosno specifically said the AntiFa and BLM are "far worse, far more evil, far MORE fascist" and more violent than actual Nazis and KKK members.
Which is a blatant lie.
Which is a blatant lie.
Yeah he's wrong. They can all be as bad as one another. There is no light and dark side here,it's not the movies
Meanwhile, a hopelessly triggered white supremacist sobs like a child because he thinks he's the victim:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.......*breathe*......HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....
The point is black supremacism isn't ingrained in BLM or antifa in the same way. That's the bit that should be mind numbingly obvious.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,013
Heh, I didn't think that bit needed re-stating, it's pretty explicit in my post!
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,473
To be fair to president Trump he is attempting to defend the 1st ammendment. Free speech is free speech. If you condone the idea of free speech you cant then pick and choose what to censor just because something is repulsive or you disagree with it. Its sheer hypocrisy.
Both sides are to blame for the violence. Whether there is a basis for moral eqivalence or not, the fact is that the perpetrarors of violence are wrong, whatever side they are on.
Punch a nazi is a viral meme. People find this is acceptable just because they feel nazis are below their own moral and social standing? Really? So beating someone up is OK if you dont agree with them (which is the fundamental logic on show here)?
Folks need to get a grip. You dont fight a belief system with punches and bats.
Both sides are to blame for the violence. Whether there is a basis for moral eqivalence or not, the fact is that the perpetrarors of violence are wrong, whatever side they are on.
Punch a nazi is a viral meme. People find this is acceptable just because they feel nazis are below their own moral and social standing? Really? So beating someone up is OK if you dont agree with them (which is the fundamental logic on show here)?
Folks need to get a grip. You dont fight a belief system with punches and bats.
Trump isn't trying to defend anything but his meal ticket. He's way out of his depth on all counts, this included.
"Not in the same way" . So you believe, in some way, it is?
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,473
Fair comment but at least he is trying to make it clear that there is blame on both sides. It isnt just a simple case of "nazis are bad mmmkay"
No, it's not an absolute
Yes you can, that's why we have hate speech laws
So our hate speech laws are hypocritical?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,013
But when you go to counter protest, and the right wing rally-goers renege on their agreement with the police, and purposefully go down a route that puts them in direct contact with you?
Is that both sides fault or is that purposefully antagonistic of one group?
I think some nasty folk will latch onto it, but it's not part of the raison d'etre in the same way it is for the other side.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,473
Fundamentally yes. Because it is censorship and therefore diametrically opposed to the entire idea of 'free' speech.
Its free speech unless we decide we dont like what you are saying, then we will lock you up. Its the same thought process as you find in dictatorships.
Are we so insecure in our motal and social superiority that we have to lock people up for misguided beliefs?
I believe you dont effectively challenge ideas through censorship but through debate. If you forcefully censor you add more gravitas to ideas than they rightfully deserve.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,473
Still no excuse for violence and the police should have seen what was happening and turned them around officially before violence broke out.
But yes - i agree it was somewhat antagonistic.
Three leaders of BLM are currently being sued by a Baton Rouge officer for inciting hatred that caused the deaths and injuries by shootings at Dallas and Baton Rouge. Granted, that whole issue is about hatred towards the police force in particular but if successful in prosecution, do you think your viewpoint will change?
- Status