It's probably a religion thing, the anarchy aspect and lack of repect for order and leadership etc.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
2 US Senators bring forth a resolution to call ANTIFA 'domestic terrorists '
- Thread starter Mr. X
- Start date
It's probably a religion thing, the anarchy aspect and lack of repect for order and leadership etc.
Antifa is basically an immune system response in society. No one likes having a "fever" or "imflammation" but it's telling you something is wrong and it's an emergency reaction that's fighting back the virus that is facism. Maybe cure the facism problem instead of just trying to treat the symptoms that are basically "Antifa are annoying??".
To be fair, you don't need to be religious to have that sort of opinion. Anarchism isn't exactly mainstream in US society.
Forget deaths. Where are the injuries caused by antifa? Andy Ngo wasn't injured, he was inconvenienced. Actually, he got what he wanted and was paid handsomely for it so I wouldn't even give him that much credit.
The flags used to be red both from the 30's throughout the 70s, same as the lifesaver ring around it, to display socialism and communism. Around the 80s the more recent "Antifaschistische Aktion" changed the small flag to black to symbolize autonomic anarchism as an opposition towards fascism and capitalism. Apart from standing strongly against naziism and fascism, the symbol has nothing to do with the Reichsflagge or swastika flag.
Last edited:
Na, you can't believe this. The level of ignorance it would take is astounding.
I know, but i can see why they would be completely threatening to people who aren't fascist in the temporal sense.
Antifa are somewhere at the bottom of my list of things to worry about in 2019.
Just trying to make Dems "defend" Antifa with this bullshit bill. Should just respond with a similar one aimed and right wing neo nazis.
I guess the problem is that even very liberal people are uncomfortable with tactics used by some people in certain cells of Antifa, whereas the Republican base agrees with a lot of the positions of the extreme right and think it's unfair to label hate groups as racist hate groups.
Sucks having principals.
I guess the problem is that even very liberal people are uncomfortable with tactics used by some people in certain cells of Antifa, whereas the Republican base agrees with a lot of the positions of the extreme right and think it's unfair to label hate groups as racist hate groups.
Sucks having principals.
This is the logical conclusion of a 2 party system- you're always going to end up with one side going extremist. It happens everywhere else eventually. The question is whether the rest of society can defeat it or not. The US has some hardcoded advantages and disadvantages for this.
WW2 Partisans were terrorist too if you want to go down this path
Stop batting for fascists
Not sure what those obvious reasons might be. That symbol (which isn't necessarily the anti-fascist symbol, but a common one as it originally represents the German organization that spawned the movement) is really old, like sometime around the second world war old, I think, and was designed by people on the far left. The colours made sense then, and they still do.
Also, fuck anyone supporting this shit mentality displayed by these senators.
Look at the stats regarding deaths, injury, etc... and you immediately see Antifa is nowhere near the threat they're framing it as.
That is all it takes.
Anyone claiming Antifa are terrorists is an incredibly stupid person completely ignorant of reality.
Or they're just desperate far-right subhumans trying to spin this for their potnetial audiences.
That is all it takes.
Anyone claiming Antifa are terrorists is an incredibly stupid person completely ignorant of reality.
Or they're just desperate far-right subhumans trying to spin this for their potnetial audiences.
ANTIFA regularly gets in scuffles and fights with "Proud Boys", so pretending ANTIFA doesn't injure people or doesn't engage in violence is beyond being disingenuous.
You can support punching Nazi's in the face... which people on ERA regularly support and is very open in doing so for good reason. Yet people are bending over backwards to paint ANTIFA as a specifically non-violent organization when there is very clear evidence they engage in violence against the alt-right.
It's ok to admit ANTIFA is an organization that uses violence as a means to an end.
And Andy Ngo got his face bashed in with some fists and some other stuff, guy had open cuts on him and a black eye. Hate him all you want, but he was injured. This type of spin is getting a bit embarrassing.
They are only violent in response and defense to violence.
No proud boys? No violence.
You can do this with every group they stand against.
The concept of antifa is protected by the first amendment. Any crimes perpetrated by people under the self proclaimed banner are already crimes, no additional laws are needed. This is a bill to prevent protesting.
Not really. Like I said, there is video of that dip shit Andy Ngo getting his face smacked around and dosed in pepper spray. Pretending that ANTIFA and Proud Boys aren't looking to fight at this point is kinda like pretending the Dead Rabbits were just defending themselves from Bill the Butcher and only responded when attacked.
And no, this isn't a "both sides" argument. ANTIFA isn't a right wing white supremacists group. Having groups like ANTIFA is important in times when people are empowered to openly display their fascism, but I'm also not going to pretend the group is just "acting in self defense".
Yes, really.
They are ONLY there as a response to these things, that doesn't mean every altercation is justified... but they would not exist if facist groups did not.
It's even more hilarious because the anti-fascist movement in the US is basically anarchists and anti-nationalists. I think when people say "I'm anti-fascist but I don't like antifa" it's because they don't want to associate with anarchists more than anything.
It's just like how the right uses socialism to describe anything political that stands in their way. Climate change? That's socialism. Women's rights? That's socialism too!
Antifa will be any kind of protest that goes agaisnt conservative America, doesn't matter what it's about.
There's no Antifa without fascists tho. it is literally self defense against fascism .
That is not an argument of self defense.
Showing up because Proud Boys show up isn't self defense, that's going to a location because someone you oppose is there. Your literally contradicting yourself. Self defense is if they are already there and Proud Boys start picking fights, what you're describing is ANTIFA being a reactionary force against Proud Boys.
Of course it is.
There is no contradiction, their very existence is self defence.
They would not exist at all if right wing hate groups didn't. They are a natural defense against those things.
You're either not following the comment chain or you're conflating ANTIFA's existence with the argument that ANTIFA doesn't engage in violence and only does so in self defense.
You're wrong, as has been explained.
They only EXIST because they are a defense to far-right hate groups.
*Proud Boys are literal Nazis who espouse fascist viewpoints that will end in the death of countless minorities*
Antifa isn't self defense!
So you're fine with calling Antifa terrorists, but you're not with calling people who have killed more people in America in the past 10 years than Al-Qaeda and ISIS combined? (https://www.typeinvestigations.org/investigation/2017/06/22/home-hate/)
Logic fails to describe this.
No, it's not.
You literally just argued that ANTIFA only responds to violence... while arguing that ANTIFA's existence is in itself rightful self defense.
It's a ridiculous argument that is a snake eating it's tail.
Why can't you guys just be honest. ANTIFA does violent stuff, and it's ok because they are fighting against fucking neo-nazi's.
I'm loud and proud supporting their effort to bash nazi's heads in, even if it's not in self defense. Now I don't support their actual politics, but that's a different issue. They are a useful left wing militarized group that is comfortable in using violence against fascists. Pretty simple stuff.
Yeah, I think you don't really get what Antifa is. It's ok.
This is true, but it's not a very large part of their strategy. Most literature documenting the various movements will attest they are largely non violent in means of protest.
No, I fully understand what ANTIFA is. I simply don't try to dabble in spinning their image when I'm already comfortable supporting a group that openly uses violence against neo-nazi's
Yes it is.
Sorry, but you're completely wrong here.
They only exist as a reaction to facist hate groups, their very existence is a defense against these things.
No one is denying they use violence, but it is violence in DEFENSE of violence.
You seem to be hung up on the idea that peoiple are in denial about their use of violence, but we're not. Their violence as a reaction is fully justified, it would not exist without far-right hate groups attempting to inflict violence on people for simply existing.
People in this thread are trying to argue that ANTIFA doesn't engage in violence and only does so in self defense.
The same people who are arguing that self defense is the simple state of ANTIFA existing.
That's not how self defense works, especially in the topic of "is ANTIFA a violent organization"
So are you trying to make a moral argument to self defense, or trying to defend ANTIFA from a legal standpoint of self defense?
No, American socialists have been treated like second class citizens for quite a long time. American establishment hate the left wing far more then they hate the right wing
Or maybe people define self defense differently depending on the context, they may feel threatened by extremist right wing movements and want to "group" up to defend themselves against it? But that isn't self defense at all? Like wtf are you even arguing? You're being disingenuous for literally no reason.
Unless I've missed the rise of a FARC-like force in the US, there is nothing militarized about antifa
Jesus christ, Neville Chamberlain. "Maybe if we let them have Sudetenland they won't invade the rest of... FUCK"
Yea, I'm a centrist who openly supports ANTIFA using violence.
You got me
It's ok if you can't read, nobody will judge you
