American Leftists Are Fascists Marching ‘Under the Banner of Anti-Fascism

a reply to: SprocketUK

Violence is not fascism, violence is a spook, based on some moralistic right-wrong nonsense

fascism is an ideology

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: SprocketUK

Violence is not fascism, violence is a spook, based on some moralistic right-wrong nonsense

fascism is an ideology

Using violence to shut someone up or stop them being heard is one of the cornerstones of fascism.
Not just physical violence either.
That guy with a Trump badge on his lapel, a lot of people would be petitioning for him to get fired from the job he is working at. (The same with Hillary too). If anything, I'd much rather have a fight with someone than have some sleazy git writing to my boss and setting up petitions to lose me a job and all the grief that goes along with it.

It seems no one can tolerate a different viewpoint anymore.

I suspect it's always been a bit like that, I remember my granddad throwing people out of his pub for talking politics, football and religion. Those were the big fight starters. These days any div can start a petition that will hurt someone for having the temerity to be their own person and vote their own way.

a reply to: SprocketUK

I know and you can't just say authoritarians. Something a little stronger is needed to help demonize the other group, as evidenced by both sides calling each other fascists.

a reply to: SprocketUK

So your grandfather was a fascist?

a reply to: SprocketUK

Fascism is an ideology, again "Violence" is a spook, violence is not "fascism"

what about State-sanctioned violence, is that fascism? by your reasoning would you admit Police are fascists? all governments have been fascists etc

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: Konduit

Who defended Soros? he is our enemy, he may fund Democratic and Liberal groups but not anarchists or Antifa, and that is what makes this Conspiracy about as intelligent as the "Muh Russia", we want Soros destroyed

Soros-Funded Group Gave $50K to Radical Group Antifa Who Provoked Berkeley Riot

The Alliance for Global Justice is funded by a Soros-backed charity called the Tides Foundation, who gave $50,000 to help fund a radical-left group called “Antifa,” who used extreme violence to shut down the event at UC Berkeley featuring Milo Yiannopoulos.

BwaaaHaHaHa

a reply to: xuenchen

RefuseFascism is not Antifa, they are an admitted front for the CPUSA

But "Truthfeed," said it so it must be true right? you are above this "Fake News" because you only follow blindly to "independent propaganda" websites that fit your narrative

I mean at this point it is just pathetic

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: SprocketUK



So your grandfather was a fascist?

Well, he killed his share in WW2 (The Jap kind) , so I doubt he would identify with them. It was a standard thing in pubs back in the day, especially the rougher ones. Without rules forbidding such talk, things got out of hand pretty quick. I guess the fascist version would be "You can only talk politics if you support mine, football if you support mine and religion if you support mine) He banned the lot. Just as he wasn't keen on blokes swearing when there were ladies around.

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: SprocketUK

Fascism is an ideology, again "Violence" is a spook, violence is not "fascism"

what about State-sanctioned violence, is that fascism? by your reasoning would you admit Police are fascists? all governments have been fascists etc

No, sometimes violence is needed to ensure a person's safety. Like when you have some nut running amok with a machete, you want a cop to put him down to protect the general public.

Fascist violence is that which is designed to either deny a person their voice or another their ability to hear a dissenting opinion.
Cops don't do that, unless you are standing on a box saying kill all this race or that group.
And that kind of polemic isn't an actual discourse with people anyway, its just incitement to commit a crime

a reply to: SprocketUK

Actually you just said "Using violence to shut someone up or stop them being heard is one of the cornerstones of fascism."

I just found it ironic that you missed that he was using physical force to keep people from freely discussing whatever they wanted and that that fits exactly what you had just posted.

Fascist violence is that which is designed to either deny a person their voice or another their ability to hear a dissenting opinion.

Now you are just shifting goalposts.

a reply to: SprocketUK

Violence doesn't make the fascist, their thought/ideology make them a fascist, just like violence didn't make people Nazi's it was their belief and their ideology

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: SprocketUK

Actually you just said "Using violence to shut someone up or stop them being heard is one of the cornerstones of fascism."

I just found it ironic that you missed that he was using physical force to keep people from freely discussing whatever they wanted and that that fits exactly what you had just posted.

Fascist violence is that which is designed to either deny a person their voice or another their ability to hear a dissenting opinion.

Now you are just shifting goalposts.

Not at all, it wasn't about quashing dissent, merely that those three topics were pretty much guaranteed to get people antsy when they were in their cups.

that point originally was more as a comparison to now, how people don't get on.


as for shifting goalposts, I think that quote is merely a clarification of my earlier post. Why do you think its different?

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: SprocketUK

Violence doesn't make the fascist, their thought/ideology make them a fascist, just like violence didn't make people Nazi's it was their belief and their ideology

Quite. Though just how many fascist things must a non fascist do before they are an actual fascist?

using violence for political aims is one of the big things that defined fascism so if it looks like a duck, its probably a duck, even if it doesn't want to be one.

a reply to: SprocketUK

But quashing dissent wasn't part of "If you believe you have the right to gag another human," post?

Don't get me wrong, I believe your grandfather had every right to toss whoever he wanted out of his place. I'm just saying that you made a vague statement that applies to what was going on there.

The fact remains that he used force to shut them up yet, you still don't think that made him a fascist.

So, it would seem that you agree with XAnarchistX to a point with the caveat that you want to let some things slide.

a reply to: SprocketUK

One can have fascists beliefs and follow the ideology and never be "violent", and one can be "violent" and never be a fascist

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: JBIZZ

Your assessment is wrong though, the only way communism exist is without a government to regulate things and create hierarchies and classes

You don't seem to understand that human nature will create these things no matter what. Hierarchies and classes will always exist.

a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux

Autonomous, egalitarian, non-hierarchal spaces have existed before capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism, with added spooks such as religion, constitutions, "Law-and-order" and monetary systems. classes are based on spooks, phantasms

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux

Autonomous, egalitarian, non-hierarchal spaces have existed before capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism,

I'm curious as to when and where these "spaces" existed. And if they were so great, why don't they exist today?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: SprocketUK

But quashing dissent wasn't part of "If you believe you have the right to gag another human," post?

Don't get me wrong, I believe your grandfather had every right to toss whoever he wanted out of his place. I'm just saying that you made a vague statement that applies to what was going on there.

The fact remains that he used force to shut them up yet, you still don't think that made him a fascist.

So, it would seem that you agree with XAnarchistX to a point with the caveat that you want to let some things slide.

if he carried his house rules to wider society then yes that would have been fascist.
Telling people they have to abide by a code of conduct to drink in his pub was just looking after himself and the other patrons. He could have lost his licence if there was too much trouble there.

It hurts no one to allow a political speech to go on in a suitable venue though. Apples and oranges.

Quashing dissent is gagging people. If one can't speak up against a thing then there is no visible dissent

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: SprocketUK

One can have fascists beliefs and follow the ideology and never be "violent", and one can be "violent" and never be a fascist

True, we can all be prone to violence, though I've yet to meet a peaceful, non violent fascist.

a reply to: SprocketUK

I never said there was anything wrong with what he did. I simply said that your vague description of what fascism is fits that situation.

I'm not even saying fascism is wrong because I don't agree with your oversimplified definition. That is my point. "violence=fascism" is wrong and so is "political violence=fascism".

Every soldier engages in violence for political reasons which, according to you, should make them fascists but then you seem to flip-flop on that position.