ProtestWarrior - Pro-war, fascist site.

[SocialistGenius]

Comrades,

I recently stumbled across the site www.protestwarrior.com.

The site is a collection of poorly put together propaganda from the right, consisting of various denouncements of "liberals", "lefties", "socialists", and "anti-war people".

Check it out for yourself, my words cannot come close to describing this site in all of it's utter absurdity.

I sent the administrators of the site a message, through the contact link, and hope they will reply to me so I can post it here. I'd like to get them on this forum so we can debate, and rightly refute, them.

[WUOrevolt]

Did you read their anatomy of a photograph, from the anti war demonstrations in september? They said that since the woman was leading a group of youths and she had a shirt with the Vietnamese flag on it, then they must be communist.

First of all, ther is nothing wrong with that. And second, there is no proof to link her with communism, as she could just be representing an anti war delegation from Vietnam, and those youth protestors could have had no connection to her whatsoever. There is certainly no proof in the photograph.

[Tungsten]

"SocialistGenius"

I'd like to get them on this forum so we can debate, and rightly refute, them.
What do you intend to refute?

The videos showing the anti-capitalist protestors physically attacking the protest warriors for no legitimate reason? Or the videos showing them refusing to debate?
That's going to take some doing.

[Atlas Swallowed]

I have seen some of these clowns while at protests in NYC and Washinton DC. Thier numbers are low and they are quite amusing. I sorta stuck up forthem once, a fella marching near me was taunting them about his higher economic status. I asked him "what the fuck does that have to do with anything?" Fortunatly for him he kept his mouth shut afterward :angry: That is what I hate about protests, yuppies and shallow college students who do not even know what they are protesting about.

I wonder if they are associated with FreeRepublic those idiots are known for pro-war activity as is clear channel.

[VonClausewitz]

SocialistGenius;


The site is a collection of poorly put together propaganda from the right, consisting of various denouncements of "liberals", "lefties", "socialists", and "anti-war people".

I thought it was a fairly well built site actually, it's a little more intelligent than stormfront anyway. (the forums aren't though, just replace Jews with Muslims and there you go). A little competition never hurt anyone did it ?

What is this site anyway, but the opposite of protest-warrior ? granted, there is more brains on this particular site, but really, it's just the same, just different politics.

[Publius]

Comrades,

I recently stumbled across the site www.protestwarrior.com.

The site is a collection of poorly put together propaganda from the right, consisting of various denouncements of "liberals", "lefties", "socialists", and "anti-war people".

Check it out for yourself, my words cannot come close to describing this site in all of it's utter absurdity.

I sent the administrators of the site a message, through the contact link, and hope they will reply to me so I can post it here. I'd like to get them on this forum so we can debate, and rightly refute, them.

I don't know.

Is it really that different from what you do? Just different targets and different methods.

I should note, I'm 'from' there, but I don't really post in the political forums anymore as they're shit.

Most of the people there are rampant idiots, even those on 'my side'.

I would like to see some of you post there, though. It would be funny, to say the least.

THe one thing they have going for them is they don't ban opposing views, at all.

[JKP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 07:48 AM

Comrades,

I recently stumbled across the site www.protestwarrior.com.

The site is a collection of poorly put together propaganda from the right, consisting of various denouncements of "liberals", "lefties", "socialists", and "anti-war people".

Check it out for yourself, my words cannot come close to describing this site in all of it's utter absurdity.

I sent the administrators of the site a message, through the contact link, and hope they will reply to me so I can post it here. I'd like to get them on this forum so we can debate, and rightly refute, them.

I don't know.

Is it really that different from what you do? Just different targets and different methods.

I should note, I'm 'from' there, but I don't really post in the political forums anymore as they're shit.

Most of the people there are rampant idiots, even those on 'my side'.

I would like to see some of you post there, though. It would be funny, to say the least.

THe one thing they have going for them is they don't ban opposing views, at all.
Since when did you become a neocon?

Also, why are you dividing this up into "us" and "them"?

I think you already know things are more complcated than that.

[Publius]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 08:29 PM




Since when did you become a neocon?

I'm not.

I don't really agree with anything they stand for, anymore, but I used to associate with them.



Also, why are you dividing this up into "us" and "them"?

Because they do.

Introduce yourself there, if you want an example.



I think you already know things are more complcated than that.

Not to them.

[JazzRemington]

ALl these people do is go to a protest, make fun of people's beliefs while they are usually in a highly emotional state, get beat up, and then whine about it. I was on their forums a while back arguing about the legality of acohol compared to marijuana and the only argument this person had was that alcohol was OK because the intent was OK.

[Orthodox Marxist]

The videos showing the anti-capitalist protestors physically attacking the protest warriors for no legitimate reason? Or the videos showing them refusing to debate?
That's going to take some doing.


No legitimate reason have you been dropped on your head. The protest warriors go to these rallies with the intention of provocation they yell abusive slogans throw things at marchers and push and shove them. Then when the demonstrators fight back these "protest warriors" turn on their camera that way they can claim the left attacked them for no reason. Their founder is an idiot neo con war monger.

http://www.rocknrev.com/pw/pwned.html

Thought you might like this one Its called protest warrior pwned by their own


Well, the crowds of liberals that had gathered to support Cindy Sheehan were absolutely huge! The Protest "Warriors" (~snicker) were a little bit too scared to walk their tiny, insignificantly sized group into that huge crowd, so they figured they'd pop on over to the other side of the tracks, so to speak, and mingle into the large crowd of right-wing, republican pro-war, anti-Sheehan folks that had gathered. You know... A crowd of their own peeps. They figured it was the safest place to be. They're such WARRIORS!


So what do you suppose happened when these "warriors" (~snicker) strolled into that large crowd of right-wing conservatives from Texas? Do you suppose that crowd understood the irony of the Protest Warrior signs? Of course not! Those signs were designed for intelligent liberals and leftists who would surely get the wit, irony and sarcasm. They were not designed for angry, redneck, republican warmongers.

Of course, the expected happened. The redneck republicans didn't understand the wit, nor the irony, nor the sarcasm and mistook Kfir and gang for anti-war protesters. How did they react? Well, how do you THINK a large group of right-wing, republican rednecks would react if they mistakenly thought a hippie liberal had just wandered into their camp? They attacked!


The Protest Warriors tried to reason with the angry mob of right-wing republicans, but it was to no avail.

They screamed, “We are on your side!”
Their cries were met with chants of, “Liars!”

[Orthodox Marxist]

By defender of liberty


I saved the "Black children belong in black schools Say no to vouchers" sign, as well as a few of the others, onto a floppy and then saved it on a computer at work in a folder marked "funny signs"

There's a racist and it only took me 1 minute of looking

[VonClausewitz]

You dont get sarcasm do you ?

[Orthodox Marxist]

and then theres these one's


Is islam "THE" anti-christ?


Are Muslims better seen as objects of fear or derision?


Tools to Fight the homosexual Agenda in School


National Rally Against Islamofascism Day


or maybe they're Al Qaeda members pretending to be hippies.

(I took the link out of this one so as not to offend anyone)


"Club Auschwitz" apparel...good idea?

[Orthodox Marxist]

You dont get sarcasm do you ?


In my experience when a restricted member says something like that they usually arent being sarcastic.

[Graham_Pogo]

Fuck them! There was a nazi rally about 2 years ago and they were actually debating whether or not to go protest the nazi filth. Their reasons were because they didn't want to be with the commies and other left wing "scum". In the end they didnt show up.

[Alex Wolff]

War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
Surely, above anything else, a man or woman should live their life governed by their conscience rather than a set of rules imposed by a paper tiger and/or moral and patriotic feelings?

[Tungsten]

Red Marxist Army
I'm not involved with "protest warrior", nor do I post on their forums. They're conservatives, I'm not.

No legitimate reason have you been dropped on your head.
Having a different opinion isn't a legitimate reason for attacking someone, tearing down their banners or placards.

The protest warriors go to these rallies with the intention of provocation they yell abusive slogans
"Four more years" is an abusive slogan?

throw things at marchers and push and shove them.
You must have been watching a different set of movies because the only pushing and shoving (in some cases punching) I saw was from the anti-capitalists.

Then when the demonstrators fight back
Fight back against what, different opinions? People chanting slogans? How pathetic.

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by Tungsten
Having a different opinion isn't a legitimate reason for attacking someone, tearing down their banners or placards.

The protest warriors entire goal is to throw up snide signs that use irony to mitigate the message of a protest and provoke violence. They openly admit this. In fact, they make no effort to obfuscate this issue. They are not protesting, nor do they have anything valid to say, they are intentionally and maliciously trying to piss other people off. It is their goal to make someone else angry because they do not accept their ideas.

Suppose you write a leaflet supporting the president and distribute it on the street. Instead of starting my own leaflet which examines the president's performance as a leader in an intelligent way, I take my time to organize people who walk by, take your leaflet, and then throw it in the trash before anyone can read it. Or, I simply infiltrate your print shop and make sure that all the leaflets are marred and damaged. Am I simply expressing my free speech, or am I just being an asshole and trying to drown you out? I vote the latter.

If you want to stand across the street and "counter protest" that's one thing, if you want to invade my group and make a distracting ruckus I think even Gandhi would kick your ass, dude.

[Tungsten]

Free Palestine

The protest warriors entire goal is to throw up snide signs that use irony to mitigate the message of a protest and provoke violence.
Perhaps some of them are expecting violence. Perhaps the resulting violence proves their point.

They openly admit this. In fact, they make no effort to obfuscate this issue. They are not protesting, nor do they have anything valid to say, they are intentionally and maliciously trying to piss other people off.
They do raise some good points, but that's besides the point. They have right to "piss other people off". It's called freedom of speech.

It is their goal to make someone else angry because they do not accept their ideas.
That excuses violence? I just don't think you like differing opinions.

[Orthodox Marxist]

You must have been watching a different set of movies because the only pushing and shoving (in some cases punching) I saw was from the anti-capitalists.


Yeah you watched the edited version that pw put's out to make them look like the good guys. They provoke the left by any means they can and then turn on the camera when the left fights back that way they can claim to be innocent.

Pw is nothing more than a site of hypocrite war loving baby killing racists

[VonClausewitz]

Red Marxist Army;



You dont get sarcasm do you ?


In my experience when a restricted member says something like that they usually arent being sarcastic.

I was refering to your accusations of racialism based on this;



I saved the "Black children belong in black schools Say no to vouchers" sign, as well as a few of the others, onto a floppy and then saved it on a computer at work in a folder marked "funny signs"

The site is sarcastic, that sign, as far as I can tell, is a dig at the american-left.


(I took the link out of this one so as not to offend anyone)

QUOTE
"Club Auschwitz" apparel...good idea?

Copying titles of threads, when faced with someone (me) who has read the thread, makes you looks stupid. Most of the membership hated, dismissed that idea.


Pw is nothing more than a site of hypocrite war loving baby killing racists

baby killing ?? Why are they hypocrites ??

[Orthodox Marxist]

baby killing ?? Why are they hypocrites ??


Yes they advocate killing babies ever heard of a pw member know as TS or truthseeker and a pw member know as sputnik. TS came over to the other forum I post at and made various statements to that regard as well as those that approved of the killing of civilians by the atomic bombs. Well anyways when he was clearly loosing the argument (the majority of us at that site lean to the left) he decided to recruit some of his pw buddies to sign up at our site to make a long story short we consistently defeated them with every argument they brought up and most of them eventually left. The only member of pw I respect is Hk grinkgo

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)Perhaps some of them are expecting violence. Perhaps the resulting violence proves their point.[/b]

What point is that? That if you invade a group, make a distracting ruckus, mitigate the message of their protest and maliciously attempt to piss people off that some people may become agitated? Whoa. Good point, asshole. You're a fuckin' Nostradamus, aren't you?


Originally posted by [email protected]
That excuses violence? I just don't think you like differing opinions.

Considering I have absolutely no involvement with those who physically accosted the Protest Warriors, that makes little sense. And I doubt those people have a problem with differing opinions, it seems to me that the Protest "Warriors" are the ones who do - that's why they infiltrate their group and mitigate their message.


Tungsten
They do raise some good points, but that's besides the point. They have right to "piss other people off". It's called freedom of speech.

Thank you for being very selective in what you chose to respond to. I have already addressed this point, so I will just repeat what I have already said here:

"Suppose you write a leaflet supporting the president and distribute it on the street. Instead of starting my own leaflet which examines the president's performance as a leader in an intelligent way, I take my time to organize people who walk by, take your leaflet, and then throw it in the trash before anyone can read it. Or, I simply infiltrate your print shop and make sure that all the leaflets are marred and damaged. Am I simply expressing my free speech, or am I just being an asshole and trying to drown you out? I vote the latter.

If you want to stand across the street and "counter protest" that's one thing, if you want to invade my group and make a distracting ruckus I think even Gandhi would kick your ass, dude."

[Publius]

I would like to point at that your vitriolic reaction to them is what enables them.

Do you not realize that?

[Tungsten]

Free Palestine

What point is that? That if you invade a group, make a distracting ruckus, mitigate the message of their protest and maliciously attempt to piss people off that some people may become agitated? Whoa. Good point, asshole. You're a fuckin' Nostradamus, aren't you?
No. That you're mindless ruffians who readily resort to violence when faced with people whose opinions differ to your own. It's got nothing to do with being "fuckin" agitated. Learn some social skills.

Considering I have absolutely no involvement with those who physically accosted the Protest Warriors, that makes little sense.
But you're willing to rush to their defence with poor excuses.

And I doubt those people have a problem with differing opinions, it seems to me that the Protest "Warriors" are the ones who do - that's why they infiltrate their group and mitigate their message.
Were they tearing down the anti-capitalist's placards and banners? I guess not.

Thank you for being very selective in what you chose to respond to. I have already addressed this point, so I will just repeat what I have already said here:
Don't bother. What you repeated didn't provide an answer either. How many protest warriors were there? How many anti-capitalists? How could they possibly "drown out" anything? Your position amounts to:

If I hold a banner bearing a particular opinion and someone else holds a banner with a differing opinion, he's "drowning out" my message by just being there, so I get to kick his head in.

I don't care "agitated" you or your buddies feel by people with differing opinions; unless they're kicking you in, you don't get to kick them in. It's a simple matter of being cilivized.

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by Tungsten
How could they possibly "drown out" anything?

I don't think yelling people down, putting up snide signs that mitigate the message of the protest, and shoving cameras in people's faces at a scheduled event is excercising your right to free speech. To show up to such an important event and do nothing more than mitigate their message, maliciously try to piss people off, yell shit at people trying to talk, shoving cameras in their faces and making snide remarks, is in extremely poor taste and you deserve to get your ass kicked. Your right to free speech shouldn't interfere with others. You can have a counter-protest across the street, but infiltrate my group and it's throw-down time, asshole.

[Publius]

I don't think yelling people down,

Yelling at a protest?!?!

What the hell do you think this, a protest or something?!!/

No yelling allowed!



putting up snide signs

Snide signs at a protest!??!?! WHAT NEXT, ACTUAL PROTESTING?!?


that mitigate the message of the protest,

So if some jackass holds up a sign, the entire protest is 'mitigated'?



and shoving cameras in people's faces at a scheduled event is excercising your right to free speech.

'Shoving' is so pejoritive.



To show up to such an important event and do nothing more than mitigate their message,

Or 'debate'.



maliciously try to piss people off,

'Stand there and hold up a sign, or chant' EXACTLY WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING.



yell shit at people trying to talk,

Fuck 'em.



shoving cameras in their faces and making snide remarks,

Cry me a fucking river.



is in extremely poor taste and you deserve to get your ass kicked.

Is 'being a dumbass' also grounds for an asskicking? If so, you're needed.



Your right to free speech shouldn't interfere with others.

Of course it should.

Fuck you.

See? Free speach, and it intereferes with you.



You can have a counter-protest across the street, but infiltrate my group and it's throw-down time, asshole.

:lol:

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by Publius+--> (Publius)Yelling at a protest?!?![/b]

Hey detective dipshit, in case you didn't catch it the first time; Yelling people down who are making a speech at a scheduled event isn't excercising your right to free speech. Go to the next Million Man March or State of the Union address and try to yell down whoever is speaking, see what happens.


Originally posted by Publius+--> (Publius)'Shoving' is so pejoritive.[/b]

Thanks for sharing. We care.


Originally posted by Publius
Or 'debate'.

Don't kid yourself. No "Protest Warrior" is ever there to "debate," they're there to provoke. See any of their videos, people often challenge them to the podium to debate civily - they refuse.


Originally posted by Publius
Fuck 'em.

You really show us all your intellectual capacity with this very convincing insight.


Originally posted by Publius
Cry me a fucking river.

See above.


Originally posted by Publius
See? Free speach, and it intereferes with you.

I suggest investing some money in the direction of an "English for Dummies" book.


[email protected]
So if some jackass holds up a sign, the entire protest is 'mitigated'?

Are you illiterate? Or do I just need to make it simple enough for you understand?


Publius
Is 'being a dumbass' also grounds for an asskicking? If so, you're needed.

Yeah, you're really on the cutting edge of internet comedy.

[Publius]

Originally posted by Free [email protected] 13 2006, 11:47 PM




Hey detective dipshit, in case you didn't catch it the first time; Yelling people down who are making a speech at a scheduled event isn't excercising your right to free speech. Go to the next Million Man March or State of the Union address and try to yell down whoever is speaking, see what happens.


Maddox called, he wants his insults back.

I'm free to yell in a public space. See; free speach.



Don't kid yourself. No "Protest Warrior" is ever there to "debate," they're there to provoke. See any of their videos, people often challenge them to the podium to debate civily - they refuse.


Yes, I'm sure no PW was ever there to debate, even for a second.

Moron.

Watch the videos. They ask people to debate and they actuall do debate with someone.

I guess they weren't 'really debating'? Moron.




You really show us all your intellectual capacity with this very convincing insight.

And you show your lack of intellectual capacity with everything you say and do.



I suggest investing some money in the direction of an "English for Dummies" book.


As if that makes any fucking sense.

How am I supposed to 'invest money in a direction'? Throw money west? Look in the stock exchange for SOTH, EAST, WEST, NRTH?

I heard NRTH was up a quarter point, maybe I'll invest in that direction! Fucking idiot.



Are you illiterate? Or do I just need to make it simple enough for you understand?

You probably need to stop being a dumbass, for ANYONE to understand you.

Take it under consideration.



Yeah, you're really on the cutting edge of internet comedy.

Hey, I'm not the one stealing Maddox quotes 'detective dipshit'.

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by Publius+--> (Publius)And you show your lack of intellectual capacity with everything you say and do.[/b]

Just when I was wondering if your collective wit went beyond repeating a person's own retort against them, you go ahead and confirm all doubt.

Don't ever stop being a dumbass, Publius. Stick to what you're good at. ;)


Originally posted by [email protected]
You probably need to stop being a dumbass, for ANYONE to understand you.

See above.


Publius
How am I supposed to 'invest money in a direction'?

Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you really that daft?

[Publius]

Originally posted by Free [email protected] 14 2006, 12:36 AM






Just when I was wondering if your .collective wit went beyond repeating a person's own retort against them, you go ahead and confirm all doubt.[quote]

Can't. Syntax. Bad.

Your assignment for Monday is to re-write that retort so that it makes sense and conforms to the rules of the English language.

If I 'confirmed your doubt' about my 'lack of wit' than I've established in your mind, my wit, which is exactly the opposite of the point you were trying to make.

[quote]
Don't ever stop being a dumbass, Publius. Stick to what you're good at. ;)

Correcting your grammatical errors?




Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you really that daft?

I'm insulting you; get with the program.

Honestly, what a stupid metaphor.

Why not just say 'buy a book'? It's clear your figuritive language skills are not up to direction.

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by Publius
Why not just say 'buy a book'? It's clear your figuritive language skills are not up to direction.

Figurative.

Before you run your fat yap about grammar, you might want to run a spell check for fuck's sake. You know, just so you don't come off as even more daft than you already appear. :)

[Qwerty Dvorak]

I would contribute something intelligent and constructive to this thread, but damn this is just too amusing. :)

[Publius]

Before you run your fat yap about grammar, you might want to run a spell check for fuck's sake.

Totally different fields, yaknow?

"Before you run your yap about basket weaving, you should be hip to the scene on theoretical physics."

Nice try though.



You know, just so you don't come off as even more daft than you already appear. :)


Daft, punk?

[Free Palestine]

Sorry, I forgot I was talking to an idiot. Allow me to dumb it down for you, son. If you can't even spell you're in no position to be lecturing anyone on grammar. This is not a difficult concept to understand.

[FULL METAL JACKET]

Wow look at this:


Take the issue of the Palestinians. The Arabs have six million square miles of land. They could give their Palestinian brothers a state tomorrow, and with one day's oil profits give every one of them a bar of gold. Instead, the Arab dictators prop up Arafat and his loathsome gang of oppressors, and brainwash their people to be pure monsters. When mothers happily send their children off to bomb buses and schools, this is not based on any rational grievance. No, this is endemic of a sick, utterly immoral, anti-life culture that serves only one purpose: to keep tyrants in power.

Protestwarrior.com - mission (http://www.protestwarrior.com/faq.php)

What utter crap. Complete disregard to the fact that they are fighting for their land. Not someone else's.

This website expects the Palestinians to bend over backwards for the world.

[Orthodox Marxist]

I decided to go over to their site a few months ago and exercise my right of "free speech" as it were it seems the protest wimps only approve of free speech when it agree's with their rhetoric.

(Yes I have been banned)

[Publius]

Sorry, I forgot I was talking to an idiot. Allow me to dumb it down for you, son. If you can't even spell you're in no position to be lecturing anyone on grammar. This is not a difficult concept to understand.

You didn't 'forget you were talking to an idiot' you forgot what we were talking about because you ARE an idiot.

Minor, but important, distinction.

[Publius]

I decided to go over to their site a few months ago and exercise my right of "free speech" as it were it seems the protest wimps only approve of free speech when it agree's with their rhetoric.

(Yes I have been banned)

Really?

What was your name?

Because there are a number of leftists there.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2006, 09:23 PM
No. That you're mindless ruffians who readily resort to violence when faced with people whose opinions differ to your own. It's got nothing to do with being "fuckin" agitated. Learn some social skills.

Imagine what young Tungsten would have been saying back in 1930 to the "Red Front"....

"Now I know the Brownshirts are pretty nasty, but if you fight them you'll become mindless ruffians who resort to violence with people who's opinions differ from yours." :lol:

Or perhaps the people who participated in the "Battle of Cable Street" would be "told off" by our lovely Tungsten....

"No you should debate with those folks, not fight them." :lol:

I'll give you a tip Tungsten, those fools may call themselves "Protest Warriors", but there's a reason people here talk about Class War, because the left has a long history of being "Class Warriors"!

And liberal moaning ain't gonna' change that! :D

[Amusing Scrotum]

Oh and by the way, both Publius and Free Palestine should stop flaming and try to engage in "civil debate" - or else! :o

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2006, 08:29 PM

Sorry, I forgot I was talking to an idiot. Allow me to dumb it down for you, son. If you can't even spell you're in no position to be lecturing anyone on grammar. This is not a difficult concept to understand.

You didn't 'forget you were talking to an idiot' you forgot what we were talking about because you ARE an idiot.

Minor, but important, distinction.

Again with the repetition?

Yawn.. You're really boring me.

I mean, I'd love to go the round-and-round with the insult game, it's fun and all, but you've shown yourself to be ill equipped for the job.

That, and I'm not fluent in fucking idiot.

You're already about as memorable as a fart in the wind, and equally as substantial. I'm done with you. :)

[Tungsten]

Armchair Socialism

"Now I know the Brownshirts are pretty nasty, but if you fight them you'll become mindless ruffians who resort to violence with people who's opinions differ from yours."
Sorry to point out the obvious flaw in your reasoning: Unilke the brownshirts, the protest warriors weren't trying to punch your lights out, were are they?

I'll give you a tip Tungsten, those fools may call themselves "Protest Warriors", but there's a reason people here talk about Class War, because the left has a long history of being "Class Warriors"!
Presumably, these "class warriors" see no difference between someone expressing a different opinion and someone trying to beat them up. The political consequences of a governing body holding such a worldview are well documented.

[Publius]

Originally posted by Free [email protected] 14 2006, 10:09 PM





Again with the repetition?


Again with the repition.



That, and I'm not fluent in fucking idiot.

You're already about as memorable as a fart in the wind, and equally as substantial. I'm done with you. :)

Step away from the shitty similes before you get hurt.

I'd hate to see you lose anymore brain cells.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Tungsten+Feb 14 2006, 11:10 PM--> (Tungsten @ Feb 14 2006, 11:10 PM) Sorry to point out the obvious flaw in your reasoning: Unilke the brownshirts, the protest warriors weren't trying to punch your lights out.... [/b]

Well we weren't there, were we? ....therefore how are we supposed to judge whether the "Protest Warriors" started it?

Anyway, they must be shitty "Warriors" if they back away from physical confrontation. It's like someone describing themselves as a "Contract Killer" and then announcing that they have an ethical problem with killing people.

As for the Brownshirts, they didn't start everything. The Red Front went looking for them on occasions and fought with them - and if they managed to mount more opposition they would have stopped the Nazi's coming to power.


Originally posted by [email protected]
Presumably, these "class warriors" see no difference between someone expressing a different opinion and someone trying to beat them up.

Well you see "left-Warriors" learn from history. A Neo-Nazi today, may not have killed anyone yet, but he will if he gets the chance. The "left" does their best to prevent that "chance" whilst you moan.


Tungsten
The political consequences of a governing body holding such a worldview are well documented.

Indeed.

The Spanish Anarchists were fucking brilliant - every time they found a Priest they shot the bastard because the Church had been helping Franco.

I ain't got a problem with shooting fascists, or the Tsar's lackeys, have you?
_____

I'm going to remind you two - Free Palestine and Publius - again, no more flaming. Okay?

[Publius]

I'm going to remind you two - Free Palestine and Publius - again, no more flaming. Okay?

Ah, but it is so amusing.

Fair enough.

As I've already won, further discussion is superfluous.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Originally posted by Publius
See; free speach.

See: Secret Service investigates violent essay by seventh grader (http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode_island/articles/2006/02/02/secret_service_investigates_violent_essay_by_seven th_grader?mode=PF)

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by Publius
As I've already won, further discussion is superfluous.

Whatever makes you feel better. ;)

[Orthodox Marxist]

Really?
What was your name?
Because there are a number of leftists there.

I actually cant remember what name I was using at the time as I said it was a few months ago I do remember posting protest warrior pwned and linking to the site as well I enjoyed making republicans loose their temper (not a hard thing to do mind you). Anyways when I tried my user name and password the next day I was not allowed to sign in.

[Seong]

I really don't understand why right wing assholes bother coming here. Do they think they'll make us 'see the light' or do they really have nothing better to do? *yawn*

[Tungsten]

Armchair Socialism

Well we weren't there, were we? ....therefore how are we supposed to judge whether the "Protest Warriors" started it?
They didn't start anything. The video clearly shows them being attacked without any provocation (having a different opinion doesn't count).

As for the Brownshirts, they didn't start everything. The Red Front went looking for them on occasions and fought with them - and if they managed to mount more opposition they would have stopped the Nazi's coming to power.
What's this got to do with the price of fish? It doesn't justify anything.

Well you see "left-Warriors" learn from history.
Pity they don't learn that communism doesn't work, go home and spend their time pursuing something useful.

A Neo-Nazi today, may not have killed anyone yet, but he will if he gets the chance. The "left" does their best to prevent that "chance" whilst you moan.
Well that's just dandy. To be on the safe side, let's nuke all predominantly Islamic countries in case there are terrorists there. Wouldn't want to give them a chance to bomb anyone, would we?
And then there's the anti-capitalists. I'm sure there's a few Stalinists hiding in here somewhere. Best to round them up and shoot all of them just in case. Wouldn't want to give them the chance of getting into power, would we?

Indeed.

The Spanish Anarchists were fucking brilliant - every time they found a Priest they shot the bastard because the Church had been helping Franco.

I ain't got a problem with shooting fascists, or the Tsar's lackeys, have you?
But by that logic, I should ventilate every socialist I meet because I don't like their ideology, even though they've done nothing to me.
Seong

I really don't understand why right wing assholes bother coming here. Do they think they'll make us 'see the light'
You're beyond any help we can give.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)They didn't start anything. The video clearly shows them being attacked without any provocation (having a different opinion doesn't count).[/b]

And you accept that as an authentic account, why?


Originally posted by [email protected]
Well that's just dandy. To be on the safe side, let's nuke all predominantly Islamic countries in case there are terrorists there. Wouldn't want to give them a chance to bomb anyone, would we?
And then there's the anti-capitalists. I'm sure there's a few Stalinists hiding in here somewhere. Best to round them up and shoot all of them just in case. Wouldn't want to give them the chance of getting into power, would we?

Where did I advocate pre-emptive murder? ....I'm simply talking about winning the "Battle of the Streets". Something you obviously find "horrible".

Fine have it your way, I'm sure the Christian Fascists will give you a nice job. After all, if histories any kind of guide that's who you'll side with.

What you also forget, is that the "left" most of the time limits it confrontation to "Street Battles". It's the "Right" that blows up Abortion Clinics, beats up prominent atheists etc.

Though, it's not really nice to try and stop that is it Tungsten?


Tungsten
But by that logic, I should ventilate every socialist I meet because I don't like their ideology, even though they've done nothing to me.

Are you stupid? ....Spain was in a state of Civil War and Organised Religion sided with Franco.

[Orthodox Marxist]

They didn't start anything. The video clearly shows them being attacked without any provocation (having a different opinion doesn't count).

Yes the video does show them being attacked after they attack the left who then decides to fight back the protest idiots turn on their camera then they can say they were innocent.

[Publius]

I really don't understand why right wing assholes bother coming here. Do they think they'll make us 'see the light' or do they really have nothing better to do? *yawn*

I enjoy debating.

I could probably tear you apart, for instance.

[Seong]

Yes I'm sure you could.
Fortunately I don't really give a shit.

[Tungsten]

Armchair Socialism

And you accept that as an authentic account, why?
It's not an account, it's there in the video. There were no Mooresque-"fade to black"s or doctoring of the image.

Where did I advocate pre-emptive murder? ....I'm simply talking about winning the "Battle of the Streets".
-It's the same difference.
-There was no "battle", anyway.

Something you obviously find "horrible".
Yes, I find the initiation of force horrible.

Fine have it your way, I'm sure the Christian Fascists will give you a nice job.
The "Christian Fascists", if you want to call them that, aren't trying to silence me using violence.

After all, if histories any kind of guide that's who you'll side with
They're no friends of mine and I'm not into comprimises.

What you also forget, is that the "left" most of the time limits it confrontation to "Street Battles".
Like that matters.

It's the "Right" that blows up Abortion Clinics, beats up prominent atheists etc.
We're not discusing abortion clinics or atheists. We're discussing protest warrior. I don't believe in any of that bible-thumping anti-abortion crap.

Though, it's not really nice to try and stop that is it Tungsten?
Stop trying to change the subject and set up straw men. It won't work.
Red Marxist Army

Yes the video does show them being attacked after they attack the left
They didn't "attack" the left.

who then decides to fight back the protest idiots turn on their camera then they can say they were innocent.
Bollocks. The violence was unprovoked and one-sided. Did you miss the one where they interviewed that hippy about why he attacked one of them earlier? "Because your Nazis" or some similar excuse, was his reply.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)It's not an account, it's there in the video. There were no Mooresque-"fade to black"s or doctoring of the image.[/b]

Well I have not seen the video in question, but there seem to me to be two important questions someone should ask....

1) What happened before the people started recording?

2) What happened after the people finished recording?

These questions are crucial if we wish to understand the context in which said incident took place.


Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)-It's the same difference.[/b]

No, it's not.


Originally posted by Tungsten
-There was no "battle", anyway.

Generally when two political tendencies brawl in the streets, people describe the incident as a "Battle for the Streets".

From the sounds of it, those "brave" Protest Warriors lost the "battle" pretty badly.


Originally posted by Tungsten
Yes, I find the initiation of force horrible.

As I said earlier, if you were around in the 1920's and 30's you'd be pissing and moaning about people trying to stop fascism.

Your choice.


Originally posted by Tungsten
The "Christian Fascists", if you want to call them that, aren't trying to silence me using violence.

Not yet anyway.


[email protected]
They're no friends of mine and I'm not into comprimises.

"Middle Class Businessmen" - which what you are is it not - have shown a marked tendency to side with fascism of one form or another when confronted with the possibility of working class power.

Your downright rejection of any kind of popular resistance to fascism - "I find the initiation of force horrible" - and your already expressed support for nuclear action against whole cities of ordinary people.

Suggests that you wouldn't be the type of person to betray your class interests - fascism.


Tungsten
We're not discusing abortion clinics or atheists. We're discussing protest warrior.

And where do Protest Warriors find their "political allies"? ....the Christian Right or Militant Feminism?

[Tungsten]

Armchair Socialism

Well I have not seen the video in question,
Then why are you commenting on it and running to the defence of people you know nothing about? :rolleyes:

No, it's not.
The difference between getting thrashed and getting murdered is only a matter of degree.

As I said earlier, if you were around in the 1920's and 30's you'd be pissing and moaning about people trying to stop fascism.
But the Nazis were initiating force against people too, just like your gang were against the protest warriors.

"Middle Class Businessmen" - which what you are is it not - have shown a marked tendency to side with fascism of one form or another when confronted with the possibility of working class power.
How insightful. Let's see: Gang of thugs who want to kill them and take everything they've got vs other gang of thugs who won't bother them providing they kiss their asses enough and hand over whatever they want at their command. I wonder who they're going to side with? Hmm...tough choice, that.

Your downright rejection of any kind of popular resistance to fascism - "I find the initiation of force horrible"
Duh! I don't agree with communism, however I'm not advocating killing communists when they do their silly demonstrations. Does that make me a supporter of communism? :rolleyes:

- and your already expressed support for nuclear action against whole cities of ordinary people.
I guess nuking is only okay if it has popular support, huh? :lol:

Suggests that you wouldn't be the type of person to betray your class interests - fascism.
He says, while advocating justice-by-lynch-mob and physically attacking anyone who doesn't agree with him. If I'm the fascist, then why are you the one using the tools of Hitlerism?

You really messed up joining in this debate, socialism. (And do watch those movies.)

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)Then why are you commenting on it and running to the defence of people you know nothing about?[/b]

I have not "run to the defence" of anyone.

I have merely stated that it is incredibly naive and foolish to form an opinion of an event based on one video and the accounts of people who obviously have something to gain by portraying themselves in a certain light.

I am inclined to conclude that said incident took place at a heated protest where both sides were being antagonistic and at such events street fighting is not uncommon.

What does surprise me slightly is that "lefties" in this thread have been so quick to defend the actions in the eyes of "bourgeois liberalism". In my opinion, such a position - whether it's is accurate or not - gives credibility to "bourgeois legalism" and a far more "revolutionary" message would be to simply say that the Protest Warriors - that name cracks me up - challenged us for the streets and we won!

That message will "shock" bourgeois liberals, but they ain't our "target audience". :lol:


Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)But the Nazis were initiating force against people too, just like your gang were against the protest warriors.[/b]

"My gang"???

I have never met these people and the only political position of theirs that I know of is being anti-war - at least that's what I think the protest was about.

I am also not way affiliated with them - on the Protest Warrior site they've got pictures of women with head-scarfs on, the Pious are not part of my "gang".

Indeed the majority of the American "left" would be subject to harsh criticism from me and I would not want to affiliate with them.

So accusations of them being part of "my gang" are baseless.

As for the "initiating", as I have said, one video doesn't tell the whole story and it seems the Protest Warriors understand what's going on better than you do....


Originally posted by ProtestWarrior.com
ProtestWarrior takes a no-holds-barred approach to confronting these shock troops of statism as our Patriot Truth Missile signs and slogans strike down their moral house of cards. Witness the birth of a new grassroots movement of liberty lovers and join us as we take back the streets and defend America's righteous mission of bringing freedom to all corners of the globe.

http://protestwarrior.org/videos/eagle_strike.php

Notice the phrase "take back the streets". That has a specific meaning and most people would understand what that entails - you're obviously not one of those people.

Politics is about "taking the streets" and commanding them. The "Right" understands this very well, some of the "Left" understands this too and really only Liberals don't get this - which perhaps explains their insignificance post 1900. :lol:

Indeed if you wish to wade around in a muck of Philosophical questions about the ethical and moral implications of political action, you are free to do so. However, don't expect anyone to be interested in what you say, because philosophical debates about man in the abstract tend not to bare any relationship to the real world and are therefore useless.


Originally posted by Tungsten
How insightful.

I guess it is "insightful", however I'd call it a well documented fact.

I'm sure if you posted about it, someone would kindly present you with some reading material regarding the history of fascism and "Middle Class" support for fascism.


Originally posted by Tungsten
Duh!

"Duh" indeed.

If the "Red Front" had been a bit bigger then it could well have effectively driven the Brownshirts from the streets of Germany and prevented the Nazi's from coming to power.

However, I can certainly see how discussing the ethical and moral implications of "initiating" force against the Brownshirts is a better method to stop the Nazi's. :lol:


Originally posted by Tungsten
Does that make me a supporter of communism?

Well it depends.

In times of heightened class conflict, you will make the choice between the Communists and the ruling class - and often a fascist group. In such times people usually decide according to their class roots and you if I'm not mistaken, are a "businessman".

In which case you will likely watch with glee as the Police clubs striking workers across the head and shots people at will.

Of course, we can't discount the possibility that you'll continue to be completely irrelevant and start a small discussion group debating about whether the "initiation of force" is "correct". However, that possibility seems slim.


[email protected]
He says, while advocating justice-by-lynch-mob and physically attacking anyone who doesn't agree with him. If I'm the fascist, then why are you the one using the tools of Hitlerism?

You don't really know a whole lot about the history of fascism, do you?

Fascist Parties have generally been well funded and well disciplined and their actions have been carefully thought out. Whilst the "grunts" may occasionally lynch someone, the "tools of Hitlerism" have generally been to use state power or organised and armed gangs to get their message across.

In this thread, all I have said is that the working class should attempt to win the "Battle for the Streets" and that they should do this when the opposition chooses to confront them physically.

There isn't a "lynch-mob" mentality behind that position, neither is there a "Hitlerist" mentality behind that position.

Indeed I rather doubt that you could tell anyone anything of use about fascism, because after responding to this thread I am certainly under the impression that you know absolutely nothing about the "nature" of politics and what actually happens in the real world.


Tungsten
(And do watch those movies.)

I've looked over that site and I can't find it, perhaps you could link it?

[Amusing Scrotum]

I just watched this video....

http://protestwarrior.org/videos/eagle_strike.php

....and I have to say that it was a complete waste of 20 minutes.

The Protest Warriors seem rather crap. They went there to protest a "left" demonstration and all they did was stand around until the Police ushered them anyway.

If that's how they expect to "take back the streets" and "fight the left" - then I'd say that they're going to be at it for a long time yet. :lol:

Perhaps they should ask the "Boys in Blue" how to go about it....

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xk2QJDhq7Gc&search=anarchist

You see, who needs Protest Warriors when the Police do such a good job?

[Jimmie Higgins]

Heh, Protest Warriors. I used to go to that site a lot but as Bush and the war became more unpopular, they became less fun to argue with and their stances became weaker and weaker as they lost confidence in what they were doing.

[Amusing Scrotum]

I think the funniest thing about them, is that whilst they are against the "evil" of "statism" - they're perfectly happy to support the American States invasion of Iraq.

[Free Palestine]

To answer Armchair's point, the Protest Warriors are not much different than Sean Hannity. Neither have an ideology or coherent belief system other than, "Republicans right, Democrats wrong." They're nothing, ideologically speaking, just Bush-Cheney sheep. They have no set belief system other than, "If the Republicans are doing it, it's good. If the Democrats are doing it, it's bad."

In otherwords, they lack integrity. I've yet to see an instance where they have a deeply held belief, then finds out Republicans are going against it, for which they will then chastise them. It doesn't happen. Not with the Protest Warriors... not with Hannity. They're not conservatives, they're Republicans.

[Atlas Swallowed]

The majority of the anti-war(in the US) protesters are just as bad. They would not be protesting if it were John Kerry or Al Gore bombing the crap out of another nation. They are Democrats nothing more. Anarchists, Socialists, and Communists are despised almost as much by the US liberals(moderate conservatives anywhere else in the world) as they are by the conservatives.

[Free Palestine]

It never fails to crack me up how the word 'communist' is still an insult in the US. Also, it's pretty interesting how you have to be less and less leftist in order to be an enemy of the United States. Communist in the 50s and 60s; Socialist in the 70s, 80s and 90s; and now just plain liberal in the new millenium. Another decade and slightly right-of-center will be a criminal offense.

[Atlas Swallowed]

Most of them don't know the difference between an Anarchist and a serial killer. People here are easy to control because they easilly scare and believe every cock and bull story they are fed.

[BattleOfTheCowshed]

Hahaha, Protest Warrior, they're really a joke. That previous description of them is spot-on, they basically go to protests with retarded signs like "Communism: Stalin and Mao killed X-million people" and "Hippies Smell", get pushed around/get their ass kicked and then go online and ***** about it uncessantly. I once went on their forums, it was a combination of 1. uber-religious freaks whose minds were fucking obsessed on homosexuality (couldn't stop talking about it) 2. retarded "free-marketers" who refused (or were unable?) to answer any challenge to the the uber-capitalist crap they spew and 3. super racist Zionists.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Atlas Swallowed+--> (Atlas Swallowed)The majority of the anti-war(in the US) protesters are just as bad. They would not be protesting if it were John Kerry or Al Gore bombing the crap out of another nation. They are Democrats nothing more.[/b]

You think that's bad, trying coming to my "neck of the woods". The most "radical" tendency here are "Right" Social-Democrats - Trotskyist and Green - and even they are too few to count.

Indeed a couple of weeks ago there was an "Anti-War Protest", which was in fact a prayer for the hundredth dead British soldier - and that was probably the most "radical" activity here for at least a year.


BattleOfTheCowshed
....they basically go to protests with retarded signs like "Communism: Stalin and Mao killed X-million people" and "Hippies Smell", get pushed around/get their ass kicked and then go online and ***** about it uncessantly.

Indeed.

Their attempt to "take back the streets" doesn't seem to be going all that well and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they completely disappeared within the next decade.

It'll be such a loss. :lol:

[Tungsten]

Armchair Socialism

I am inclined to conclude that said incident took place at a heated protest where both sides were being antagonistic and at such events street fighting is not uncommon.
But not justifiable by any means.

Politics is about "taking the streets" and commanding them.
Is this what you think you're doing? How very amusing. What are you in command of, exactly?

Indeed if you wish to wade around in a muck of Philosophical questions about the ethical and moral implications of political action, you are free to do so.
Amoralism isn't a very effective tool when it comes to dispensing justice.

However, don't expect anyone to be interested in what you say, because philosophical debates about man in the abstract tend not to bare any relationship to the real world and are therefore useless.
You bet your ass debates about "man in the abstract" have a relationship with the real world. Just because I don't think it's morally right to grab the guns at the first sign of someone who doesn't agree with me doesn't mean I'm not prepared to ventilate certain people if the need arises. We shoot thieves who try to rob us. Just because the thief is carrying a red flag and chanting slogans doesn't mean he's going to be considered any less a thief if he tries to rob us too.

Materialism is the product of a weak mind incapable of dealing with the "intangibles".

I'm sure if you posted about it, someone would kindly present you with some reading material regarding the history of fascism and "Middle Class" support for fascism.
No attempt to argue against what I posted, though.

If the "Red Front" had been a bit bigger then it could well have effectively driven the Brownshirts from the streets of Germany and prevented the Nazi's from coming to power.
The "Red Front" were no better.

However, I can certainly see how discussing the ethical and moral implications of "initiating" force against the Brownshirts is a better method to stop the Nazi's.
It's better method of preventing oneself becoming and behaving like a Nazi, or following an identical moral code.

In times of heightened class conflict, you will make the choice between the Communists and the ruling class - and often a fascist group.
I'd just leave the country and leave them to it.

In such times people usually decide according to their class roots
I don't have any "class roots".

and you if I'm not mistaken, are a "businessman".
You're mistaken.

In which case you will likely watch with glee as the Police clubs striking workers across the head and shots people at will.
If they were trying to take my property, yes I would. Likewise, if the government was trying to do the same, I'd enjoy watching them and their allies being shot too.

You don't really know a whole lot about the history of fascism, do you?
I'm talking about fascism in principle and in practice, not the "history" of it.

There isn't a "lynch-mob" mentality behind that position, neither is there a "Hitlerist" mentality behind that position.
"Your downright rejection of any kind of popular resistance to fascism"- implying that violence against anyone is okay providing it's popular enough.

Indeed I rather doubt that you could tell anyone anything of use about fascism, because after responding to this thread I am certainly under the impression that you know absolutely nothing about the "nature" of politics and what actually happens in the real world.
This would be the real world where people will just work for work's sake and no one will ever, ever dream of initiating force against other people for personal gain or political power. You're a utopian and a dishonest one at that.

If that's how they expect to "take back the streets" and "fight the left" - then I'd say that they're going to be at it for a long time yet.
How are your boys "taking back the streets"? Chanting slogans in the hope that everyone else will join in? I wouldn't get too impatient if I were you.
----

Their attempt to "take back the streets" doesn't seem to be going all that well and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they completely disappeared within the next decade.
Speaking of how well "taking back the streets" protests are going, when does the revolution begin, comrade? :lol:
Free Palestine

They're nothing, ideologically speaking, just Bush-Cheney sheep. They have no set belief system other than, "If the Republicans are doing it, it's good. If the Democrats are doing it, it's bad."
It's a bit like your position- if the Palestinians are doing it, it's right. If the Israelis/US are doing it, its wrong. It's a pity you're only capable of seeing hypocracy in other people.
BattleOfTheCowshed

Hahaha, Protest Warrior, they're really a joke. That previous description of them is spot-on, they basically go to protests with retarded signs like "Communism: Stalin and Mao killed X-million people"
Hahahaha. Fancy anyone considering that an argument against communism. <_<

[Free Palestine]

Originally posted by Tungsten
It&#39;s a bit like your position- if the Palestinians are doing it, it&#39;s right. If the Israelis/US are doing it, its wrong. It&#39;s a pity you&#39;re only capable of seeing hypocracy in other people.

Your sweeping generalizations highlight your mental (ideological) limitations. It&#39;s quite clear that you fight againts the figments of your feverish "imagination", and not against your real adversaries. Personally, I never condemn US policy simply because it is US policy. I&#39;m an American too. I&#39;m only a radical opponent of the US government imperial policies, and not only because they harm the entire world, but also because they are bad for the US people. I don&#39;t condemn Israeli policy simply because it is Israeli policy either. I&#39;m only a radical opponent of Zionism, which I consider a criminal ideology based on discriminatory ethnic and religious principles of exclusion and oppression of non-Jewish individuals and populations.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)But not justifiable by any means.[/b]

Perhaps.

However, we are talking about real world events and in that case it is preferable to understand why these attempts took place. Therefore just passing "judgement" is really useless.

For instance, I could respond with the "judgement" that these events were "justifiable" and I could say that they were "justifiable" because they were effective.

A Protest Warrior could respond by saying that these events weren&#39;t "justifiable, because the Protest Warrior&#39;s lost. However, if they had won, then he could well respond by saying these events were "justifiable".

Indeed if they had won, I suspect that you would join in saying that these events were "justifiable" because these events would represent a defeat for the "left" - which you despise.

As a couple of bright men pointed out over a century ago, "judgements" don&#39;t exist "up in the air", they are based on real world scenarios and specific people. These people have real world political agendas and their "judgements" will reflect this.

To a Christian - with a Christian political agenda - bombing an Abortion Clinic is "justifiable". To a Pro-Choice activist, it&#39;s not.


Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)What are you in command of, exactly?[/b]

Nothing at the moment, which enables your smug gloating.

However, there is a reason that the oppressed are called the oppressed, and it&#39;s not because we win a lot&#33;


Originally posted by Tungsten
Amoralism isn&#39;t a very effective tool when it comes to dispensing justice.

I suppose that justice is "dispensed" in an "a-moral" way.

However, the specific laws that people are tried for breaking are certainly based on all kinds of "moralism".

Wife beating was allowed for centuries because it was deemed "morally right" - and Christian - to do this. Today - in some places - it is deemed "morally wrong" to beat your wife and as civilised people we agree with that.


Originally posted by Tungsten
You bet your ass debates about "man in the abstract" have a relationship with the real world.

Do you not realise the contradictory nature of that statement? ...."man in the abstract" is - by definition - man abstracted from the real world.

If you don&#39;t believe me, consult a dictionary....


Originally posted by dictionary.com
Abstract....

1. Considered apart from concrete existence: an abstract concept.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=abstract

What exactly is the "relationship" of "a man" who exists outside of the real world with the real world?


Originally posted by Tungsten
Just because the thief is carrying a red flag and chanting slogans doesn&#39;t mean he&#39;s going to be considered any less a thief if he tries to rob us too.

And who exactly is "us"?


Originally posted by Tungsten
Materialism is the product of a weak mind incapable of dealing with the "intangibles".

Tungsten, the last of the feudal philosophers&#33; :lol:

I&#39;d be very interested to hear more with regards you "critique" of materialism, maybe you could start a thread on it? ....just for "shits and giggles".


Originally posted by Tungsten
The "Red Front" were no better.

Of course, any kind of resistance to fascism makes one a "rotten bastard" in Tungsten&#39;s book.

Imagine what he thinks about the International Brigades&#33; :o

I mean those "bastards" actually tried to stop Franco - that must be a crime worthy of hanging in your book?


Originally posted by Tungsten
It&#39;s better method of preventing oneself becoming and behaving like a Nazi, or following an identical moral code.

How to fight fascism as defined by Tungsten....

Fight them in the streets = big no no.

Sit around on your arse making sure you "prevent" yourself from "becoming" a Nazi whilst they come to power and start gassing people = abso-fucking-lutely.

I guess Tungsten, the people of the Warsaw Ghetto were just "behaving like a Nazi" when they rose up and tried to overthrow the Nazi&#39;s violently?


Originally posted by Tungsten
I&#39;d just leave the country and leave them to it.

I suppose it&#39;s better than seeing you "goose-step" around Central Park. :lol:


Originally posted by Tungsten
I don&#39;t have any "class roots".

Yes, you do.


Originally posted by Tungsten
You&#39;re mistaken.

Emphasis added....


Originally posted by Tungsten+Jan 21 2006, 11:36 PM--> (Tungsten &#064; Jan 21 2006, 11:36 PM)I&#39;m not convinced that it won&#39;t effect me. It&#39;s not the commune-types that bother me, it&#39;s the revolutionaries who think that my business is their business.[/b]

http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php...st&p=1292007936 (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=43979&view=findpost&p=1292007936)

Do you own a business or not?


Tungsten
I&#39;m talking about fascism in principle and in practice, not the "history" of it.

How are we supposed to determine what fascism does in "principle and practice" if we don&#39;t look at fascisms history?

Honestly, you should think before you type.


[email protected]
"Your downright rejection of any kind of popular resistance to fascism"- implying that violence against anyone is okay providing it&#39;s popular enough.

Well have a look, I said "popular resistance" against "fascism".

In the case of fascism, resistance - popular or not - is "okay" with me. Violence against women on the other hand, is not "okay" with me no matter how "popular" it is.

I don&#39;t look for "Universal truths" - they don&#39;t exist. I do judge individual case by "Communist standards" - basically, does this make proletarian revolution more or less possible.


Tungsten
You&#39;re a utopian and a dishonest one at that.

You&#39;re an idiot and an obvious one at that. :D

[Tungsten]

Armchair Socialism

A Protest Warrior could respond by saying that these events weren&#39;t "justifiable, because the Protest Warrior&#39;s lost. However, if they had won, then he could well respond by saying these events were "justifiable".
What did they "lose"?

Indeed if they had won, I suspect that you would join in saying that these events were "justifiable" because these events would represent a defeat for the "left" - which you despise.
I wouldn&#39;t want to lower myself to your level.

As a couple of bright men pointed out over a century ago, "judgements" don&#39;t exist "up in the air", they are based on real world scenarios and specific people.
I&#39;m not proclaiming otherwise.

Do you not realise the contradictory nature of that statement? ...."man in the abstract" is - by definition - man abstracted from the real world.
Another wonderful demonstrations of how totally out of your depth you are.

1+2=3 is "abstract". I guess mathematics has no basis the real world. :rolleyes:
If you don&#39;t fancy mathematics, then I&#39;m sure the concepts of "jusctice", "right" and "wrong" must have no basis in the real world either, because those are abstract too.

Once again: Materialism is the product of a weak mind incapable of dealing with the "intangibles".

If you don&#39;t believe me, consult a dictionary....
Reading the dictionary definition of "abstract" won&#39;t educate you as to the correct use of abstractions and how they relate to concretes any more than looking up the word "building" makes you an qualified architect.

Tungsten, the last of the feudal philosophers&#33;
You don&#39;t know anything about my philosophy, so such a statement could only have been made out of ignorance.

This suggest that you&#39;re more concerned with wanting to win "points" by being believed and appearing to be right rather than actually seeking to promote valid facts and being right. Given the nature of the majority of the people who come to this forum, you might very well find an audience, but not one worthy of credit.

I&#39;d be very interested to hear more with regards you "critique" of materialism, maybe you could start a thread on it? ....just for "shits and giggles".

Let&#39;s have a definition of materialism&#39;s precise position (as you understand it) then. Because from what I gather, it rejects the existence of consciousness, volition and therefore moral liability. If that&#39;s the position you hold, then the only giggles will be coming from me.

Of course, any kind of resistance to fascism makes one a "rotten bastard" in Tungsten&#39;s book.
No, just behaving like them makes you a "rotten bastard".

I mean those "bastards" actually tried to stop Franco - that must be a crime worthy of hanging in your book?
Stalin tried to stop fascism too. He must have been a really nice, caring person. :rolleyes:

How to fight fascism as defined by Tungsten....

Fight them in the streets = big no no.

Sit around on your arse making sure you "prevent" yourself from "becoming" a Nazi whilst they come to power and start gassing people = abso-fucking-lutely.

I guess Tungsten, the people of the Warsaw Ghetto were just "behaving like a Nazi" when they rose up and tried to overthrow the Nazi&#39;s violently?
I&#39;ve clearly made a mistake believing you were ever capable of rational thought.
I guess I&#39;m going to have to be patronising:

Initiating force= Not OK

Self defence/Retaliation= OK

Killing a nazi for advocating nazism= Not OK

Killing a nazi for trying to send you/someone else to a death camp= OK

Attacking a protest warrior for holding a counter protest/calling you names= Not OK

Attacking a protest warrior who&#39;s trying to punch you= OK

The difference between these is so obvious that you&#39;d have to be mentally retarded not to understand it. Anyone who isn&#39;t retarded isn&#39;t making this mistake innocently and is behaving like a nazi. Which category do you come under?

I have a hypothesis that there is some link between the inability to understand this and the people who can&#39;t figure out the difference between rational self-interest and trampling on anyone who gets in your way.


Do you own a business or not?
:lol: I suppose you think the phrase "mind your own business" means that someone is refering to an actual money-making business, do you? :rolleyes:

I don&#39;t look for "Universal truths" - they don&#39;t exist.
Is that statement universally true?

I do judge individual case by "Communist standards" - basically, does this make proletarian revolution more or less possible.
In other words, there&#39;s nothing you wouldn&#39;t do. Then what happens after the revolution? Or haven&#39;t you figured that out, yet?

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)What did they "lose"?[/b]

The "Battle" to "take back the streets" - which is their stated goal.


Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)If you don&#39;t fancy mathematics, then I&#39;m sure the concepts of "jusctice", "right" and "wrong" must have no basis in the real world either, because those are abstract too.[/b]

Well the ideal of "justice" - or "right" and wrong" - don&#39;t have a material basis in the real world, they are abstracted ideals.

What actually happens is we have a specific kind of "justice" which is designed by a specific group of people who have a specific set of interests.

In 1700 it was "justice" when feudal lords stole crops of Peasants, because this "justice" served the material interests of the ruling class.

Today, it is "justice" for the Police to club striking workers across the head, because this again serves the material interests of the ruling class.

"Justice" - or what is considered "right" and "wrong" - are not eternal truths, they represent real material interests.


[email protected]
Let&#39;s have a definition of materialism&#39;s precise position (as you understand it) then....

I am not here to teach you, so perhaps you could start with reading something simple - like this....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism

....and then move on to more in depth texts - I&#39;d recommend The Germany Ideology.

However, if you would like to know the "basis" from which materialism "grows", then you should start from the phrase....

Social being determines consciousness.

That is, if you like, the "foundation" of historical materialism and perhaps the starting point for your greatly anticipated "critique".


Tungsten
Stalin tried to stop fascism too. He must have been a really nice, caring person.

In that section of the "score-card", Stalin does "score" significantly higher than anyone in the British and French Governments.

[Tungsten]

Armchair Socialism

Well the ideal of "justice" - or "right" and wrong" - don&#39;t have a material basis in the real world, they are abstracted ideals.
They are conected to some concrete bases, so therefore they have some grounds in reality.

What actually happens is we have a specific kind of "justice" which is designed by a specific group of people who have a specific set of interests.
But there is a type of justice in which it is in everyone&#39;s interest to follow.

In 1700 it was "justice" when feudal lords stole crops of Peasants, because this "justice" served the material interests of the ruling class.
Not by my definition.

Today, it is "justice" for the Police to club striking workers across the head, because this again serves the material interests of the ruling class.
That&#39;s piss poor even for you. It&#39;s justice to have people being hit over the head to prevent them from taking things from others- no matter who they are or who the victim is. This is the principle behind the idea that the initiation of force by one person against another should be banned.

However, if you would like to know the "basis" from which materialism "grows", then you should start from the phrase....
Social being determines consciousness.
And I don&#39;t think I need venture any futher, because it&#39;s ridiculous. Don&#39;t believe me? Take a look yourself. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx)

"Karl Marx was born into a progressive and wealthy Jewish family"

If social being determines consciousness then Marx would have been just another "greedy capitalist" and the communist mannifesto wouldn&#39;t have existed. But he wasn&#39;t, which contradicts the whole theory.

That is, if you like, the "foundation" of historical materialism and perhaps the starting point for your greatly anticipated "critique".
There&#39;s little need. I&#39;d go further, but I&#39;ve already demolished it&#39;s foundations.

In that section of the "score-card", Stalin does "score" significantly higher than anyone in the British and French Governments.
So you&#39;d rather have lived under Stalin than Atlee or Churchill? I believe you.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)They are conected to some concrete bases, so therefore they have some grounds in reality.[/b]

Well yes.

You see what you consider a "Universal Truth" actually has a real material base and is therefore not a "Truth", rather it is a reflection on your "material base".


Originally posted by Tungsten+--> (Tungsten)But there is a type of justice in which it is in everyone&#39;s interest to follow.[/b]

If we eliminated as many differences as possible in society - classes, patriarchy, racism and so on - then we could theoretically come to a point where we produced "justice" that was in "everyone&#39;s interest".

However, as long as massive differences in material interests still exist, such a "noble goal" will always fail.


Originally posted by Tungsten
It&#39;s justice to have people being hit over the head to prevent them from taking things from others- no matter who they are or who the victim is.

The striking Miners weren&#39;t "taking things", they were striking - they still got (bourgeois) "justice"....a crushed skull&#33;


[email protected]
If social being determines consciousness then Marx would have been just another "greedy capitalist" and the communist mannifesto wouldn&#39;t have existed. But he wasn&#39;t, which contradicts the whole theory.

If that is your rebuttal, then your argument is "ridiculous".

As I said, start a separate thread on the issue.


Tungsten
There&#39;s little need. I&#39;d go further, but I&#39;ve already demolished it&#39;s foundations.

No, you really haven&#39;t.

If that was an effective "demolition" of the "foundations" of historical materialism, then "scabs" or Policemen would totally ruin it.

However, historical materialism does not analyse individuals, it analyses large social groups and draws conclusions from the actions of these groups.

[somebodywhowantedtoleaveandnotcomeback]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2006, 06:55 PM
"Karl Marx was born into a progressive and wealthy Jewish family"
Actually, they were from jewish origin but became officially lutheran to make it easier for his father Heinrich to work as a lawyer. They were wealthy, though certainly not rich.
His parents had liberal, though non-radical ideas on topics such as politics and religion. In any case, what does this matter? Marx didn&#39;t choose to be born in that family under those circumstabnces, did he? The major part of his life he lived in poverty, or under pover conditions.