Justification for kicking the shit out of scumbags

[Tommy-K]

Would you say that this argument...

"Fascists don't respect the human rights of others (i.e. ethnic minorities) so why should we respect their human rights?"

...is reasonable justification for kicking the shit out of fascist scumbags, let's say, on an NF march. As some would argue that...

"Kicking the shit out of fascist scumbags is not respecting their human rights and so makes you as bad as they are."

It's something I've been pondering over for a while. I don't believe in an eye for an eye, but in this case I'm not sure. Is it justifiable?

[An archist]

When you're dealing with fascists, hostory has shown us that the best way to counter hem is to kick them while their numbers are still small, chase them at their meetings, fight them at their protests, find out where they live.
It's not democratic, it's not nice, but it has to be done.

[Dr Mindbender]

The problem with getting violent with the fash (although morally its justified for the reason you mentioned) is that it puts them on the pedestal so they can say, ''look at those trot thugs beating everyone up, come to us cause we're not the troublemakers!''

[welshred]

yea, it works both ways. Beating the crap out of them can rid them in an area if the numbers are small, but they can use it to their advantage like someone has already said.

[dso79]

Would you say that this argument...

"Fascists don't respect the human rights of others (i.e. ethnic minorities) so why should we respect their human rights?"

...is reasonable justification for kicking the shit out of fascist scumbags, let's say, on an NF march.

In many situations violence is justified and sometimes it may even be necessary, but I don’t like that line of reasoning.

It‘s the sort of argument that right-wingers use to justify the death penalty or the maltreatment of ‘terror suspects‘. Human rights are inalienable and should always be respected. You can’t just take them away when somebody does something wrong.

[People's Councillor]

Simple solution, Ulster Socialist. Wait for them to use violence once, just once, and then come down on them like a ton of bricks. That gets antifa the moral high ground, and avoids the stigma associated with the pre-emptive strike.

The only problem with this, I guess, is that they might not use violence, but that is highly unlikely due to the fact that fascists are by nature thugs.

[A-S M.]

in my view it's simple justice, just look at all the harmfull things fascism has caused the world and different people and how much of it they get away with, just look a normal human morals, not the ones that are instilled in everyone by the modern society, and see what is right or wrong as a human beeing, not a red, left, right, up, under, doesn't matter, just as a normal human beeing, fascism is unacceptable and if it doesn't go away we'll make it go away

[TheDifferenceEngine]

If you don't belive in freedom of speech for everyone Then you don't get it for anyone

Even facist scum have the right to have their moronic beliefs respected.

[A-S M.]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 01:08 pm
If you don't belive in freedom of speech for everyone Then you don't get it for anyone

Even facist scum have the right to have their moronic beliefs respected.
i don't believe in absolute freedom of speech, and remember that fascists don't use words only to speak their mind

[An archist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 01:08 pm
If you don't belive in freedom of speech for everyone Then you don't get it for anyone

Even facist scum have the right to have their moronic beliefs respected.
No
Fascism is plain and simply wrong. It must be stopped by any means necesary.

[Comrade Marcel]

No no no. It's a red herring.

Beating the shit out of fascists doesn't make you one. Beating someone up isn't a political ideology. It's a means of enforcing power through a form of force. The state uses force, bosses/corporations use force, etc. etc.

Obviously the goal is to use militant action that is accompanied by conscious awareness of why those participating are using the said tactic. It should also incorporate some sort of tactical and community involvement.

Violence against fascists has to be used wisely, and because some people unfortunately fall into the trap of the thread poster, our justification with scientific and rational reason and intellectual arguments has to be propagated throughout those who could potentially be won over to the antifa side. This means if a newspaper criticizes you, you write in and counter with them. You hold meetings in the area, etc.

And TheDifferenceEngine: Free speech is an abstract concept, and in bourgeois society although it doesn't even exist (unless you have a very warped concept of "free") it is often used as justification for repression, shunning, finger pointing and polarizing.

[TheDifferenceEngine]

If you dont give people the opportunity to speak their mind without fear of reprisals, then you have no opportunity to change their minds. Facism is born out of ignorance, and can be easily swayed from their mindset with a few bites of information.

Unless they are raised as facist scum (like prussian blue -shiver) then they'll relent pretty quick in the face of logic.

The really hardcore raised-from-birth motherf***ers will inevitably react with violence at the slightest provocation (i.e protests), giving you free reign to self-defense them as much as you like. (in my opinion theres no such thing as "force appropriate response")

DON'T give up our moral high ground just because you want shits and giggles from beating up some skinheads.

[An archist]

Fascists are generally not very open towards reasoning, they hear a very simple and populistic explanation for problems ('it's the jooos!') and just accept it without thinking. Off course, there are some exceptions, people who are very committed towards fascism and kow what they're talking about, but most are waaaay too far off for reason.

[coonbasha]

I dont know why you lot say you are anti fascist. You are trying to impose your ideologies on the rest of civilisation by using violence. if that isnt fascism, then I dont know what is.
Fucking red scum

[RedAnarchist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 01:15 am
I dont know why you lot say you are anti fascist. You are trying to impose your ideologies on the rest of civilisation by using violence. if that isnt fascism, then I dont know what is.
Fucking red scum
Hey dipshit, we won't be forcing our views on most people beacuse they will be class concious by the time of the revolution. Try reading a bit more instead of masturbating at that picture of Nick Griffin.

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 07:21 pm
If you dont give people the opportunity to speak their mind without fear of reprisals, then you have no opportunity to change their minds. Facism is born out of ignorance, and can be easily swayed from their mindset with a few bites of information.

Unless they are raised as facist scum (like prussian blue -shiver) then they'll relent pretty quick in the face of logic.

The really hardcore raised-from-birth motherf***ers will inevitably react with violence at the slightest provocation (i.e protests), giving you free reign to self-defense them as much as you like. (in my opinion theres no such thing as "force appropriate response")

DON'T give up our moral high ground just because you want shits and giggles from beating up some skinheads.
I have no interest in changing their minds. I am not interested in appealing to their hearts and minds. I shouldn't have to debate my right to exist with someone either.

I don't need a moral high ground. In fact, I would like to be a low down, dirty, lying, heartless piece of shit, so long as it is helping fight fascism or make some sort of gain for the future proletarian revolution.

Also, you have no proof that your way of appealing to their hearts is more successful. You have no proof that only born fascists can not be reasoned with. You have no proof that they can be "easily swayed".

Even if they could, they can easily do this themselves. There is plenty of material available to them. None of us should have to be the one to risk a beating/stabbing/etc while trying to explain to some bonehead that they are a human.

Also, militant tactics have been proven to work. Any area in North America and the UK (elsewhere as well) with strong militant anti-fascist movements are relatively low in racist and fascist activity. The places (like London, ON) with pacifist anti-racist movements (who work with the cops, funded by the state, etc.) are rife with scum.

You can have the moral high ground, I'l take fash free streets, thank you.

[socialistpunk]

do you really need justification to beat the shit out of nazis there hate filled wankers with no reason

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 07:21 pm
If you dont give people the opportunity to speak their mind without fear of reprisals, then you have no opportunity to change their minds. Facism is born out of ignorance, and can be easily swayed from their mindset with a few bites of information.

Unless they are raised as facist scum (like prussian blue -shiver) then they'll relent pretty quick in the face of logic.

The really hardcore raised-from-birth motherf***ers will inevitably react with violence at the slightest provocation (i.e protests), giving you free reign to self-defense them as much as you like. (in my opinion theres no such thing as "force appropriate response")

DON'T give up our moral high ground just because you want shits and giggles from beating up some skinheads.
Let them have their free speech, they can say whatever they want - but if their speech offends me then my free listening will come into play and I will beat the crap out of them. Their freedom of speech is not limited, they are simply facing the consequences of exercising it in the same way that if I exercised my freedom of movement to stand in the middle of the road doing star jumps a possible consequence is me getting run over.

[BlessedBesse]

let's just beat up everybody that disagrees with us

by the end, everyone will agree, right?



*shakes fist threateningly*
RIGHT??

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 03:33 pm
let's just beat up everybody that disagrees with us

by the end, everyone will agree, right?



*shakes fist threateningly*
RIGHT??
Where is this idea about "beating up" people who "disagree" coming from? That's what they say about us on shitfront. Putting aside the fact that militant techniques aren't necessarily about beatings, we are not talking about "disagreements", we are talking about genocidal maniacs who want to see 90% of the planet's people enslaved! We are talking about the mortal enemy of the working class: fascism and organized racism!

It is odd that Trotskyites, Marxist-Leninists ("Stalinists"), Anarchists, social-democrats, etc. can manage to more or less get along to fight fascism. They have Disagreements... They get into animated debates over beer, once and awhile it might get heated. That's a disagreement. Some fascist racist fuck's opinion on my status as human being is not a "disagreement"; get it?

I'm not sure what point you were trying to make anyways.

[BlessedBesse]

I'm being facetious

a thug with highfalutin justifications is still a thug

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

The real Nazis are the corporate heads and the politicians, and they are way more subtle about it because guess what, they don't call themselves Nazis and they aren't explicit in their plans for domination. I equate the fascists of today, the ones that actually call themselves fascists, with some kind of violent histoircal reenactment society.

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2007 02:51 pm
I'm being facetious

a thug with highfalutin justifications is still a thug
No, a thug is someone who just likes violence.

Using violence as a tool for political work is a means of a achieving greater goals. You might even say it's an art. Beating a fascist is a thing of beauty! :lol:

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

I feel like quoting Alexander Berkman at length when he speaks of how to deal with counter-revolutionaries. So I will. I think that as far as debate and thought, it goes a lot further for the working class to be knowledgeable of fascist thought, in order to understand precisely why it is a bad thing. It goes further and makes more of an impact if their ideas can be challenged by presnting vastly better ones and most importantly, put out into the open so the general populace can air their grievances about it.


"But would you let counter-revolutionists incite the people if they tried to?"

By all means. Let them talk all they like. To restrain them would serve only to create a persecuted class and thereby enlist popular sympathy for them and their cause. To suppress speech and press is not only a theoretic offense against liberty: it is a direct blow at the very foundations of the revolution. It would, first of all, raise problems where none had existed before. It would introduce methods which must lead to discontent and opposition, to bitterness and strife, to prison, Tcheka, and civil war. It would generate fear and distrust, would hatch conspiracies, and culminate in a reign of terror which has always killed revolutions in the past.

The social revolution must from the very sears be based on entirely different principles, on a new conception and attitude. Full freedom is the very breath of its existence; and be it never forgotten that the cure for evil and disorder is more liberty, not suppression. Suppression leads only to violence and destruction.

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by Juan Sin [email protected] 22, 2007 08:40 pm
I feel like quoting Alexander Berkman at length when he speaks of how to deal with counter-revolutionaries. So I will. I think that as far as debate and thought, it goes a lot further for the working class to be knowledgeable of fascist thought, in order to understand precisely why it is a bad thing. It goes further and makes more of an impact if their ideas can be challenged by presnting vastly better ones and most importantly, put out into the open so the general populace can air their grievances about it.


"But would you let counter-revolutionists incite the people if they tried to?"

By all means. Let them talk all they like. To restrain them would serve only to create a persecuted class and thereby enlist popular sympathy for them and their cause. To suppress speech and press is not only a theoretic offense against liberty: it is a direct blow at the very foundations of the revolution. It would, first of all, raise problems where none had existed before. It would introduce methods which must lead to discontent and opposition, to bitterness and strife, to prison, Tcheka, and civil war. It would generate fear and distrust, would hatch conspiracies, and culminate in a reign of terror which has always killed revolutions in the past.

The social revolution must from the very sears be based on entirely different principles, on a new conception and attitude. Full freedom is the very breath of its existence; and be it never forgotten that the cure for evil and disorder is more liberty, not suppression. Suppression leads only to violence and destruction.
Armchair babbling is all good until you have to live in an area where fascists live. It's all good until you are a Jewish person, a Black person, or an immigrant new to a community facing racist aggression. Then things change. I would like to see Berkman's response when the fascists agree with what he say's, and say "thanks for supporting our right to free speech" while they break his face.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by Comrade Marcel+June 23, 2007 02:41 am--> (Comrade Marcel @ June 23, 2007 02:41 am)
Juan Sin [email protected] 22, 2007 08:40 pm
I feel like quoting Alexander Berkman at length when he speaks of how to deal with counter-revolutionaries. So I will. I think that as far as debate and thought, it goes a lot further for the working class to be knowledgeable of fascist thought, in order to understand precisely why it is a bad thing. It goes further and makes more of an impact if their ideas can be challenged by presnting vastly better ones and most importantly, put out into the open so the general populace can air their grievances about it.


"But would you let counter-revolutionists incite the people if they tried to?"

By all means. Let them talk all they like. To restrain them would serve only to create a persecuted class and thereby enlist popular sympathy for them and their cause. To suppress speech and press is not only a theoretic offense against liberty: it is a direct blow at the very foundations of the revolution. It would, first of all, raise problems where none had existed before. It would introduce methods which must lead to discontent and opposition, to bitterness and strife, to prison, Tcheka, and civil war. It would generate fear and distrust, would hatch conspiracies, and culminate in a reign of terror which has always killed revolutions in the past.

The social revolution must from the very sears be based on entirely different principles, on a new conception and attitude. Full freedom is the very breath of its existence; and be it never forgotten that the cure for evil and disorder is more liberty, not suppression. Suppression leads only to violence and destruction.
Armchair babbling is all good until you have to live in an area where fascists live. It's all good until you are a Jewish person, a Black person, or an immigrant new to a community facing racist aggression. Then things change. I would like to see Berkman's response when the fascists agree with what he say's, and say "thanks for supporting our right to free speech" while they break his face. [/b]
This.

Being a "thug" and defending yourself and your community from fascists and racists is something that any leftist that is physically capable should feel duty bound to do.

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

Being a "thug" and defending yourself and your community from fascists and racists is something that any leftist that is physically capable should feel duty bound to do.
Defending from their fists or their words?

Because one is sensible and the other isn't, so much.

Maybe the thing that seems to be most troublesome is that both fascists and some sorts of anti-fascists use as their casus belli that they're purging the world of some kind of incurable filth.

[ahab]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 01:08 pm
If you don't belive in freedom of speech for everyone Then you don't get it for anyone

Even facist scum have the right to have their moronic beliefs respected.
fascists are not people, nazi's are not people, they have given up their title as a human being when they decided that they need to discriminate, murder, rape, belittle and hunt other human beings (among the other things they do to us.) They are an animal, no not even an animal, they are a virus that needs to be exterminated

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

fascists are not people, nazi's are not people, they have given up their title as a human being when they decided that they need to discriminate, murder, rape, belittle and hunt other human beings (among the other things they do to us.) They are an animal, no not even an animal, they are a virus that needs to be exterminated
If you want to condemn Nazis, don't use the same rhetorical conventions.

[LSD]

Let them have their free speech, they can say whatever they want - but if their speech offends me then my free listening will come into play and I will beat the crap out of them.

And you have no problem with that scenario? I suppose in your mind you should not be charged with assault since you were "provoked"

So tell me, if beating up "fascists" is acceptable, what else is? Killing them? How about raping them?

If some Nazi "****" refuses to stop peacably protesting, should we "teach her a lesson"? You know,"slap her around" a bit, maybe "fuck the capitalist outa her"? I mean, she's just a "fash" so it's not like she has any rights...

I think you need to think long and hard about what kind of society you are endeavouring to create. Because a system in which people's social rights are dependent on them toeing the ideological line is anything but free ...and is hardly what I'd call communist!


If victims of persecution are allowed to be continually persecuted by the persecutors then something is wrong with society.

Unless you can come up with some objective demonstrable harm that doing otherwise would produce, we have an obligation to grant full democratic enfranchisement to every member of society.

Revolution is not about "class spite". We fight the bourgeoisie because we have to, not because we enjoy it. "Hurting" the former capitalists would be a complete waste of time and worse than useless public policy.

We're not overthrowing the bourgoeisie to replace them with a worse oppression! The revolutionary aftermath is a very delicate situation and a little too much overeagerness in "suppression" can derail the entire endeavour.

We don't want another Lenin ...or another Mao. Tha means no "iron discipline", no "ruling party", and no government suppression!

Now, that might mean having to debate capitalists a lot longer than we might like to, but so long as we're on the wining side of history, who gives a damn? Revolution isn't about making revolutionaries happy, it's about emancipating the proletariat.

And censorship is fundamentally incompatible with an emancipated society.


I have no interest in changing their minds. I am not interested in appealing to their hearts and minds. I shouldn't have to debate my right to exist with someone either.

You're talking philosophy when you should be talking politics.

The issue isn't "why should" racists be allowed to speak, it's how would one go about stopping them.

No one is denying that racists are wrong, but the problem with censorship is that by definition it requires a censor; that is, someone empowered to declare what is and what is not "acceptable" speech.

This thread seems to be of the opinion that an ad hoc censoring body somehow wouldn't be oppressive. The reality, however, shown again and again is that "mob censorship" can be just as bad if not worse than institutionalized suppression.

It's also intrinsically unstable.

In the small scale, sure, you can run around beating people up; but the moment it becomes politically significant, the bourgeois state will interfere, if only to maintain law and order.

I would remind you that the single best example of this kind of street fighting as politics was Germany in the 1930s, and we all know how well that turned out...

Whether before, after, or durring a revolution, people must remain free to excersize their opinions. After all, the whole point of working class insurrection is to empower the people, not to subject them to ideological terror.

The communist cause is not the decriminalization of assault! The excuse of "provokation" only goes so far.

[BlessedBesse]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 06:38 am
blacks are not people, gays are not people, they have given up their title as a human being when they decided that they need to discriminate, murder, rape, belittle and hunt other human beings (among the other things they do to us.) They are an animal, no not even an animal, they are a virus that needs to be exterminated
it's amazing how awful your statement sounds when you take out the groups which it's "cool" to hate

[Chicano Shamrock]

No one is denying that racists are wrong, but the problem with censorship is that by definition it requires a censor; that is, someone empowered to declare what is and what is not "acceptable" speech.

This thread seems to be of the opinion that an ad hoc censoring body somehow wouldn't be oppressive. The reality, however, shown again and again is that "mob censorship" can be just as bad if not worse than institutionalized suppression.
Who cares if it is oppressive? These are people that wish to do harm to the people of the world. With their words that you wish to protect they gather more people to their cause. Then when they are big enough they act on their cause.

In LA Saturday the Minutemen had a march and about 500 people came and shut down their march. They shut down their recruiting and they shut down their message. This is what needs to be done to save the people from harm. This is the same group that stands at the border with rifles, shotguns and pistols. There have been situations where groups of immigrants have been ambushed and killed. There have been plans by the KKK to plant pipe bombs in latino areas.

Your free speech idea is all fun and good until their fucking hunting people at the border. They need to be stopped. If they participate in a group that kills people or fuels the flame of individuals that kill people they need to be confronted.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bl...story?track=rss (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-blacks24jun24,1,7763148.story?track=rss)

[LSD]

Who cares if it is oppressive?

Ostensibly anyone who gives a damn about human rights. That's supposed to include self-declared leftists like you.

Again, this is not a philisophical question. Censorship isn't wrong because it's imoral or anything as inane as that. No, censorship must be fought for the same reason that capitalism must be fought, because it is intrinsically harmful.

Again I ask the question, do you want a society in which rape is acceptable so long as the perpetrator was sufficiently "provoked" or "justified"? If not, how can you apply a double standard to simple assault?

People's civil rights cannot be subject to the requirement of passing some sort of ideological test, even if that ideology happens to be valid. Our movement is supposed to be predicated on the notion of universal working class liberation, not just the liberation of the workers we happen to agree with.

Minorities have rights not because they're minorities, but because they're people. They have no special claim to superhuman protections. Everyone has the right not to be attacked or assaulted, but what you seem unable to recognize is that that everyone includes the openly "reactionary".

Disagree with them, fight them, show the world how wrong they are. But when you start beating them, you head down an incredibly dangerous road.

One that cannot lead to a progressive future.


With their words that you wish to protect they gather more people to their cause. Then when they are big enough they act on their cause.

You are infantalizing the working class to an astonishing degree.

Have you heard the "arguments" for racism? Have most people on this board? If so, how come we all aren't out there beating up immigrants?

People don't become racists because they're "convinced" by the "logic", they do so, for the most part, because they are either raised that way from childhood or are drawn to the emotion of the "movement".

People join race-groups for the same reason they join churches. It isn't about the "arguments", it's about the feelings, about the community that these kinds of groups engender.

You can't fight that kind of emotion with "no platforming".

Besides, if we try to "out-censor" the "fascists", we will lose and what's worse we'll come across as petty and authoritarian. In an environment where 90% of the population already associates communism with the catastrophe of the Soviet Union, nothing could be tactically stupider.

If we're going to trust the proletariat, we need to stop treating it like it needs to be protected from "bad" ideas. The bourgeoisie censors because it knows that, given all the options, the working class isn't going to chose exploitation.

But our ideas don't need that kind of institutional packaging; we aren't trying to fool people or socialize them to apathy, we're trying to liberate them.

So getting all the ideas out there, even the "bad" ones, is in our interest.

We want a full and open discussion, we want a fully informed working class. 'Cause that's the only way that we win. A radicallized class-conscious proletariat can only develop in an environment of knowledge.

Trying to "no platform" our "enemies" only hurts our cause in the end because it helps keeps the working class ignorant and servile by perpetuating the notion that it must be "protected from itself".

There's nothing wrong with class-based economic actions like striking or work stopping. But there's a vast difference between leveraging economic power for better conditions and using positional authority to pursue a personal agenda.

And in the end, the capitalists are simply better at this and if we get into a war of suppression with them, they will win.

Our strength is that we are espousing a theory of emancipation against oppression. We need to capitalize on that strength and not be afraid of debate, any debate.

[ahab]

Originally posted by BlessedBesse+June 24, 2007 03:20 pm--> (BlessedBesse @ June 24, 2007 03:20 pm)
[email protected] 24, 2007 06:38 am
blacks are not people, gays are not people, they have given up their title as a human being when they decided that they need to discriminate, murder, rape, belittle and hunt other human beings (among the other things they do to us.) They are an animal, no not even an animal, they are a virus that needs to be exterminated
it's amazing how awful your statement sounds when you take out the groups which it's "cool" to hate [/b]
yea heres the fucking difference, those people you put in place of nazi's and fascists dont do those things, maybe GROUPS of those people are mad and want to hurt non-gays and 'white' people, but not every gay and 'black' person does. But every nazi and fascist do want to discriminate and hate other people, THEIR OWN RACE, just because they think some of them are inferior for whatever reason. They are dumb brutes and need to be met with violence.

And its not cool to hate them, its necessary to hate them, they are the enemy

[BlessedBesse]

Originally posted by ahab+June 25, 2007 06:23 pm--> (ahab @ June 25, 2007 06:23 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 03:20 pm

[email protected] 24, 2007 06:38 am
blacks are not people, gays are not people, they have given up their title as a human being when they decided that they need to discriminate, murder, rape, belittle and hunt other human beings (among the other things they do to us.) They are an animal, no not even an animal, they are a virus that needs to be exterminated
it's amazing how awful your statement sounds when you take out the groups which it's "cool" to hate
yea heres the fucking difference, those people you put in place of nazi's and fascists dont do those things, maybe GROUPS of those people are mad and want to hurt non-gays and 'white' people, but not every gay and 'black' person does. But every nazi and fascist do want to discriminate and hate other people, THEIR OWN RACE, just because they think some of them are inferior for whatever reason. They are dumb brutes and need to be met with violence.

And its not cool to hate them, its necessary to hate them, they are the enemy [/b]
You're right, let's just put everyone who oppresses anyone else in a concentration camp. What does it matter? they're not human beings.

Dehumanizing the opposition is the best way to ruin the lives of our enemies while maintaining a clean conscience!

[ahab]

Originally posted by BlessedBesse+June 25, 2007 06:56 pm--> (BlessedBesse @ June 25, 2007 06:56 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 06:23 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 03:20 pm

[email protected] 24, 2007 06:38 am
blacks are not people, gays are not people, they have given up their title as a human being when they decided that they need to discriminate, murder, rape, belittle and hunt other human beings (among the other things they do to us.) They are an animal, no not even an animal, they are a virus that needs to be exterminated
it's amazing how awful your statement sounds when you take out the groups which it's "cool" to hate
yea heres the fucking difference, those people you put in place of nazi's and fascists dont do those things, maybe GROUPS of those people are mad and want to hurt non-gays and 'white' people, but not every gay and 'black' person does. But every nazi and fascist do want to discriminate and hate other people, THEIR OWN RACE, just because they think some of them are inferior for whatever reason. They are dumb brutes and need to be met with violence.

And its not cool to hate them, its necessary to hate them, they are the enemy
You're right, let's just put everyone who oppresses anyone else in a concentration camp. What does it matter? they're not human beings.

Dehumanizing the opposition is the best way to ruin the lives of our enemies while maintaining a clean conscience! [/b]
no, not everyone who opposes someone else, just nazi's and fascists, considering how they are the scum of the earth and fuck concentration camps, kill those muthafuckers on the spot. Are you a nazi/fascist sympathizer?

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

no, not everyone who opposes someone else, just nazi's and fascists, considering how they are the scum of the earth and fuck concentration camps, kill those muthafuckers on the spot. Are you a nazi/fascist sympathizer?


You sound like you sympathise with their tactics if you call your foes scum of the earth and think that the wrong sort of political opposition should be silenced on the spot with guns.

[BlessedBesse]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 03:02 am
no, not everyone who opposes someone else, just nazi's and fascists, considering how they are the scum of the earth and fuck concentration camps, kill those muthafuckers on the spot. Are you a nazi/fascist sympathizer?
1. this "you're either with us or against us" bullshit sounds very familiar
2. http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/discordman/bin/irony.jpg

[Chicano Shamrock]

Ostensibly anyone who gives a damn about human rights. That's supposed to include self-declared leftists like you
If they are going to deny other's their human rights why should fascists get dealt with any differently? I don't care about the moral high road. If they are going to kick the shit out of people because of their color then I think it is ok to make a preventive strike.


Again, this is not a philisophical question. Censorship isn't wrong because it's imoral or anything as inane as that. No, censorship must be fought for the same reason that capitalism must be fought, because it is intrinsically harmful.
Isn't catching a Nazi's boot to the gut harmful also?


Again I ask the question, do you want a society in which rape is acceptable so long as the perpetrator was sufficiently "provoked" or "justified"?
That is silly. There is no justification for rape. I also don't want to live in a society where everyone is all hippie love and let the fascists be until they massacre us.


Disagree with them, fight them, show the world how wrong they are. But when you start beating them, ....
Wait what is the difference between fighting them and beating them up?


People don't become racists because they're "convinced" by the "logic", they do so, for the most part, because they are either raised that way from childhood or are drawn to the emotion of the "movement"
And if we shut down their movement they can't appeal to people's emotions. As for the raised from childhood thing well in the US many people are raised from childhood with different degrees of racism. These groups can appeal to the underlying racist stereotypes and falsehoods.


If we're going to trust the proletariat, we need to stop treating it like it needs to be protected from "bad" ideas.

not just the liberation of the workers we happen to agree with.

So getting all the ideas out there, even the "bad" ones, is in our interest.

I don't think kicking the shit out of a fascist or racist organizer or group member is justified because their ideas are wrong. I disagree with a lot of people's ideas. I disagree with christians, rednecks, democrats, republicans and even a lot of times authoritarian Communists. I don't think it is justifiable to beat them up.

The thing about the fascists and what not is that they actually harm people here and now. I don't care about their ideas, I care about their actions. The KKK has tied black guys to the back of there truck and pulled them around the city killing them with limbs coming off. The KKK has come with shotguns and rifles and shot a crowd full of people. The minutemen sit at the border with rifles waiting for some Mexican to fuck up or hold something that looks like a gun so they can light them up. I can't let shit like that slide just so I can say "I allow all ideas and if you aren't for all speech you aren't for free speech". Maybe you can and I admire your numbness but if these people wish to harm others then I think it is justified to smack them up.

[rouchambeau]

TheDifferenceEngine, you can't even spell "fascism", so shut the fuck up with your psudo-moralistic, nazi-sympathetic bullshit.

[MisterSmurf]

I love it when words like 'nazi/fascist-sympathiser!' are used to describe people who simply don't agree with the notion that to deal with fascists you need to KILL THEM ALL WITH GUNS! WIPE THEM OUT! SCUM! MUTHAFUCKAS MUST DIE! BANG BANG BANG! THEY ARE THE ENEMY!

It's profoundly and utterly stupid and yet so glaringly ironic and up its own arse that it can make you marvel at the beauty of human delusion. You cannot fight fire with fire.

What do you intend to do, all you gun totting nutters, after you wipe out the fascists and the nazi-sympathisers? Shoot yourself in the head? Because if you look up the definition of fascism, you'll find that after accomplishing your glorious mass genoside, you are a fascist, & in the most absurd and paradoxically moronic way that it's possible to be one, come to that.

[Dimentio]

Fascism is an ideology based on the supremacy of the state and the state as an organism formulated by Benito Mussolini in year 1919. ~BEEP~


Hence, one could indeed criticise antifa for an inefficient, counter-productive strategy, but they have a whole other ideological foundation.

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j106/Dickvy/gargamel.jpg

[fashbasher 5000]

As soon as fascists organize, they are recognizing the stakes of physical violence. What separates us from them is that even if we strike first in a literal sense, they initiated the conflict because without fascism there would be no need for antifa. By adopting the fascist mentality, they are striking a blow at human freedom, equality, and justice. If you are physically able, it is your duty to defend those values.

[capitalistwhore]

I am wary about posting this lest *they* read this and discover my tactics, but what I've found is that I like to find two very powerful fashy groups and help them hate each other. They will eventually eliminate each other. I do not have to beat the shit out of them at all. They are more prone to violently attacking anyway.


Besides, I try to avoid direct conflict. Not only am I female and about 5 feet tall - I still think I could hold my own - but truthfully I don't like to even touch them.

[Nemichka]

Originally posted by Chicano [email protected] 25, 2007 12:48 am


No one is denying that racists are wrong, but the problem with censorship is that by definition it requires a censor; that is, someone empowered to declare what is and what is not "acceptable" speech.

This thread seems to be of the opinion that an ad hoc censoring body somehow wouldn't be oppressive. The reality, however, shown again and again is that "mob censorship" can be just as bad if not worse than institutionalized suppression.
Who cares if it is oppressive? These are people that wish to do harm to the people of the world. With their words that you wish to protect they gather more people to their cause. Then when they are big enough they act on their cause.

In LA Saturday the Minutemen had a march and about 500 people came and shut down their march. They shut down their recruiting and they shut down their message. This is what needs to be done to save the people from harm. This is the same group that stands at the border with rifles, shotguns and pistols. There have been situations where groups of immigrants have been ambushed and killed. There have been plans by the KKK to plant pipe bombs in latino areas.

Your free speech idea is all fun and good until their fucking hunting people at the border. They need to be stopped. If they participate in a group that kills people or fuels the flame of individuals that kill people they need to be confronted.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bl...story?track=rss (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-blacks24jun24,1,7763148.story?track=rss)
see, but the thing is, there is a BIG difference between "kicking the shit out of fascists" and shutting down their hateful rallies.
I think beating up fascists is unacceptable.
Self-defense, though, or defense of others, is mandatory.
The people that argue that we need to keep this high moral ground are completely right. People do not understand leftism. They hear "anarchy" and think completely destructive chaos, living like animals, killing, etc. I have gotten this too many times. So, when we beat up fascists without provocation, we are just feeding into this negative, stereotypical image.
We want people to be enlightened, right? We want them to see what being a leftist is about... And violence does not attract the everyday person, those people that we want to reach out to.

[Palmares]

I think a "fight them, or dont fight them" is misguided. I think a multi-faceted appraoch is more appropriate.

Basically, of course we dont want to be fascists like the, so we there is the space to engage with them and challenge them on their beliefs, then by all means we do that. That is what we should sim for. But it is ludicrious to think that that is the only way, or the only way we should do it.

So whats this self-defence thing then? Well, indeed few here would disagree that if a fascist attacked, one is within theirs rights to fight back. But really, i think there is more to it.

I think think the main point of contention relates to what a fascist might say. As if they do threaten to actually attack people, I think there is a precident to attack them. And if they are known to attack people, then i think the precident holds. Just like in class war, self-defence is not egoist.

So yeah, lets the fucks say what they want, to a point. Threats, though not automatically neccessarily a point for self defence, still has a legitismacy. If a fascist said that to me, especially as a non-white anarchist type, i would not take it as a joke. And if it is known a certain fascist indeed has undertaken attacks upon someone [that isnt a nazi that is, hehe], theres nothing wrong with beating them up.

Of course not all fascists act in the same way, but i am more specifically talking about boneheads, who have a specific agender of violence and machismo. Talking is unlikely to do shit, so meet their violence, and defeat them.

Though not a perfect example, the creation of the SHARPies in the US was possibly the main factor in defeating the nazis on the street. Hell, in one case the lead singer of a nazi band was shot and that smashed the scene in that city...

[apathy maybe]

What is that quote about debating fascists? Make sure to outnumber them 3 to 1, because they aren't interested in debate...

If fascists were happy to hold peaceful rallies, hand out leaflets wanting to be elected to parliament (sort of like a lot of "socialist" types...), then I wouldn't be so adverse to letting them be.

But they don't do that do they. No, they attack non-whites, they attack leftists, they attack queers and so on. They spread hateful propaganda, they promote violence against "innocents" (non-whites, non-heterosexuals, anyone who isn't "normal"), and are generally scum...

So, it shouldn't come as a surprise to them if they do these sorts of things and people retaliate...

Anti-Fa. Because the only good fascist is a dead one.

(See ABB, and Anti-Fa in Russia on why Anti-Fa is needed http://abb.hardcore.lt/joomla/index.php?op...temid=56#faq125 (http://abb.hardcore.lt/joomla/index.php?option=com_easyfaq&task=cat&catid=31&Itemid=56#faq125) )

[fashbasher 5000]

Of course fascists don't hand out leaflets. The entire basis of fascism is in bigoted violence and scapegoating.
If they did hand out leaflets and refrain from violence, then violence would not be an acceptable tactic for fighting them. They choose the stakes. They have chosen violence. So be it.

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

How many immigrants, gays, or minorities actually sanction, promote, condone, request, or even know about anti-fascist attacks? Because if all of these attempts to keep the fascists or Nazis quiet were done without even consulting with the people who are personally the most threatened by them it smacks of hobbyist vanguardism.

[LSD]

If they are going to deny other's their human rights why should fascists get dealt with any differently?

Because human rights aren't a tit-for-tat business. The fact that racists/fascists/whatever may have no intention of respecting our rights is irrelevent to the question of their own social enfranchisement.

Someone who actually goes around attacking other people obviously needs to be stopped and society has every right to defend itself. Buteven those people do not sacrifice their humanity merely by virtue of breaking the law.

Indeed the principle that "disruptive elements" are no longer human has long been a principle of fascist ideologies, the very ones that you're ostensibly defending us from.

Convicted murderers have proven themselves to be a danger to others, and yet even so as leftist we oppose cruel and inhumane prison sentences. We condemn the miserable condition of prisons. Not just because we don't like the state, but because we recognize that even genuinely "bad" people still retain their humanity.


Isn't catching a Nazi's boot to the gut harmful also?

Absolutely, which is why when a "Nazi" kicks you or is about to kick you, you have every right to defend yourself from him/her.

What you do not have is the right to "beat them up" merely because you think that somday they might attack you based solely on your interpreation of their political beliefs.

'Cause remember, most "fascists" these days do not label themselves as such. Sure, there are a couple thousand die hard "88" types. But most of the people you're talking about want nothing to do with Mussilini's corporatism or Hitler's varient thereof.

No, for the most part, they call themselves "conservatives" or "patriots" or some other innocuous sounding adjective. And while, to you, they may nonetheless be obvious "Nazis", your personal political assesment is not sufficient to deprive them of their right to not be beaten in the streets.

And this isn't just about social principle; I would remind you that to most people, communism is as much, if not more so, a danger than "fascism". Meaning that if you establish the precedent of politically-based assaults, it will quickly include you as well.

In the context of bourgeois society, mass assaults such as you are proposing will either lead to political chaos, and subsequently the ascension of the conservative "law and order" types, or a straightforward political crackdown.

Either way it isn't in our interests.

And all this attention being given to the politically insignificant crowd of "fascists" only helps our real enemies remain hidden and, even worse for us, portray us as hotheads and "anarchists" in the worst sense of that word.


That is silly. There is no justification for rape.

But there is for "beating up"? So violent assualt only becomes wrong if there's a sexual aspect to it? So as long as our hypothetical "leftist" is just beating the shit out of some "fascist ****", it's all cool?

Don't you see how arbitrary the lind you're drawin is? If people have rights, they have rights. And thr right not to be raped and the right not to be assaulted in the street go hand in hand.

Like it or not, if you find the idea of raping "fascists" to be distasteful, then you must accept the fact that, fundamentally speaking, it is absolutely no different from the model that you are proposing.

It's just that rape is a more emotionally disturbing crime than simple assault. The underlying violation, however, is identical.


And if we shut down their movement they can't appeal to people's emotions.

That has got to be one of the most naive statements I have ever read.

Maybe you should have a chat with the surviving members of the SPD, that is the ones who weren't murdered in the concentration camps.

There's a reason that this tactic has never worked in the past.


The thing about the fascists and what not is that they actually harm people here and now.

Except they kind of don't. I mean, yeah, they probably want to harm people "here and now", but there are so fucking few of them that they can't really do much.

Fascism hasn't been a major political force in over fifty years, and so while there are rump fascist organizations out there and all number of groups that you might choose to label "fascist", the fact is, big-F Fascism just doesn't exist anymore.

Indeed this whole leftist obsession with fighting "fascists" is more of a holdover than anything else, a mimicking of the great revolutionary movements of the twenties and thirties which really did have a powerful fascist enemy to fight.

Today, however, the primary agents of destruction and exploitation are not fascists, not in name and not even in ideology, but liberal capitalists and their agents.

Which means that wile "attacking the fash" might seem emotionally satisfying, it isn't the "great struggle" that "anti-fascist" groups like to make it out.

It also means, however, that if attacking fascists is justified because they're ideology leans towards mass destruction, then so must be attacking all manner of capitalists and even some self-declared leftists.

After all, primitivism if adopted would nescessitate the deaths of billions, does that make "beating the primmie" as acceptable as "bashing the fash"?

Why not? Both have about equal chance of gaining any serious power in our lifetimes. That is, none.


The KKK has tied black guys to the back of there truck and pulled them around the city killing them with limbs coming off. The KKK has come with shotguns and rifles and shot a crowd full of people.

The KKK is dead. For all practical terms the organization doesn't exist anymoore. It hasn't been a centralized body for over seventy years, and since the 1960s its numbers have been dropping exponentially.

There are, at this point, less than 2000 self-identifying "klansmen" in the entire United States. An even those 2000 primarily spend their time sending out mailings and appearing on the Jerry Springer or Howard Stern shows.

Half a century ago, the Klan tied people to trucks and tied them to trees, today a black man in urban America is a million times more likely to be killed by a another black man than by the KKK or any other racist group.

It's poverty and the instutional racism of liberal socierty that are primary instruments of minority oppression these days, not guys in hoods. Ans concentrating on the latter only helps to obscure the real issues.


If fascists were happy to hold peaceful rallies, hand out leaflets wanting to be elected to parliament (sort of like a lot of "socialist" types...), then I wouldn't be so adverse to letting them be.

OK, so does that mean that you oppose attacking fascists who don't attack you? Or are you buying into the nonsensical arguments that merely by virtue of their being "fascists", they "must" be potentially violent?


But they don't do that do they. No, they attack non-whites, they attack leftists, they attack queers and so on.

Some do, but for the most part "fascists" do what most other political radicals do, they talk.

Every so often there's news of a hate crime of one sort or another, but even then I would remind you that most of the people running around beating up gays aren't political "fascists", they're certainly not members of any "fascist" political party.

No, 95% of the time, they're ordinary "conservatives, usually poor and uneducated, with no real political leanings other than not liking all this "liberal filth". A violent temperment and copious consumption of alchohol often play a leading role as well.

But when was the last time that you honestly heard about a centrally-organized "fascist campaign" against anyone? When was the last time that you experienced serious "race-war"?

The fact is, for all their bluster and for all the undue credit that leftist groups give them, the vast majority of "fascists" are entirely harmless. And the ones who aren't are generally people who would be dangerous whatever their ideological inclinations.


They spread hateful propaganda, they promote violence against "innocents" (non-whites, non-heterosexuals, anyone who isn't "normal")

In other words, they "hold peaceful rallies, hand out leaflets" and use other non-violent means to spread their ideas.

[bcbm]

But when was the last time that you honestly heard about a centrally-organized "fascist campaign" against anyone? When was the last time that you experienced serious "race-war"?

The fact is, for all their bluster and for all the undue credit that leftist groups give them, the vast majority of "fascists" are entirely harmless. And the ones who aren't are generally people who would be dangerous whatever their ideological inclinations.

Fascists are harmless because antifa makes them harmless. In areas where organized resistance to fascist organizing is weak, they make political ground and start to engage in the kind of violence you accuse them of being incapable of. Fascists talk the game, but they're also far more willing to play it then most leftists, and when allowed to organize, they will. That is why we stop them from organizing, by whatever means we can.

[An archist]

Violence isn't pretty, it isn't cool, it isn't nice.
But sometimes it necessary, a more experienced anarchist told me about the extreme-right wing students group in our city, the NSV. Severl years ago they had started growing, until at some point they had about 25-30 members.
The local anarchists decided it was time to take action and started a campaign. (not to be sectarian, but other leftwing groups in the city simply didn't do anthing)
So they looked for the bars where the NSV held their meetings, printed posters calling for people to boycot these bars.
And of course there was more militant action, where they sought out the NSV students to beat them up and follow them to their homes/student dorms to show them 'we know where you sleep'
This is not friendly, this is not democratic, but it worked, the next year, the NSV had 5 members left and hardly held any meeting.

[apathy maybe]

LSD, had a look at that website I posted?

Yes most fascists don't call themselves that, most of the time (I might even guess all of the time) these sort aren't attacked by anti-fa folk.

But those that do, they often are violent against people they don't like. See that bit in the news about gay rights protesters in Moscow the other month?

Anyway, remember, Anti-Fa are watching you...

[A-S M.]

fascists are one of our enemies, we can not underestimate them (like lots of fascist underestimate antifa/afa/...), things like "they're harmless" etc are dangerous things to say, fascist groups especialy have more power then most of us think, beating up their "soldiers" is just the beginning, there's nothing wrong with it (it sends out a signal) but we must be sure not to stay stuck here, we have to take out their leaders too

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

Yes most fascists don't call themselves that, most of the time (I might even guess all of the time) these sort aren't attacked by anti-fa folk.

Even though they are the ones that have the best chance of actually instating a form of fascism. The nostalgic neo-nazis don't have a hope in hell of actually making a fascist society, but regular conservative businessmen, politicos, generals, teachers, and cops have a lot more going for them if they attempted to do so. Logically you should be attacking them instead (based on the logi of anti-fascists, not my logic)- only guess what, those cloest totalitarians are not as helpless and hopeless as the obvious ones because they have the state on their side. So they attack the easy ones instead.



But those that do, they often are violent against people they don't like. See that bit in the news about gay rights protesters in Moscow the other month?
If the gay rights marchers brought pepper spray or something then they would be able to drive back the reactionaries who attacked them- that's sensible. But what isn't sensible is breaking up the fascist marches- what does it matter who's doing the repressing and comitting the agression- shouldn't the point be that it is occurring, and violating a group's attempt at speaking?

[ahab]

Originally posted by Juan Sin [email protected] 26, 2007 05:43 am


no, not everyone who opposes someone else, just nazi's and fascists, considering how they are the scum of the earth and fuck concentration camps, kill those muthafuckers on the spot. Are you a nazi/fascist sympathizer?


You sound like you sympathise with their tactics if you call your foes scum of the earth and think that the wrong sort of political opposition should be silenced on the spot with guns.
their tactics? excuse me but people have been beating the shit out of eachother since the dawn of man...and besides theyre fucking nazi's and fasho's, they are scum, and how else should we combat them, if not with violence? they are brutes, talking things out wont do anything, there is no peaceful means of dealing with them. Its not just about beating them up either, you need to show people they are weak and that they can be stopped, otherwise people will just look the other way and they will spread like a virus. Now with younger nazi's and fascists it isnt necessary to do any real bad damage, and small ass wooping may teach them a lesson

[bcbm]

Originally posted by Juan Sin [email protected] 29, 2007 10:20 am
Even though they are the ones that have the best chance of actually instating a form of fascism. The nostalgic neo-nazis don't have a hope in hell of actually making a fascist society
Of course not, but that isn't why antifa attack them. Although in some places, those groups are the ones with power and they're gaining ground... Eastern Europe, for instance.


but regular conservative businessmen, politicos, generals, teachers, and cops have a lot more going for them if they attempted to do so. Logically you should be attacking them instead (based on the logi of anti-fascists, not my logic)- only guess what, those cloest totalitarians are not as helpless and hopeless as the obvious ones because they have the state on their side. So they attack the easy ones instead.

Nonsense. Antifa have fought against those fuckers as well. They were quite recently heavily involved in the actions against the G8 meetings, not that I would characterize those as "fascist" meetings.



But what isn't sensible is breaking up the fascist marches- what does it matter who's doing the repressing and comitting the agression- shouldn't the point be that it is occurring, and violating a group's attempt at speaking?

I don't give a fuck about fascists having their speeches or meetings disrupted. Offering fascists a platform to organize allows them to build stronger movements and start taking more serious action. When disrupted they can't operate and have to move and become more isolated from each other, being unable to publicly advertise their affiliations. It makes perfect sense to break up the speeches and meetings of people who want to kill me, my friends, and billions more.

[fashbasher 5000]

The only reason why they have no chance of setting up an actual fascist society is our opposition to them from their infancy.

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

The normal, apolitical people, if they actually heard the fascist platform themselves, would finally be able to know why it's not a very nice worldview, to put it lightly. I doubt many of them are so naive as to believe the bigotry, especially when it's not sanctioned by the media or the political mainstream. Probably the quickest way to deal with a fascist resurgence would be to let them speak for themselves.

We have a hard enough time selling people on socialism, anarchism, and communism, and we are suppsoed to be genuinely concerned with liberty, equality, and human dignity. Imagine how hard it would be to sell people on the deportation and murder of an ever-growing number of enemies of the state.

[A-S M.]

I doubt a fascist would speak the truth about fascism, look at what hitler did and what happend, I doubt it that was what the people wanted, but they get a lot of nice promises, fascists may be stupid enough too believe in fascism but they're not that stupid to know people won't like it very much, well at least the smarter ones amongst them, i'm not talking about the inbred blood and honour morons

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

True, which brings me back to the point about the deadliest fascists not identifying themselves as such in any way. They're too discreet to even join a far-right political party like the BNP and instead apply authoritarian nationalist beliefs to their mainstream conservative party or government.

These closet fascists would also probably imprison or execute the lifestylist neo-nazis if they ever got a chance. An actual fascist state desires an extremely tight amount of order and I doubt skinheads would fit into that vision.

But as far as what Hitler did, he was very, very blatant in his racism and nationalism. From the very beginning he proclaimed himself to be an anti-Semite in his writing. Sure, the people might not have known that he was planning to kill so many people, but it wouldn't be hard to get a clue when the racist propaganda began to appear everywhere.

[A-S M.]

I agree but I don't think they are not linked to such organisations, because they won't get a fascist revolution without soldiers,they can allways eliminate them afterwards (look at the sturm abteilung...) so we can try and limit the number of people who will fight for them, not only through violence offcource, there are lots of ways to deal with these kind of problems

[Chicano Shamrock]

QUOTE
The thing about the fascists and what not is that they actually harm people here and now.


Except they kind of don't. I mean, yeah, they probably want to harm people "here and now", but there are so fucking few of them that they can't really do much.
Well maybe not where you are at. I have talked to ex-Neo Nazi's that given speeches about hate. How they have beat up kids for not being white. Stomped their hands until they were broken. Beat them until they bled. I know people that have been attacked by racists or maybe Fascists for being non white or non hetero.

So the reason I made my first post was not to go out and kick everybody's ass. It was just to say that in my opinion if someone's objective is to hate people and organize to attack them then I think kicking the shit out of them is justified. Now you might have a different opinion and that's good for you. If someone wants to organize to kick my ass I am not going to let it slide until they have large enough numbers to jump me or my friends.

[TheDifferenceEngine]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 05:12 am
TheDifferenceEngine, you can't even spell "fascism", so shut the fuck up with your psudo-moralistic, nazi-sympathetic bullshit.
nazi-sypathetic?

Maybe I'm not Left enough?

We should really "purge" everyone who disagrees with us, eh?

[ahab]

Originally posted by TheDifferenceEngine+July 02, 2007 03:56 pm--> (TheDifferenceEngine @ July 02, 2007 03:56 pm)
[email protected] 27, 2007 05:12 am
TheDifferenceEngine, you can't even spell "fascism", so shut the fuck up with your psudo-moralistic, nazi-sympathetic bullshit.
nazi-sypathetic?

Maybe I'm not Left enough?

We should really "purge" everyone who disagrees with us, eh? [/b]
it has nothing to do with 'purging' people who disagree with us. Nazi's and fascists are a SERIOUS and local threat. You must not live in an area where there is a real nazi problem, these thugs rape kids, murder people on the street just because they are black, mexican, homosexual, leftist, etc. Its not safe to live in areas with nazi's and fascists if your not with them, that it why its necessary to fight, you cant show compassion to them because they show none. Not to mention theyre basically the backhand of the police, a lot of nazi's (at least around here) are protected by some police because they do the dirty work for them.

[fashbasher 5000]

The issue with fascists being able to freely spread their ideas is that a lot of people in the working and middle classes have problems that they could easily blame on immigrants, Jews, Mexicans, what have you. In a lot of cases, it wouldn't take much of a push to get them to.

[A-S M.]

I'm starting to see this allready, political parties like "vlaams belang" (=nationalist morons) over here have lots of votes and people who are proud to vote for them, most of them are working class people too, but yea, it's easier to blame and attack someone you can actually come across on the street then some rich fuck sitting behind closed doors with a cop squad protecting them I guess, too bad so little people are still prepared to fight for their class

[EwokUtopia]

If they are older, active skinheads, use of force can be justified, but never against some dumb kid who is just running his mouth. Id say that violence should be reserved for the violent. Even if someone is extremely offensive, do not physically attack them unless they physically attack (or are about to) you or somebody else. Just offend the shit out of them and shit on their beliefs.

[capitalistwhore]

Ahab - I think you made a really great point. People are aren't exposed to violent fascist pricks don't (can't) understand the severity of the situation. They think it has something to do with being offended.

Be afraid to walk down the street. Or hell, be afraid that your grandmother is going to speak Spanish to a friend at the local gas station and some asshole neo-nazi kids are going to attack her.

When gangs of those fucks get started, they infest. Sometimes it takes kickin' the shit out of them to make them at least *fear* what might happen if they try it with someone's grandmother.

That's the thing: most gangs of that sort only understand violence. You can not reason with them.

[Comrade Marcel]

Anyone who questions fascist violence should simply see the thread about contemporary Russia and Eastern Europe.

[TheDifferenceEngine]

It seems I have changed my mind. (Or maybe it's the scotch...egg.)

I am glad to say I do not live in a city where there is much racist violence. (Most ethnically diverce city in the UK outside London.)

But this has made me ignorant to the suffering that facist scum can inflict and I am sorry for any short-sighted comments I have made about reasoning with these people.

[Barry]

I personally think that you can not deal with Fascists peacefully, you must use violence against those who would do the same to you. These guys will only realise that they are not wanted and to teach them a good leason is to beat them off the streets, out of the pubs and back into their own homes were they can stay alone. They should be dealt with like the rats that they are when you find a nest you destroy it!!!!!!!!

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by LSD
So violent assualt only becomes wrong if there's a sexual aspect to it?

Well yes.

I abhor rape, not violent assault. The former is never 'ok', the later is obviously contextual.

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by People's [email protected] 10, 2007 02:07 pm
Simple solution, Ulster Socialist. Wait for them to use violence once, just once, and then come down on them like a ton of bricks. That gets antifa the moral high ground, and avoids the stigma associated with the pre-emptive strike.

The only problem with this, I guess, is that they might not use violence, but that is highly unlikely due to the fact that fascists are by nature thugs.
I do not have any antifa experience, given that there are not any open Fascists around where I live, but there is a group of Nazi thugs on the place I do intend to move to. It is pretty ironic how there are not any open Nazis where I live, given that a good deal of the people in this predominantly "left" liberal town blame the Mexicans and blacks for all kinds of problems. There is a lot of political apathy where I live, and people over here keep their racism to themselves, it seems.

This seems like a good idea [I am referring to the quoted text.]. I doubt that individual terroristic adventurism would really get much accomplished.

The only thing keeping a lot of Fascist cells active are their allies, the police. Hell, some of the Fascist thugs that you people see on the streets are probably off-duty pigs.

The Fascists that live where I intend to relocate are pretty secretive; just showing their faces usually means getting their asses kicked. I guess I will ask comrades in my own organization and those in other ones in that city (I have observed US SWP, CWI, RCP, and The Freedom Road Socialist Organization (I don't know how much help these ones will be, as they seem more like rabid liberals than Maoists. The Freedom Road Socialist Organization, active in the immigrant rights movement, initially and rabidly supported the STRIVE Act!)), to get an idea of how things work.

There are also Minutemen as well where I intend to relocate. I have only seen one of them thus far. He was at a public forum on immigration "reform," with the right-wing hacks, Keith Ellison and...Gueiterrez, I think his name is, presenting this "reform" plan that was later defeated. We basically started informing other people near us, particularly the Latinos, of his presence. I guess a shouting match was about to erupt between him and a group of Latinos, but the moderator broke it up.

[Cencus]

Originally posted by Red-star-[email protected] 01, 2007 06:51 pm
Fascism has declined massivley in the UK ( :D ) but can anybody tell me why? It really confuses me, is britain itself becoming a more tolerant place? or have the fash come to their senses?
Back in the 80s the U.K. had one of the biggest Nazi kicking movements in Western Europe afaik, combined with a large non-violent anti-nazi movement. That Naziism just isn't British old bean. Add to that the way the U.K. fascists seem to get even more factional as they get smaller, and are thoroughly infiltrated by the state, you are left with a small movement.

I'm no fighter but I see nothing wrong with giving active nazis a thorough good hiding, but remember thier are plenty of other ways of fucking em up.

[Cult of Reason]

The ends justify the means. If beating the shit out of them is effective at stopping them, do it!

[Pia Fidelis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 02:03 am
The ends justify the means. If beating the shit out of them is effective at stopping them, do it!
Thank you, Maximilien Robespierre. Your logic is flawless.

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by Pia Fidelis+September 02, 2007 07:37 pm--> (Pia Fidelis @ September 02, 2007 07:37 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2007 02:03 am
The ends justify the means. If beating the shit out of them is effective at stopping them, do it!
Thank you, Maximilien Robespierre. Your logic is flawless. [/b]
Agreed.

Never again comrades!!

[AntifaHooligan]

Im getting so sick of people thinking this way:

"Fascists use violence= All people who use violence are fascists.
Antifa use violence= Antifa are fascists aswell!"

WTF?! How the hell does just resorting to violence make people fascists? If it wasnt for antifa those fascist scumbags would have control of the streets, and THEN you would se some REAL violence! So all you pussy pacifists, shut the fuck up, you dont know what you are talking about. Antifa isnt violent, we just defend our streets against the scum.

[Cencus]

I used to be a pacifist, but gradually over time I came grudgingly to the conclusion that waving placards and walking thru city streets will, on it's own, not stop the violence that Nazi thugs choose to inflict on random innocents. This is not to say violence is the only method, but part of a multipronged approach. It's a tool in politics deciding not to use it is to handycap yourself in a very real and often violent battle.

An intellegent man given a hammer, a saw, and some nails, and told to build a house would not throw away the hammer because he disagreed with hitting the nails, it's the same here. Violence and the threat of violence is and has always been a tool in the cupboard to be pulled out and used when the time is right.

Ghandian pacifism is great when fighting an opponent with moral constraints, but when fighting an enemy with no such baggage hindering him there really is little choice.

[Redboy]

Most fascists are doing it to be different. Especially Young ones. In the UK, there is 2 People who walk around with skinheads, and claim to be fascists. Kind of sad really, they walk around telling people that there parents rip down pictures of swastikas off their bedroom wall.

Some even, have no idea what Fascism stands for (politically) And are just doing it to stand out like sore thumbs.

Edit- I did not mean 2 People in the entire of the UK, I meant In my school. I am only 14 :D

[spartan]

Violence is a natural instinct that can be useful to us humans some times when it is needed like the revolution (violence will definately be needed then!). We leftists should not shy away from violence as opposing our (the lefts) enemies violently is our fucking right!

[AntifaHooligan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 07:41 pm
violence is a natural instinct that can be useful to us humans some times when it is needed like the revolution violence will definately be needed then! we leftists should not shy away from violence as opposing our (the lefts) enemies violently is our fucking right!
Couldnt agree more. I am a non-violent person, but i believe in violence if absolutely necessary. When it comes to the revolution and combating the right, violence IS absolutely necessary. Violence is sipmly a part of human nature. It might be primitive, but sometimes a good kick in the head is the only way.

[Sickle of Justice]

Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.

[Comrade Rage]

Fascists can be largely crushed with violence, but their propaganda must be countered to the furthest extent. Refute it all. Except if it's 'National Anarchist' crap, just burn that shit.

By the way I really hate National Anarchists!!

[AntifaHooligan]

Originally posted by Sickle of [email protected] 15, 2007 08:08 pm
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
Well, this may sound brutal but: If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism. Simple and plain.

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by AntifaHooligan+September 15, 2007 03:24 pm--> (AntifaHooligan @ September 15, 2007 03:24 pm)
Sickle of [email protected] 15, 2007 08:08 pm
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
Well, this may sound brutal but: If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism. Simple and plain. [/b]
Right On!! I reverse my former statement. Lock and load.

[AntifaHooligan]

Originally posted by COMRADE CRUM+September 15, 2007 08:29 pm--> (COMRADE CRUM @ September 15, 2007 08:29 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 03:24 pm

Sickle of [email protected] 15, 2007 08:08 pm
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
Well, this may sound brutal but: If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism. Simple and plain.
Right On!! I reverse my former statement. Lock and load. [/b]
Amen brother! :D

[Red Scare]

Originally posted by COMRADE CRUM+September 15, 2007 03:29 pm--> (COMRADE CRUM @ September 15, 2007 03:29 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 03:24 pm

Sickle of [email protected] 15, 2007 08:08 pm
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
Well, this may sound brutal but: If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism. Simple and plain.
Right On!! I reverse my former statement. Lock and load. [/b]
its on now mother fuckers, lock and load :D :AO: :banner: :star: :redstar:

[Bilan]

Originally posted by Sickle of [email protected] 16, 2007 06:08 am
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
Werd.
Speak to them in their own language. If they speak English, speak English. If they speak with a shotgun, bring a shotgun.

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by Sickle of [email protected] 15, 2007 08:08 pm
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
I think it is necessary to organize working class people against Fascists when possible, even if it takes the form of a united front with other non-socialist people at times. Small bands of armed leftists are not going to be able to stop them effectively unless the fascist group is extremely small and isolated. Typically, the fascist will get beaten up, will heal up over time, and come back again. I believe it is fundamental to get working class people involved in all kinds of things, so why not anti-fascism as well?

I feel that getting the working class more involved against fascists where they are prevalent is important, especially where they enjoy police protection (if you ask me, fascists are often used as police Auxiliaries to combat the working class, especially to combat the movements of oppressed minorities.).

[AntifaHooligan]

Theres only one way to get rid of fascism, and that is destroying it physically!

Everybody: Make a gang, get some weapons and go out on those streets and destroy the right-wing scum! :banner: :ph34r:

[Sickle of Justice]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 10:28 am
Theres only one way to get rid of fascism, and that is destroying it physically!

Everybody: Make a gang, get some weapons and go out on those streets and destroy the right-wing scum! :banner: :ph34r:
i agree with the sentiment, man, but seriously? are you actually willing to kill people because of there political ideology? cuz sorry, but i'm not. at least, not unless the other options are exhausted. we need to stop them proliferating there ideology, and by attacking them we legitimize there ideology when we need to stomp it out.

There are many different breeds of nazi, not just young fuckups who roam around beating people. i agree with beating that type, but when you attack a peaceful activist, (unless you can conceivably kill all of them, and destroy all knowledge of there ideology and even if you could, that'd be a pretty fucked up tactic), you simply make the problem worse.

although the faster and more tempting solution is violence, it is by no means a permanant solution. if it looks like a resurgence of nazi attitudes is near, violence could be justified as a preventative measure, but in most cases, naziism is far from prevalant, so violence would accomplish nothing.

[Sickle of Justice]

Originally posted by AntifaHooligan+September 15, 2007 08:24 pm--> (AntifaHooligan @ September 15, 2007 08:24 pm)
Sickle of [email protected] 15, 2007 08:08 pm
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
Well, this may sound brutal but: If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism. Simple and plain. [/b]
ummmmm....

No?
fascism is an idea, which springs from a mental disability known as "prejudice". saying "If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism" is like saying "if we kill all the schizophrenics there will be no schizophrenia".

[Bilan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 08:28 pm
Theres only one way to get rid of fascism, and that is destroying it physically!

Everybody: Make a gang, get some weapons and go out on those streets and destroy the right-wing scum! :banner: :ph34r:
It just isn't that simple, mate.
You can't just beat fascists up and expect them to disappear. Nor can you just go around killing them and expect them to disappear. It just isn't that black and white.

[AntifaHooligan]

Originally posted by Tierra y Libertad+September 18, 2007 01:31 am--> (Tierra y Libertad @ September 18, 2007 01:31 am)
[email protected] 16, 2007 08:28 pm
Theres only one way to get rid of fascism, and that is destroying it physically!

Everybody: Make a gang, get some weapons and go out on those streets and destroy the right-wing scum! :banner: :ph34r:
It just isn't that simple, mate.
You can't just beat fascists up and expect them to disappear. Nor can you just go around killing them and expect them to disappear. It just isn't that black and white. [/b]
What is your strategy then?

[Pia Fidelis]

Originally posted by Sickle of Justice+September 18, 2007 01:25 am--> (Sickle of Justice @ September 18, 2007 01:25 am)
[email protected] 16, 2007 10:28 am
Theres only one way to get rid of fascism, and that is destroying it physically!

Everybody: Make a gang, get some weapons and go out on those streets and destroy the right-wing scum! :banner: :ph34r:
i agree with the sentiment, man, but seriously? are you actually willing to kill people because of there political ideology? cuz sorry, but i'm not. at least, not unless the other options are exhausted. we need to stop them proliferating there ideology, and by attacking them we legitimize there ideology when we need to stomp it out.

There are many different breeds of nazi, not just young fuckups who roam around beating people. i agree with beating that type, but when you attack a peaceful activist, (unless you can conceivably kill all of them, and destroy all knowledge of there ideology and even if you could, that'd be a pretty fucked up tactic), you simply make the problem worse.

although the faster and more tempting solution is violence, it is by no means a permanant solution. if it looks like a resurgence of nazi attitudes is near, violence could be justified as a preventative measure, but in most cases, naziism is far from prevalant, so violence would accomplish nothing. [/b]
Careful what you say: people here will call you a Nazi sympathiser.

I agree with you wholeheartedly though.

[AntifaHooligan]

Originally posted by Sickle of Justice+September 18, 2007 01:31 am--> (Sickle of Justice @ September 18, 2007 01:31 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 08:24 pm

Sickle of [email protected] 15, 2007 08:08 pm
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
Well, this may sound brutal but: If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism. Simple and plain.
ummmmm....

saying "If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism" is like saying "if we kill all the schizophrenics there will be no schizophrenia". [/b]
Err, no pretty big difference there...

[hajduk]

if we use same methods like fascist then we are same like them

[spartan]

hajduk:
if we use same methods like fascist then we are same like them
What so we just stand there and let them persecute us like the Nazi's did in the 20's and 30's and let them start another world war? Because that is what will happen! Fascists only understand one language and that is violence so it is our duty as leftists to violently oppose them as it is the only thing the Fascists know!

[hajduk]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 03:24 pm
hajduk:
if we use same methods like fascist then we are same like them
What so we just stand there and let them persecute us like the Nazi's did in the 20's and 30's and let them start another world war? Because that is what will happen! Fascists only understand one language and that is violence so it is our duty as leftists to violently oppose them as it is the only thing Fascists know!
no spartan it is better to throw the spoiled eggs on them and that will be humiliation for them
and after that we do, fascist whant to fight with us then we will kick them in the ass :D
you see you must provocated them first and then beat them
STRATEGY ;)

[AntifaHooligan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 03:24 pm
hajduk:
if we use same methods like fascist then we are same like them
What so we just stand there and let them persecute us like the Nazi's did in the 20's and 30's and let them start another world war? Because that is what will happen! Fascists only understand one language and that is violence so it is our duty as leftists to violently oppose them as it is the only thing Fascists know!
I agree with spartan. Just using violence does NOT make us fascists!!! Fascism is an ideology that flourishes violence, that is why we have to fight it physically. You cant just walk up to a fascist and say "Stop being a fascist". You would get killed. We have to confront them physically.

[hajduk]

Originally posted by AntifaHooligan+September 18, 2007 04:11 pm--> (AntifaHooligan @ September 18, 2007 04:11 pm)
[email protected] 18, 2007 03:24 pm
hajduk:
if we use same methods like fascist then we are same like them
What so we just stand there and let them persecute us like the Nazi's did in the 20's and 30's and let them start another world war? Because that is what will happen! Fascists only understand one language and that is violence so it is our duty as leftists to violently oppose them as it is the only thing Fascists know!
I agree with spartan. Just using violence does NOT make us fascists!!! Fascism is an ideology that flourishes violence, that is why we have to fight it physically. You cant just walk up to a fascist and say "Stop being a fascist". You would get killed. We have to confront them physically. [/b]
STRATEGY ;)

[Sickle of Justice]

Originally posted by AntifaHooligan+September 18, 2007 01:40 pm--> (AntifaHooligan @ September 18, 2007 01:40 pm)
Originally posted by Sickle of [email protected] 18, 2007 01:31 am

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 08:24 pm

Sickle of [email protected] 15, 2007 08:08 pm
Fascists can not be crushed with violence any more than anarchists or communists can. every time you try they will just come back, angrier and with more sympathy from the public. But they can be countered. however they attack, we fight back in a simialar manner. if they speak in soap boxes, argue with them. if they hold demonstrations, hold counter demonstrations and shout them down. and if they use violence, let the boots do the talking.
Well, this may sound brutal but: If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism. Simple and plain.
ummmmm....

saying "If we kill all fascists there will be no fascism" is like saying "if we kill all the schizophrenics there will be no schizophrenia".
Err, no pretty big difference there... [/b]
not really. my point is that fascists are mostly fascists because of some form of racism or other prejudice, and i consider prejudice to be a mental disorder. fascism, for the most part, doesn't spread like an infectious disease, but rather pops up mostly at random (or possibly as a result of being dropped on yer head as a child) like a mental disease, so killing or beating fascists is only a very temporary solution, and a bloody one.

no offense to people with mental disorders.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by AntifaHooligan+September 18, 2007 11:11 pm--> (AntifaHooligan @ September 18, 2007 11:11 pm)
Originally posted by Tierra y [email protected] 18, 2007 01:31 am

[email protected] 16, 2007 08:28 pm
Theres only one way to get rid of fascism, and that is destroying it physically!

Everybody: Make a gang, get some weapons and go out on those streets and destroy the right-wing scum! :banner: :ph34r:
It just isn't that simple, mate.
You can't just beat fascists up and expect them to disappear. Nor can you just go around killing them and expect them to disappear. It just isn't that black and white.
What is your strategy then? [/b]
Confronting them on all fronts. Not just being violent: that strategy isn't going to work.
Propaganda by the deed has it's place, but it is not suitable to completley crush fascism.

We have to do it through propaganda, and info. in our communities, schools, work places, etc.
And when necessary, we use physical means.

Oi Polloi have this great opening clip on their song "Bash the fash"...

"We'd say that that they (i.e. the fascists) put forward outside football grounds, on working class estates, have to be combated politically, but also, they've got a physical agenda, and that has to be met physically as well. People have to defend themselves against the fascists, they can't just turn the other cheek."

know what I'm saying?

[Bilan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 12:44 am
if we use same methods like fascist then we are same like them
No, it doesn't.
Fascists aren't fascists because they resort to violence.

[hajduk]

Originally posted by Tierra y Libertad+September 19, 2007 02:21 am--> (Tierra y Libertad @ September 19, 2007 02:21 am)
[email protected] 19, 2007 12:44 am
if we use same methods like fascist then we are same like them
No, it doesn't.
Fascists aren't fascists because they resort to violence. [/b]
you missed the point
i mean if we use violence on the same way like they do we will become same like fascist
but if we throw spoiled eggs on them and after that they whant to fight with us then we can send them to the hospital
STRATEGY ;)
becouse after that we will have public on our side which we can use to promote our goals

[Sickle of Justice]

Originally posted by Tierra y Libertad+September 19, 2007 02:19 am--> (Tierra y Libertad @ September 19, 2007 02:19 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 11:11 pm

Originally posted by Tierra y [email protected] 18, 2007 01:31 am

[email protected] 16, 2007 08:28 pm
Theres only one way to get rid of fascism, and that is destroying it physically!

Everybody: Make a gang, get some weapons and go out on those streets and destroy the right-wing scum! :banner: :ph34r:
It just isn't that simple, mate.
You can't just beat fascists up and expect them to disappear. Nor can you just go around killing them and expect them to disappear. It just isn't that black and white.
What is your strategy then?
Confronting them on all fronts. Not just being violent: that strategy isn't going to work.
Propaganda by the deed has it's place, but it is not suitable to completley crush fascism.

We have to do it through propaganda, and info. in our communities, schools, work places, etc.
And when necessary, we use physical means.

Oi Polloi have this great opening clip on their song "Bash the fash"...

"We'd say that that they (i.e. the fascists) put forward outside football grounds, on working class estates, have to be combated politically, but also, they've got a physical agenda, and that has to be met physically as well. People have to defend themselves against the fascists, they can't just turn the other cheek."

know what I'm saying? [/b]
i'm listening to that song right now. i completely agree. fascism must be countered/destroyed on all fronts. you can't fight violence with ideas, but you can't fight ideas with violence either. the only way to stop them is to be pragmatic and think things through. it is perfectly justified to beat fascists, but it accomplishes nothing unless coupled with other strategies.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by hajduk+September 19, 2007 10:06 pm--> (hajduk @ September 19, 2007 10:06 pm)
Originally posted by Tierra y [email protected] 19, 2007 02:21 am

[email protected] 19, 2007 12:44 am
if we use same methods like fascist then we are same like them
No, it doesn't.
Fascists aren't fascists because they resort to violence.
you missed the point
i mean if we use violence on the same way like they do we will become same like fascist
but if we throw spoiled eggs on them and after that they whant to fight with us then we can send them to the hospital
STRATEGY ;)
becouse after that we will have public on our side which we can use to promote our goals [/b]
Nah, I got your point, I just don't agree :P

[Comrada J]

I think it's a good idea to confront them, just don't play into their games. Some of them have really bad tempers - use that to your advantage.

[JoePedo]

Originally posted by Tommy-[email protected] 09, 2007 10:48 am
Would you say that this argument...

"Fascists don't respect the human rights of others (i.e. ethnic minorities) so why should we respect their human rights?"

...is reasonable justification for kicking the shit out of fascist scumbags, let's say, on an NF march.
As far as I can tell, you have managed to equivocate two very, very seperate questions.

The first of these would seem to be "is violence ever justified in combatting xenophobic violence?"

'n the second of these would seem to be "is it productive to the human spirit to deny the humanity of others?"

I would definately hold these to be seperate questions; not only could I engage in tactical military actions while acknowledging the inherent human worth of my enemy, but I would hope to solely do so; the moment the reason for violence is not the tactical objective of necessity, but merely violence itself for which one blames the victim, one has surrendered a measure of strategic clarity...

...and, yes, the commentary on "irony detectors" in this thread appears to be rather pertinent, as well. On a functional level, fascism is a process; violence is its goal, and the classical means of removing inhibitions to violence - racism, sexism, heterocentrism, nationalism, etc - are its means. Sure, this is likely inaccurate to the tiny minority of power eliete who are just fleecing money and control off the mindless and easily-manipulated... but it is a very successful analysis of the soldiers of rank low and high.

Of course, refusing to dehumanize your opponent just to justify your violence doesn't neccesarily mean that there aren't times when violence isn't useful, neccesary, and in the broad view, the only humane course of action - usually, in short-term measures to prevent the silencing of anti-fascist dissent by meeting a terror regieme with a very, very surgical strategy of applied counterterror... an art which has become quite a science...

...but by all means, love them as you kick their skull in. After all, if they could only overcome their handicap of the mental limitations of fascism, imagine how this would allow their inherent human potential to grow and blossom to the benefit of all and each.

Do not let love stop the tactics of necessity, and do not let hate be your reason when so much better reasons are avaliable.

...IMO.