Results 1 to 20 of 29
Antifa use of violence
Hi guys, I'm having a discussion on another board about the use of violence against fascist demonstrations and the police that protect them. My main argument to begin with was that fascism should be drowned out by louder chants and stamped out with revolutionary boots. Maybe I didn't articulate myself well enough because the main response was along the lines of "police shouldn't be used to suppress any free speech"; I'm not state oppression of any kind, let alone the use of the police as a force against nationalist bullshit.
The main thrust of these guys' argument has been the Voltaire-style "I abhor what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it" liberal bullcrap. I want to pull that apart but don't trust myself to make a strong enough argument to back my point of view (I can wax poetic about film but I'm not so good when it comes to anti-fascist thought). So I thought I'd ask you comrades to help me out in constructing this argument.
Any thoughts? Any particular arguments I should use to back my own?
(ps, if this thread is in the wrong place for discussion like this, could a mod please move it)
Modern democracy is nothing but the freedom to preach whatever is to the advantage of the bourgeoisie - Lenin
Those fascist groups are fringe groups which are widely shunned and ridiculed. A few dozen of shouting fascists will only make them look ridicolous to the public.
Instead focussing attention on those people, it should be focussed on the real danger, capitalism.
But for some reason antifa rarely takes any action against them.
When fascists demonstrate they aren't out to promote their ideas in a general or neutral way. Usually they march through an immigrant area or whatnot because their goal when they show themselves in public is to act as a warning to workers to know their place. Their speech also isn't just the advocacy of ideas, fascists by definition are not just a kind of right-winger but a para-vigilante force in the streets to enforce anti-worker politics.
Besides, abstract free spech doesn't actually exist. You can't make a speech and say, "I want to shoot the President" even under bourgeois free-speech rights because it is a threat of action and violence (that the state does not approve of). From a working class view, agitating and organizing fascist forces is also not speech but a threat because the goal of their speech is to get rid of democracy and any protections and reforms workers might currently have such as they are.
Defending fascists on a free-speech basis is also just self-contradictory because you are defending speech which has the goal of eliminating rights (including free-speech) to workers in general or specific targets of oppression.
Free speech has nothing to with communism. You have to realise that communists are not for free speech. In dictatorship of proletariat capitalists wouldn't be allowed to discuss possibility of capitlaism coming back...
Same goes for human rights, which are defined by owning a property and really don't mean shit... unless you want to protect bourgeuisie....
So, when you see a fascists and you fell like it - crack his skull... After a few times he'll change his mind.
The freedom to speak, not the freedom to oppress; this is the mistake I feel so many make. It is in the interest of freedom to violently oppose those who seek to take it away.
I think the best way to deal with most of the contemporary fascists, is by just out chanting them in the streets. Try to get as many of the locals with you as possible. Fascists view themselves as the savior of their race, when they get yelled at by all of their neighbours, that will make them lose faith in their ideology.
The core of the fascists are mostly people who have given up on science and reason. Their ideas have been proven wrong time and time again, they have made the decision not to bother with anyone who doesn't share their sick mindset.
Please don't confuse the 2 groups, because it is important that they both receive a treatment that destroys fascism as efficiently as possible.
Why do we need to stop them? They have historically tried to kill communists every time they had the chance. Why should we allow a group of people who get sponsered by big capital to spread racism? It is contrary to our survival instinct to let anti-worker scum spread hate. If leftists in the past would have united and stamped out fascism in the 30s, then we might have stopped the trouble afterwards, let us not make the same mistake of letting fascism operate relatively freely. We now know what it stands for, we know what it can cause.
Marx, Engels and their contemporaries were categorically against censorship and for freedom of the press. Under the dictatorship of the proletariat, capitalists won't discuss the possibility of capitalist restoration because capitalists cease to exist when their monopoly on the means of production is abolished. A capitalist is defined by his ownership of capital, a wage-laborer or peasant that openly supports capitalism is not a capitalist. Capitalists are a social class.
People will be able to discuss all they want, including how great capitalism. But that will be pointless. Today, the capitalists control the means of production, thus they also control the means of production and dissemination of ideas. When the means of production are controlled by the proletariat, proletarian culture and ideas will be dominant. Censorship and such will be entirely unnecessary, and completely contradicts the spirit of what Socialists, and leftists in general, fight and fought for.
People are free to say what they wish. Indeed. And I am free to kick their teeth down their fucking throat if I am offended by what they say.
What youre proposing could never be achieved. If the proletariat opposes free speech, and the the majority is of the proletariat, then how do you draw the boundaries of that free speech?
I'm going to take what may be a minority position on this topic:
I think that we are in big trouble if we can't argue for our ideas, and in even more trouble if we can't sharply contrast our ideas with the ideas of the far-right, in a way that completely illustrates the latter's intellectual bankruptcy. Whenever fascists have an organized debate against ideological opponents, without the violence, without the intimidation, without the street gangs, they invariably lose and are relegated to the far fringes of political culture. Especially in places like the USA, where people are justifiably digusted by fascist ideology. Many are also opposed to communism of course, but that's another story. When you automatically take the debate to "oh yeah, well, we'll see about that once I kick you in the balls!" you've pretty much admitted that your actual political beliefs are impotent, which is why fascists so often resort to violence/intimidation. Their political activity is relegated to the ridiculous street theater of gangs, marches where the countermarches are many times bigger than the actual march, boneheads vs. antifa battles, etc. Often "antifa" is pretty ridiculous, honestly, and their targets (like the NSM in the United States) are universally regarded as complete bonehead clowns, perhaps worthy of being laughed at on YouTube and little else. Liberals in the USA are far worthier of being opposed, far more dangerous than "Nazis" ever will be. If you live in a country in which anti-fascists are being stabbed to death regularly, then your situation is probably different, but if you're an "antifascist" in Santa Barbara or something there are probably a lot more constructive ways to spend your time. Unless you find punching boneheads to be just really satisfying on a personal level. In which case more power to you.
Fascism is a cult of action, though, and they propagate their ideas through violence and intimidation. As someone once said:
Originally Posted by Malcolm X
"Win, lose or draw...long as you squabble and you get down, that's gangsta."
This, a 100 times this...
@ explosive whatever your new name is..
To your suprise probably I agree with you in big parts but..
There is no thing as a "fascist demonstration" in most countries today, there are only cop demonstrations. Two weeks ago I was in munster Germany where more than 3000 cops forced 300 pathetic Nazi's down the working-class throath.
As soon as the cops stop protecting, pampering and cultivating the fash I'm al for disbanding organised antifa in most countries (obviously excluding places like Russia and Poland where it is basic self protection for leftists and minority groups) because I have every trust in the ability of the workingclass to deal with half a dozen wankers milling through their neighbourhood. But you can't separate the fash problem from the capitalist system problem, and as such you see almost all radical antifascist groups in fact spending a lot more time on systematic discrimination, state repression etcetc than on the actual fash.
The mind is its own place, and in itself Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven. What matter where, if I be still the same, And what I should be, all but less than he Whom thunder hath made greater?
Here at least We shall be free
That is not an argument. Perhaps that is where you went wrong. I believe you should not be the initial aggressor, that leads to trouble, possibly jail time. From most of the threads I've read in the forum though, I'm in the minority on this. Fascism is a joke in this day and age, not much of a threat at all, most of these "fascist" you see know nothing about fascism and are simple minded racist or bigots usually both. Next time you encounter one, Instead of instantly going into a childish rage, ask him how he would fix his respective country, then laugh at him because he'll likely go on a triad about things completely unrelated to fascism.
You can combat these "fascist" by making jokes out of them, shame them, base line humiliation tactics. Violence is not necessary because they already make jokes of themselves by being "fascist".
Just to be clear, I'm new to this and know little about "anti-fascism" is it really just Violence against idiots?
Last edited by milkmiku; 17th March 2012 at 03:49.
No, it is recognizing that unlike most democratic reactionary groups most fash have a explicitly physical agenda that needs to be countered physically as well.
Like their great examples (hitler, mussolini, Franco) fash believe that the road to political power starts by conquering the streets, what in Germany they call "national befreite zone", and since this always involves cleaning the neighbourhood of the homeless, the immigrants, the queers and those troublesome leftists the police and reactionary politicians look the other way.
We, the workingclass, need therefore to be willing to defend ourselves physically against these physical attacks.
Now often the best defense is the offence, this in general doenst mean bashing every idiot fash his brains in but it does involve targeting, if you want terrorizing, the leadership and their infrastructure, force the leaders to give up, drop out, find a job and start a family and at the same time make every meeting, demonstration, concert, etc a failure. shatter their image of hard as nails untouchable top boys as that's their main recruiting tool. most fash drop out of organised street activism first and only later and only later start to reconsider their bigotry when they are not anymore drenched in propagada 24/7.
Also don't believe the "isolated fash are more dangerous" myth the liberals love to push, the so called lone wolf does not exist, 99.9 percent of the time "lone wolfs" are either part of organised fash groups or they desperately want to impress one.
The mind is its own place, and in itself Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven. What matter where, if I be still the same, And what I should be, all but less than he Whom thunder hath made greater?
Here at least We shall be free
Use of violence is justified, look throughout history. Has peaceful protest against big bad fascists ever worked? Nope, has the UAF worked against the EDL? Nope.
Boots on the heads and into the ribs is the only solution.
I see, so when the revolution happens, I suppose the "antifa" types will become the new ss? I mean you gotta nip any opposing idea in the bud right? Have to gather up all those who would disagree with you and have them reeducated.
Fighting oppression with oppression will not work. You must CHANGE their ideology. It is working, never before has the world been so open to so many things. Give it enough time and the idea of Fascism will fade in to a "wow, times were strange back then" reference in a text book.
I'm not against Violence, but I am against being the aggressor and the oppressor. From the post I've read here and else where, antifa is content to act like thugs because the "fascist" act like thugs. I've read threads about "the evil police protecting the fascist" when it was the "antifa" who started the conflict.
Every First world nation has some sort of self-defense laws, if the violent fascist are really so violent, then at least let them be the initial aggressor , it looks a whole lot better.
nevermind all of that, I just read http://www.revleft.com/vb/before-ope...023/index.html
Looks like I'm just not antifa material.
Last edited by milkmiku; 17th March 2012 at 20:47.
Bless, perhaps we should invite them round for tea and have a nice little chat.
Wake the fuck up, FASCISTS DO NOT BELIEVE IN RATIONAL DEBATE. You have very little chance of conversion, there's cases, including posters on here whom were ex-fascists. But ask them about fascism, and more importantly, direct me to an article which looks at the history of fascism around there world. How was it defeated? In Britain, through organised, working-class resistance which most of the time became confrontational.
From the battle of cable street, to the battle of waterloo (and i mean AFA V blood & honour) For the past 8 or so years, it has been the UAF (a peaceful protest group) been in opposition with a fairly failed CV, or resume for you guys and girls across the pond. Unfortunately, fascism doesn't accept debate, fascism believes in struggle, believes in so-called survival, therefore fascism breeds violence.
mikumiku- one is not an antifascist to have good press, one is antifascist to defeat their enemy. Besides after "letting them be initial aggressor" you are often in no position to defend yourself anymore. I suggest spending few weeks in countries of Eastern Europe or in Germany, where fascists are definitely not a joke and I guarantee your naive view of the situation would change dramatically. Please spare us "antifa is as bad as nazis" bullshit.
Lets see.
Uses violence to silence political opposition.
Justifies it with logic games as in http://www.revleft.com/vb/before-ope...023/index.html
Seeks to deny the rights of others.
Wants to terrorize people.
Violence and oppression will not solve this issue. If Violence and oppression solved anything then there would be one dominate cartel in Mexico, one Yakuza in japan, ect, ect.
All the acts of violence do is turn the public against you and harden those you seek to oppress. If they fight with words, use words. The more of these antifa stories I read, the more I am convinced that they are thugs.
"one is not an antifascist to have good press"
Bad press hurts whatever cause you are fight for, you must know this?
Is there a non-thug version of these antifa groups? one that seeks to do things in a sound and logical manner?
pretty sure the public doesn't sympathize with nazis even when they get beat up
also pretty sure it isn't 'oppression'
'heavens above, how awful it is to live outside the law - one is always expecting what one rightly deserves.'
petronius, the satyricon
