i completly agree! one is good but ten is better!
Results 61 to 80 of 96
Agreed. Never underestimate an opponent, no matter how drunk, stupid, or crazy he or she is.
To revolt is a natural tendency of life. Even a worm turns against the foot that crushes it. In general, the vitality and relative dignity of an animal can be measured by the intensity of its instinct to revolt.
-Mikhail Bakunin
i completly agree! one is good but ten is better!
"No references to the need to fight terror can be an argument for restricting human rights." Vladimir Putin
"The strengthening of our statehood is, at times, deliberately interpreted as authoritarianism." Vladimir Putin
"We shall fight against them, throw them in prisons and destroy them." Vladimir Putin
Attacking with overwhelming force is a military strategy that has been used forever. It all goes back to the simple choice: Would you rather attack with less than you can and thereby increase your own risk of defeat, or attack with superior force and greatly reduce your chances of defeat? Anyone who would willingly choose to increase their chances for defeat because superior force just isn't sporting is a tactical idiot. Like I sad before, this isn't a gentleman's boxing club, its street fighting. Strength in numbers is a very good strategy. If you are in a street fight and you don't know your enemy's capabilities, attacking with superior force is the only strategy that makes sense.
yet again i completly agree with you Red October. it is just a real shame Pia Fidelis wont which is stupid and wrong.
"No references to the need to fight terror can be an argument for restricting human rights." Vladimir Putin
"The strengthening of our statehood is, at times, deliberately interpreted as authoritarianism." Vladimir Putin
"We shall fight against them, throw them in prisons and destroy them." Vladimir Putin
Why? It's more likely that you win the fight, any judgements made about it being degenerate rely on some outmoded sense of "honour".
Yeah. One on one is more dangerous to those involved.
Where are you from? Madeupnazispy-slurringantifaistan?
Sciences & Environment rocks my bedroom.
[FONT=Arial]Say what you mean and say it mean...[/FONT]
"Frankly if we have a revolution and you stop me eating meat, I'm going to eat you."- The inimitable Skinz.
Be careful, lest the time comes where we have to weigh you against a duck.
restrict the fucker. He's clearly a fash sympathiser, or at the very least a pro-cappie.
Yeah.
Also, when in the hell have the Nazis ever shown honour to their victims?
From Anne Frank to this guy in a coma, there is no honour in Nazism. Avenge our blood!
To revolt is a natural tendency of life. Even a worm turns against the foot that crushes it. In general, the vitality and relative dignity of an animal can be measured by the intensity of its instinct to revolt.
-Mikhail Bakunin
Amen to that.
From the 6 million in the death camps to Stephen Lawrence
Nazi fucks can suck my dick!
Wow! I am amazed!
I make a post against VIOLENCE and I am a sympathetic to Nazis? Pro-capitalist? Absurd and unfounded.
Do I think that Militant Nazism should be stopped? Of course. Is violence ANY means to do so? Not at all.
If you want to know my political beliefs, EVERY political compass (or similar) test has said that I am a Left-Wing Authoritarian. No post I have made says otherwise. I DO NOT support vigilante violence, of any sort, nor have I ever, nor will I ever. I do not care if it is a hardcore BNP/NPD supporter, or if it some 13 year old drawing swastikas in his mathbook, NO ONE needs to be oppressed by miltant violence. Now, when the INDIVIDUAL himself has committed a crime, the STATE, not another individual, takes all diciplinary action into its hands.
If you truly want to compare a street-fight to a war, then go right ahead. Last time I checked wars took place between two states, who have professional armies and through whom there is cause under the direct command under the STATE. To support these ideas of vigilante justice is nothing but hyper-individualistic anti-statism.
Why are their laws in a country if a group wants to enforce its own order? What you proposed is a two-sided sword. By supporting militant Antifa vilgilantes, you also have to accept that similar from Nazis can and should be expected. The State arrests violent people, and that is why the jails are full of Nazis.
What made you the law?
I disagree. Both are equally dangerous in one regard: the destruction of order. These kind of methods, when continued extensivly, resolve in a total partisan war. I do not want to see a war fought in the streets. I am quite happy with peace.
I have no idea what an OI board is, could you please explain? And, having read the rules, I hardly see as though anything I have done will get me banned.
Also, my point in mentioning that was to show the same level of propagation that you were using is shared by Nazis. Personally, I like the USSR, and I saw no problem with much of it's history, until of course the final years of decline and degeneracy. I also disagree whoheartedly that it was "state-capitalism", but such is a conversation outside this thread.
I could and DO care that people are being killed. Who is to say that, if their deaths are justifiable, then if a Nazi puts a bullet in my head that my death is justified? The STATE.
So, as an end point, I am not a Nazi, nor have I ever been, nor will I ever be. I do not sympathise with Nazis, but I DO with misguided youth who are beat up instead of being taught.
I do oppose much of the violence that is suggested here, as I have said in nearly every post I have made in this sub-forum.
"...If we are to embrace the nomenclature of the "revolutionaries" of yesterday, let us make clear distinctions...Let the word "freedom" be replaced by Unity, let the word "fairness" be replaced by Strength, let the word "struggle" be replaced with Strife...and, finally, we shall stand not as the enemies of Capitalism, but instead as the champions of Unity through Industry!"
- Louis Pierre Althusser
You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of what the Nazi movement actually is. Absolutely none. A lot of them are not "misguided youth". Most of them are treacherous, despicable things, that would attack you, drag you to some basement lair, and behead you with a kitchen knife. If, while you're being dragged away with broken legs and arms and a fractured skull, you don't want to fight -- fine. Die. But don't you fucking come here and try to preach to us simply because you don't have the fucking balls to stand up against injustice. You are completely ignorant to the nature of the enemy we have to fight. So go fuck yourself. You have no place here amongst revolutionaries.
you show more sympathy for these nazi kids than their victims. Nazism is not a passive movement, they preach violence and have all intentions to use it. Let me guess, you are a white male with left leaning politics, you are not their prime target. Ppl of colour are thier prime targets. These cowardly nazis will jump them whenever they get a chance, they do not have the luxury of hiding behind white skin.
Male, yes, white? No. I am an open leftist who does not possess white skin - I do not see how I am not a "prime" target.
I never said that Nazism was passive - passive Nazism is pretty much an oxymoron. Do I have sympathy for people who get beat up? Of course. But, I do not have more sympathy for someone who gets beat up for their political beliefs -whether Nazi or otherwise. Whereas people who get beaten up for things that they cannot quite control, there is much more sympathy to be had. But, as I have said, if someone is out "on the prowl" to get into a fight with someone, then they are scum.
Let me put it this way - if 14 year old who is into Nazism and who is part of a Skinhead gang who has personally beaten up someone under his ideology gets attacked by Antifas, then I do NOT have any sympathy. Whereas, if a different Nazi, same age, who is just curious and is exploring the idea, and maybe posts on stormfront and "dresses the part" gets the same beating, does he deserve it just as much? I personally do not think so.
When it comes to accosting Nazis, I have (personally) found that the best method when you outnumber them is just to have them hand over their patches/laces/suspenders and any other Nazi-related stuff they have on them. Everytime I have done this, they have always complied (usually getting really upset and apologising when doing so mind you). Now, if, in a case like that mentioned happened and instead the Nazi attacks, then, I do not oppose anyone laying him a beating - he chose to engage the fight and therefore accepted the consequences of his choice.
So, yes, I do not like to hear about Nazi youth getting beat up, in the same way I do not like to hear about youth who get involved in violent (nonpolitical) gangs get beat up - it is someone getting the physical end of the mistakes that we all make as youngsters. But, the same applies with other gangs, if you have done anything within the gang, you have dug your own grave.
Do I not have a place here amongst leftists? Of course I do, just in the same way everyone here does - leftist is not about single-minded elitism, at least not the leftism I know.
As for my knowledge of Nazism, I am sure I know as much as anyone else here. I had grown up and had friends (back when it was popular to do so) become really into the ideology.
Actually, I have been victim of the violence from Nazis, and, as I said when addressing RedHal's post, Nazism is a violent ideology (infact it is a culmination of violent ideologies). But, I think that you over-estimate the number of Militant Nazis out there. Most of them in the western world are internet warriors whose "words are grand, but deeds small".
Also, I am sure I have accosted more Nazis in public (unless I was outnumbered but that is just common sense) than you have. I used to have a collection of white laces that would make any bonehead jealous. How many times have I instigated a fight? Zero. How many youth whose Swastika patches that I took of their jackets did I see again wearing such? None.
Now, when dealing with violent Nazis, of course, this is different. It is impossible to say what anyone can really prepare to do when accosted by a group of angry skinheads and you are the lone brown guy with a hammer and sickle pin. No matter how strong willed someone is, and no matter how dedicated they are to the cause, no one wants to get beat up - not even the most ardent. When I was attacked, did I fight back? I tried. What else can I say? I did not stand there and accept it as though I were a Christian in the Circum Maximus, and I find it very insulting that you think otherwise. How often have you personally accosted nazis? And, in asking that I am not challenging, I am just really curious.
I think that it is important to upturn the roots instead of trying to cut down a tree. Educate the youth to understand that these ideals are NOT going to do anything good for them. Violence should always be in your backpocket, not in your hand.
AGAIN, and this is important I make this clear - I am not all for Gandhist non-aggression and non-violence.
Plus, most of these beer-gutted nazis are so out of shape they cannot even get up a flight of stairs, let alone hold their own if they needed to
"...If we are to embrace the nomenclature of the "revolutionaries" of yesterday, let us make clear distinctions...Let the word "freedom" be replaced by Unity, let the word "fairness" be replaced by Strength, let the word "struggle" be replaced with Strife...and, finally, we shall stand not as the enemies of Capitalism, but instead as the champions of Unity through Industry!"
- Louis Pierre Althusser
It doesn't take much, then again the brainless are often amazed by the tiniest of things.
Well you certainly seem to think that we should not act in a n effective manner against them.
You're deluding yourself, nazism is a violent movement which must be opposed on the streets as well as in the minds of the masses. It is no good fighting a war of words against an enemy prepared to put you in a coma or behead you.
There are no left wing authoritarians - the ultimate goal of the left is a stateless classless society.
No one needs to be oppressed by state violence.
How is the violence of the bourgeois state different from the violence of the individual, ****lamp.
So? Your point being?
Sciences & Environment rocks my bedroom.
[FONT=Arial]Say what you mean and say it mean...[/FONT]
"Frankly if we have a revolution and you stop me eating meat, I'm going to eat you."- The inimitable Skinz.
Be careful, lest the time comes where we have to weigh you against a duck.
Jazzratt you should give Pia Fidelis a link to that russian beheading video of those two immigrants. that should make him understand.
"No references to the need to fight terror can be an argument for restricting human rights." Vladimir Putin
"The strengthening of our statehood is, at times, deliberately interpreted as authoritarianism." Vladimir Putin
"We shall fight against them, throw them in prisons and destroy them." Vladimir Putin
I don't see why he doesn't get this. Sitting around trying to reason with Nazis has never worked when confronted with their violence and hate. I think Hitler himself said that the only thing that could have stopped the German fascist movement early on would have been high intensity violence against them. We cannot afford to let them spread and think it'll all be ok because we're going to respect their beliefs and assume they'll respond in kind. They don't give a shit if you're an antifa activist or a random immigrant who's never done anything against them, they will kill you all the same. Do you think they'll respect your non-violence and treat you the same way? Fuck no!
I posted that video in the Russian thread. Try again.
"...If we are to embrace the nomenclature of the "revolutionaries" of yesterday, let us make clear distinctions...Let the word "freedom" be replaced by Unity, let the word "fairness" be replaced by Strength, let the word "struggle" be replaced with Strife...and, finally, we shall stand not as the enemies of Capitalism, but instead as the champions of Unity through Industry!"
- Louis Pierre Althusser
And your point is what?
Have you read ANYTHING on this site?
The state doesn't bring the true criminals to jail. Usually, they'll side with a Nazi, even if the Nazi started the fight---why? Because the Nazis are trying to destroy the Revolutionary Left, and as long as they do that, they are the "Useful Idiots" of the ruling class.
What gave the state the right to assassinate our comrades and other people abroad? What gave them the right to kill Che Guevara? What gave them the right to invade the RSFSR? Korea? Vietnam? Cuba? Iraq? Afghanistan? Iraq? (they invaded Iraq twice). What gave them the right to deforest Vietnam? What gave them the right to starve the North Korean people? What gave them the right to exploit Third World Countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America? What gave them the right to lock Japanese people in concentration camps during WWII? What gave them the right to rule in favor of the Nazis and Klansmen when they massacred Communists in the Greensboro Massacre, calling it self-defense?!
I know that you're all snugged up in your little fantasy that the capitalists will take care of the people; however, the reality is this: WE LIVE UNDER A TYRANNICAL EMPIRE.
To revolt is a natural tendency of life. Even a worm turns against the foot that crushes it. In general, the vitality and relative dignity of an animal can be measured by the intensity of its instinct to revolt.
-Mikhail Bakunin
A Stateless society? Sounds like something Ayn Rand would have wanted. Socialism is completely about the utilisation of a large government body - I cannot see how there could be socialism without a state. I like the idea of a strong state, and a state-controlled economy. I suggest you look into this topic in more detail - there is much to be learned.
Bourgeois state? How is the state Bourgeois in a social-democracy? I am asking, not challenging. Also, if each individual choses what is his personal set of laws, then what is separating this from complete statelessness and personal interest expansions (ala Ayn Rand)?
No one needs to be oppressed by violence. Personal-interest, hypernominalist, anti-state violence is more destructive to society than anything else. It is with these ideas that a Militant Nazi movement would be able to take over - no one here wants that.
These ideas sound A LOT like those proposed by the Neo-Liberal Movement/Right-Wing Libertarian Movement. Please clarify where you separate yourself.
"...If we are to embrace the nomenclature of the "revolutionaries" of yesterday, let us make clear distinctions...Let the word "freedom" be replaced by Unity, let the word "fairness" be replaced by Strength, let the word "struggle" be replaced with Strife...and, finally, we shall stand not as the enemies of Capitalism, but instead as the champions of Unity through Industry!"
- Louis Pierre Althusser
Funny. I'd suggest the same for you. The masses should be in control of the state, not some beoureocracy of state capitalists.
If the state controlled the means of production, and the masses controlled the state through the people's democratic dictatorship, then fine by me.
To revolt is a natural tendency of life. Even a worm turns against the foot that crushes it. In general, the vitality and relative dignity of an animal can be measured by the intensity of its instinct to revolt.
-Mikhail Bakunin
Thanks, but I do not live in the USA, nor do I condone anything they have done.
"...If we are to embrace the nomenclature of the "revolutionaries" of yesterday, let us make clear distinctions...Let the word "freedom" be replaced by Unity, let the word "fairness" be replaced by Strength, let the word "struggle" be replaced with Strife...and, finally, we shall stand not as the enemies of Capitalism, but instead as the champions of Unity through Industry!"
- Louis Pierre Althusser
