First they came for the anti-fascists

[Jarhyn]

No, more, when someone disagrees that concentration camps are bad, minority groups have every right to be treated with dignity and respect as befits their behavior, and that fascism/leader worship is a bad idea, THAT makes them a Nazi. Because failure to accept those things is what Nazis do.

There is a certain, very specific set of disagreements that a person could have with me that would mean they were a Nazi, another certain, specific set of disagreements they could have with me that would make them a mysogynist, and another set of disagreements that would define them as transphobic shitlord.

Imagine that, disagreeing with the viewpoints that make someone not-a-nazi makes someone... A Nazi.

So, for example, Obama is a Nazi for setting up these camps?

Concentration camps are bad no matter who is setting them up. Full stop.

Obama hasn't been president for 2 years, but while he was, he had a policy of keeping families together and trying to keep the system functioning as quickly as possible with whatever funds were available.

This is contrasted with a policy of tearing families apart for purely punitive (read: sadistic) reasons, and defunding the side of the system which actually processes and evaluates claims for asylum

If Obama is a Nazi, he is like Colonel Klink, as contrasted against Dondolf Shitler.

 

[RVonse]

You guys are aware that showing up to antifa protests with the explicit intent of getting into a fight and making antifa look like the bad guys has been literally documented as a strategy for these far-right groups, aren't you?

I'm aware that people here routinely defend antifa violence.

If you're ready to stop doing that let us know.

Until then we'll consider you an advocate of violence, thanks.

You know what? I DO advocate for violence against fascists. But then, sometimes the best defense is a good offense.

Then you are part of the problem. The same as the adult who provides violent discipline for a child who has done something violent.

 

[dismal]

No, more, when someone disagrees that concentration camps are bad, minority groups have every right to be treated with dignity and respect as befits their behavior, and that fascism/leader worship is a bad idea, THAT makes them a Nazi. Because failure to accept those things is what Nazis do.

There is a certain, very specific set of disagreements that a person could have with me that would mean they were a Nazi, another certain, specific set of disagreements they could have with me that would make them a mysogynist, and another set of disagreements that would define them as transphobic shitlord.

Imagine that, disagreeing with the viewpoints that make someone not-a-nazi makes someone... A Nazi.

So, for example, Obama is a Nazi for setting up these camps?

Concentration camps are bad no matter who is setting them up. Full stop.

Obama hasn't been president for 2 years, but while he was, he had a policy of keeping families together and trying to keep the system functioning as quickly as possible with whatever funds were available.

This is contrasted with a policy of tearing families apart for purely punitive (read: sadistic) reasons, and defunding the side of the system which actually processes and evaluates claims for asylum

If Obama is a Nazi, he is like Colonel Klink, as contrasted against Dondolf Shitler.

So, Obama set up camps though right?

Did I miss all the calls to punch him over it?

 

[RVonse]

Ted Cruz submits resolution to designate antifa as terrorists



This is the wedge that opens the door to criminalizing dissent. Like BLM, there is no defining characteristic or membership charter that applies to all and only antifa protests. The term "antifa" is an umbrella that covers any leftist organizing that is meant to counter far-right activity in public. Cruz demonstrated his ignorance of this fact by hilariously requesting that the FBI open a RICO investigation into antifa.



That's like asking for a RICO investigation of "environmentalism" or "animal rights activism". There's nothing to investigate except an ideological position. There's no consolidated membership, no pool of shared resources, no dedicated communications network, and no official party to speak of. The only thing that's usable as an identifier, then, is the act of organizing in public to oppose far-right activity. Trump had this to say about the resolution:

Consideration is being given to declaring ANTIFA, the gutless Radical Left Wack Jobs who go around hitting (only non-fighters) people over the heads with baseball bats, a major Organization of Terror (along with MS-13 & others). Would make it easier for police to do their job!

Note that no RICO investigation has been called for in the context of the far right's acts of terrorism, which have claimed many lives. Even extending the scope of antifa to include anyone who claims to represent the anti-fascist movement, nobody has been killed by antifa. People have been injured, usually in minor ways or by implements of humiliation rather than by bullets or bludgeons. But there are already laws against assault, and these apply to anyone in public regardless of context--except in self-defense, which is arguably the rationale for antifa movements wherever they appear, whenever they have formed.

Antifa is societal self-defense against fascism, manifested as physical resistance to fascists. In literally every historical instance of fascism rising in a nation, antifas have risen in parallel to combat it. The term "antifa" doesn't mean anything more than that, just like the term "abolitionist" can refer to any of the anti-slavery movements that naturally appeared whenever slavery was prevalent in a society. Opposition movements like this are always characterized by a degree of violence in response to the threat they are trying to defend against. This includes civil rights-era protests, even those organized under Dr. King.

View attachment 22810

We all know how the FBI dealt with that situation.

Back a little further, there is ample evidence of the same anti-leftist policy in the actions of Hitler in 1933, when he used false rumors of "violent bolsheviks" to argue for the opening of the Dachau concentration camp, where he assured Germany thousands of communists and Marxists would be held.

Right now, before our eyes, the President who is checking all the boxes on the path to fascism is coming out in support of the only movement in America that opposes it. If you care about our country, you should not support this resolution; you should support antifa, communists and all, militants and all, or admit that you are doing nothing to contribute to the fight against fascism.

What is good for the goose has also to be good for the gander.

People are entitled to free speech but they are not entitled to free violence. Regardless of politics.

 

[PyramidHead]

No, more, when someone disagrees that concentration camps are bad, minority groups have every right to be treated with dignity and respect as befits their behavior, and that fascism/leader worship is a bad idea, THAT makes them a Nazi. Because failure to accept those things is what Nazis do.

There is a certain, very specific set of disagreements that a person could have with me that would mean they were a Nazi, another certain, specific set of disagreements they could have with me that would make them a mysogynist, and another set of disagreements that would define them as transphobic shitlord.

Imagine that, disagreeing with the viewpoints that make someone not-a-nazi makes someone... A Nazi.

So, for example, Obama is a Nazi for setting up these camps?

 

[PyramidHead]

You know what? I DO advocate for violence against fascists. But then, sometimes the best defense is a good offense.

Then you are part of the problem. The same as the adult who provides violent discipline for a child who has done something violent.

Yes, those precocious neo-Nazis, just innocent children who don't know any better. That has to be the most disturbing take I've read today.

 

[Patooka]

Concentration camps are bad no matter who is setting them up. Full stop.

Obama hasn't been president for 2 years, but while he was, he had a policy of keeping families together and trying to keep the system functioning as quickly as possible with whatever funds were available.

This is contrasted with a policy of tearing families apart for purely punitive (read: sadistic) reasons, and defunding the side of the system which actually processes and evaluates claims for asylum

If Obama is a Nazi, he is like Colonel Klink, as contrasted against Dondolf Shitler.

So, Obama set up camps though right?

Did I miss all the calls to punch him over it?

Yes his did. He however didn't:
- cram them with over five times the maximum capacity for people
- steal children away from parents as a matter of course
- ensure funds allocated by DHS aren't used to bring these camps to a basic sanitary standard
- provide a total lack of transparency towards the immigration process to officials of the US government.
- allow deaths in custody without even the minimum investigation to occur.

I could go on, but I'm tired of being Captain Obvious. You know, for some who claims to be against partisan bullshit, you do peddle a lot of false equivalency arguments.

 

[dismal]

Concentration camps are bad no matter who is setting them up. Full stop.

Obama hasn't been president for 2 years, but while he was, he had a policy of keeping families together and trying to keep the system functioning as quickly as possible with whatever funds were available.

This is contrasted with a policy of tearing families apart for purely punitive (read: sadistic) reasons, and defunding the side of the system which actually processes and evaluates claims for asylum

If Obama is a Nazi, he is like Colonel Klink, as contrasted against Dondolf Shitler.

So, Obama set up camps though right?

Did I miss all the calls to punch him over it?

Yes his did. He however didn't:
- cram them with over five times the maximum capacity for people
- steal children away from parents as a matter of course
- ensure funds allocated by DHS aren't used to bring these camps to a basic sanitary standard
- provide a total lack of transparency towards the immigration process to officials of the US government.
- allow deaths in custody without even the minimum investigation to occur.

I could go on, but I'm tired of being Captain Obvious. You know, for some who claims to be against partisan bullshit, you do peddle a lot of false equivalency arguments.

Can you give me some guidelines of when its OK to set up camps?

It seems like earlier the bar was just camps. Now there are so many qualifiers.

For example, I can find reports from 2014 that suggest Obama was keeping 1200 immigrant children in a former Japanese internment camp (Fort Sill). I can see snopes rates Trumps claim that Obama built the cages that children are being kept in as "true".

Why exactly does this not get over the bar for "fascist"? Is it there some sort of rule that says the first 1200 children in a former Japanese internment camp are cool but the 1201th child makes it fascist?

 

[PyramidHead]

Yes his did. He however didn't:
- cram them with over five times the maximum capacity for people
- steal children away from parents as a matter of course
- ensure funds allocated by DHS aren't used to bring these camps to a basic sanitary standard
- provide a total lack of transparency towards the immigration process to officials of the US government.
- allow deaths in custody without even the minimum investigation to occur.

I could go on, but I'm tired of being Captain Obvious. You know, for some who claims to be against partisan bullshit, you do peddle a lot of false equivalency arguments.

Can you give me some guidelines of when its OK to set up camps?

It seems like earlier the bar was just camps. Now there are so many qualifiers.

For example, I can find reports from 2014 that suggest Obama was keeping 1200 immigrant children in a former Japanese internment camp (Fort Sill). I can see snopes rates Trumps claim that Obama built the cages that children are being kept in as "true".

Why exactly does this not get over the bar for "fascist"? Is it there some sort of rule that says the first 1200 children in a former Japanese internment camp are cool but the 1201th child makes it fascist?

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

 

[Half-Life]

Yes his did. He however didn't:
- cram them with over five times the maximum capacity for people
- steal children away from parents as a matter of course
- ensure funds allocated by DHS aren't used to bring these camps to a basic sanitary standard
- provide a total lack of transparency towards the immigration process to officials of the US government.
- allow deaths in custody without even the minimum investigation to occur.

I could go on, but I'm tired of being Captain Obvious. You know, for some who claims to be against partisan bullshit, you do peddle a lot of false equivalency arguments.

Can you give me some guidelines of when its OK to set up camps?

It seems like earlier the bar was just camps. Now there are so many qualifiers.

For example, I can find reports from 2014 that suggest Obama was keeping 1200 immigrant children in a former Japanese internment camp (Fort Sill). I can see snopes rates Trumps claim that Obama built the cages that children are being kept in as "true".

Why exactly does this not get over the bar for "fascist"? Is it there some sort of rule that says the first 1200 children in a former Japanese internment camp are cool but the 1201th child makes it fascist?

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

I think his point was that you didn't see leftists running around screaming, "Obama is a Nazi!" or "Black man bad!" or "Obama is a racist because he set a record for deportations!" the way they do now with Trump in office.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

I think his point was that you didn't see leftists running around screaming, "Obama is a Nazi!" or "Black man bad!" or "Obama is a racist because he set a record for deportations!" the way they do now with Trump in office.

Because the Obama Admin was trying to cope with the situation.

The Trump Admin is trying to make it bad.

 

[J842P]

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

I think his point was that you didn't see leftists running around screaming, "Obama is a Nazi!" or "Black man bad!" or "Obama is a racist because he set a record for deportations!" the way they do now with Trump in office.

You are replying to a leftist that called Obama a fascist.

Do you ever have something substantive to add? Not just "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!"

 

[Jarhyn]

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

I think his point was that you didn't see leftists running around screaming, "Obama is a Nazi!" or "Black man bad!" or "Obama is a racist because he set a record for deportations!" the way they do now with Trump in office.

Leftists did in fact criticise Obama for a variety of policies that leftists disapprove of in general, like detaining immigrants, using drone strikes against unarmed civilians, etc.

Many people criticised him on how he applied TARP funds, issuing them to banks instead of to (or to banks on behalf of) distressed debtors.

You 100% saw those things. We just didn't call him a Nazi because he didn't broad-brush brown people as bad, act above the law, disregard Congress, and set up a network of brown-shirts

 

[dismal]

Yes his did. He however didn't:
- cram them with over five times the maximum capacity for people
- steal children away from parents as a matter of course
- ensure funds allocated by DHS aren't used to bring these camps to a basic sanitary standard
- provide a total lack of transparency towards the immigration process to officials of the US government.
- allow deaths in custody without even the minimum investigation to occur.

I could go on, but I'm tired of being Captain Obvious. You know, for some who claims to be against partisan bullshit, you do peddle a lot of false equivalency arguments.

Can you give me some guidelines of when its OK to set up camps?

It seems like earlier the bar was just camps. Now there are so many qualifiers.

For example, I can find reports from 2014 that suggest Obama was keeping 1200 immigrant children in a former Japanese internment camp (Fort Sill). I can see snopes rates Trumps claim that Obama built the cages that children are being kept in as "true".

Why exactly does this not get over the bar for "fascist"? Is it there some sort of rule that says the first 1200 children in a former Japanese internment camp are cool but the 1201th child makes it fascist?

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

Ok, but he's a specific kind of "terrible president" right? The kind whose legacy will be sending kids to concentration camps.

When are you going to start punching these people who keep defending the fascist?

We got some here it seems.

 

[Half-Life]

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

I think his point was that you didn't see leftists running around screaming, "Obama is a Nazi!" or "Black man bad!" or "Obama is a racist because he set a record for deportations!" the way they do now with Trump in office.

Leftists did in fact criticise Obama for a variety of policies that leftists disapprove of in general, like detaining immigrants, using drone strikes against unarmed civilians, etc.

Many people criticised him on how he applied TARP funds, issuing them to banks instead of to (or to banks on behalf of) distressed debtors.

You 100% saw those things. We just didn't call him a Nazi because he didn't broad-brush brown people as bad, act above the law, disregard Congress, and set up a network of brown-shirts

Obama set a RECORD FOR DEPORTATIONS! A RECORD! And you are suggesting he's not racist because he wasn't yelling about brown people, he just sent them back quietly.

So if Trump decided to send a record number of blacks back to Africa without tweeting about how black people are bad, he does it quietly, then no one would call Trump a racist.

Glad to hear you admit that.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

Ok, but he's a specific kind of "terrible president" right? The kind whose legacy will be sending kids to concentration camps.

When are you going to start punching these people who keep defending the fascist?

We got some here it seems.

No one's buying your schtick any more, why do you keep pedaling the same bullshit?

 

[dismal]

Obama was a terrible President. Congrats, you're up to speed! Now, are you more interested in talking about why the culmination of behavior that was normalized since 2008 (and is now reaching a fever pitch) reveals the total lack of institutional barriers to fascism in our government--and therefore proves the necessity of popular movements like antifas--or are you more interested in owning your fellow libs by pointing out hypocrisy? It's like, it never goes all the way with you. You get that something is bad, you see that both Democrats and Republicans do it, you see that nobody stops either of them, but your mind recoils at the undiscovered territory that lies beyond "gotcha lib, Obama did that too!" It's why you're selectively responding to everyone in the thread who tries to defend Obama except for me, who doesn't. You have no reply to a position that doesn't correspond to the red tie vs. blue tie narrative.

Ok, but he's a specific kind of "terrible president" right? The kind whose legacy will be sending kids to concentration camps.

When are you going to start punching these people who keep defending the fascist?

We got some here it seems.

No one's buying your schtick any more, why do you keep pedaling the same bullshit?

You don't buy that Obama had 1200 kids in a former Japanese internment camp?

I'm told leftists were really outraged by it at the time.

We probably had threads here and stuff.

 

[bilby]

Not only do I advocate and defend violence in defence of civilisation from fascism; I am also highly criticical and suspicious of those who claim that it is not a laudable and moral thing to do.

View attachment 22840

Tip for the slow:

No one objects to fighting the actual Nazis.

What people do object to is punching the head of the leader of the college Republicans because you call him a Nazi.

So exactly what are the minimum criteria YOU would use to identify someone as a fascist?

You keep telling us who isn't a nazi. But you never tell us how to identify someone who is. How do you propose we do that? How would you go about preventing your nation from becoming a fascist hellhole, before it's too late to do anything about it?

How, for that matter, can you be confident that it's not currently happening?

 

[Jarhyn]

Leftists did in fact criticise Obama for a variety of policies that leftists disapprove of in general, like detaining immigrants, using drone strikes against unarmed civilians, etc.

Many people criticised him on how he applied TARP funds, issuing them to banks instead of to (or to banks on behalf of) distressed debtors.

You 100% saw those things. We just didn't call him a Nazi because he didn't broad-brush brown people as bad, act above the law, disregard Congress, and set up a network of brown-shirts

Obama set a RECORD FOR DEPORTATIONS! A RECORD! And you are suggesting he's not racist because he wasn't yelling about brown people, he just sent them back quietly.

So if Trump decided to send a record number of blacks back to Africa without tweeting about how black people are bad, he does it quietly, then no one would call Trump a racist.

Glad to hear you admit that.

And then Trump said HOLD MY BEER...

I don't care if they tweet about it. I am critical of Obama's immigration policies. That alone is not sufficient for me to label him a racist. There's a specific question that needs to be asked to satisfy "racist", and that question is "Does he treat all brown people like this?"

For Obama, the answer is "no". He is fairly positive about, or neutral to many "brown people", and race is not his deciding factor.

This contrasts sharply with certain orange turds, who have made it clear that it is the color of skin and ancestry that he bases his derision and criticisms upon.

I would consider ANYONE racist for sending people somewhere on the basis of their race.

So, quit putting words in my mouth or dropping the complexity that exists in my responses so you can criticise a straw-man.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

...
So if Trump decided to send a record number of blacks back to Africa...
...