Can we discuss ANTIFA, Nazis and free speech?

[AssignedPerfectAtBirth]

I am somewhat confused about Antifa and their recent activism, particularly in Charlottesville. On the one hand I do believe that there is a line to be drawn somewhere in the case of Nazi activism. But I am struggling with the use of violence. I know the Anti-Facist League has existed in the UK for many years, but they were very much on the periphery. Am I right in thinking that such movements are relatively new in the US?

Should Nazis and white supremacists ever have a right to organise, march, make speeches or should they be battered off the streets? Where does the right of free speech end?

I have some issues with Antifa. The debate is so polarised and many rightwingers are being tossed into the same pot as white supremacists and Nazis by some of the MSM, which can't be a good thing.

Thoughts anyone?

Asking disengenuous questions which imply an an assertion which was not made is also transparent.

Or are you saying that you are actually a fascist?

University campuses are also not obliged to host anyone, or provide anyone with a platform.

Madge, could you indicate to whom your comment is addressed please?

Or, by disagreeing with your view, are you describing anyone not sharing your views as fascist?

these discussions always see someone arguing for a 'full spectrum of idea sharing'

Tell me, how shall we debate whether genocide of certain groups is advisable? Do I sit and patiently allow nazis to explain to me why I should not live, why my children should be murdered? And then make a dispassionate counter-argument?

lol no

Or, by responding to me, are you confirming that you fancy goats?

Anyway, it's a moot point. Fascism has yet to be successful anywhere, sooner or later, people wise up and kick fascist arse

go back to 4chan, why don't you

Universities exist to pursue knowledge and further intellectual enquiry, or should IMO. That means providing a platform for any invited speaker on any issue who would attract an interested audience willing to engage with a range of opinions, some of which are likely to be different. Deciding which views can be heard is fascism.

No, it really really isn't.

It is impossible for universities to allow every single person in the world a platform, thus by definition they must select who will speak, meaning some will not.

You are not owed a platform.

You really must try harder- maybe your mum could make you some chicken tendies to replenish your energy?

There is fascism on the left, too. And a great deal of heat; not much light. Dispassionate argument quickly reveals which person is a dangerous extremist and which isn't.

Words have meanings, you know.

Fascism refers to a very specific political philosophy- it doesn't mean 'no one will take my bad faith posturing seriously!'

You really must try harder.

I came on this thread to read and think about my opinions on the matter. But I don't understand the majority of it - it's like I've wandered into a long-running thread. Do you all know each other and debate in this topic often? I can't understand Madge's posts at all.

Ok. I will summarise my position.

Freedom of speech does not mean that anyone must provide you with a platform from which to make that speech.

No one is obliged to listen, either.

Where that speech consitutes a threat (I.e., marching under the flag of a philosophy that practised genocide) to life, or a call to violence, that speech may in fact be prohibited by law.

There is no fruitful exchange of ideas possible with people who advocate genocide.

It is disengenous to pretend that all a fascist needs to hear is a thoughtful critique of their ideas, and they can be argued out of murderous intent. I would no more debate their philosophy than I would debate a mugger with a knife to my throat demanding my wallet.

According to Chambers Dictionary: the broad definition is an organised political group or club. Then, more specifically, with a capital F, it refers to the Italian party from 1922 - 1943.

It has come to mean an exponent of extreme right wing, militaristic and nationalistic views that restrict political freedom and expression.

"Do you all know each other and debate in this topic often? I can't understand Madge's posts at all."

Hi, big kids, no, we don't, and I came onto this thread for the same reason as you - to engage with a thought-provoking topic. Madge's posts are sometimes confusing because she's 'answering' straw man arguments which no one has actually posted.

Like this classic:
"It is disengenous to pretend that all a fascist needs to hear is a thoughtful critique of their ideas, and they can be argued out of murderous intent. "

When has this been said?

But free speech doesn't mean engaging in debate, Madge. No one needs debate them.

OC I totally agree re the erosion of intellectual debate in universities and other civic institutions.

Madge - speakers don't turn up of their own volition at universities to give speeches; they have been invited, usually by part of the student body. So who gets to tell some groups of students whose views they are or are not allowed to hear - not even necessarily to agree with?

And thanks CSLewis - I think part of my confusion was from an article which I now see was probably in a deleted post, but which I thought was in a previous thread. Also the references to being disingenuous and posting on 4chan - I thought you all knew each other's histories!

Where is genocide being advocated on this thread? You have me confused as I was not suggesting that hate speech should be condoned.

It began as an attempt to discuss where Antifa became violent...

Both groups are a danger IMO.

Nazis more so obviously, but ANTIFA are blinkered in their thinking as well.

BigKids and CSLewis: thank you for confirming that I am on the right thread. I wandered back this morning and found a firestorm!

What is goat fancying? It's clearly an insult but has gone over my head ,

No idea

The OP included the following:

Should Nazis and white supremacists ever have a right to organise, march, make speeches or should they be battered off the streets? Where does the right of free speech end?

This is what my posts have referred to.

I would hope it is beyond dispute that a central plank of nazi philosophy is genocide.

This is an interesting article about a Boston 'free speech' rally dwarfed by thousands of counter-protesters - The Telegraph
apple.news/AlEvkNX1XSnykEVHLY5AnBw

Happened a couple of weeks after Charlottesville. Includes a quote from a police off

Woops!

...a police officer talking about the Antifa counter-protestors bringing acid to throw at Free Speech marchers/law enforcement:

"We think it’s what they had in Charlottesville,” said one policeman, dressed all in black and equipped with a body camera, referring to violence last weekend in Virginia. “They are using hydrochloric acid or battery acid.
“Their tactic now seems to be to cause so much trouble that the event just gets shut down before it can even begin.”"