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?

"Finally, that asshat Google employee was fired because he used company time and company equipment to bring his employer into disrepute, and serve him right. His bullshit would also have caused ongoing disruption in the workplace if they hadn't sacked him - how could any manager assign any BAME people or women to work with someone who had publicly stated that they were incompetent and inferior?"

Seriously?? Precisely none of that is true.

I suggest you read the memo, and then read the statement in which Google defended their decision to fire him. Then come back, and I'll happily debate the actual contents of both with you.

To clarify my view for Madge's peace of mind, it matches CSLewis's position.

I have read the memo. Bullshit based on discredited science by a whiny broflake of the sort who are ten a fucking penny.

I would also like to ask how you feel about defending the right of ISIS supporters to march in the US or the UK, if they claimed they were supporters of religious values and that the march would be peaceful.

Um, ISIS calls for the murder of any and all non-Muslims, so I'm fairly sure that comes under the category of 'explicit incitement to violence against a group of people', which is, as I've already stated, where I personally would draw the line.

Have you name changed, Madge? Or have MomentumHQ drafted in reinforcements?

What's a "broflake"?

I doubt the authorities of any town or city anywhere (outside ISIS enclaves) would grant permission for an assembly of ISIS supporters. You wouldn't get it in most of the Arab world either.

nazis call for murder too, hth

anyway, all this is moot- the ordinary assumption in any discussion is that everyone proceeds from a position in good faith; this is patently not the case here.

How so? Did I miss the memo where you were given authority to decide that?

It is legal to carry a gun in many American States. Bonkers that it is permitted IMO, but quite legal, provided the regulations set out by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms are followed.

does a person wearing nazi insignia, chanting racist slogans and carrying a firearm as they march alongside others doing the same consitute a threat? Who knows, really. It's all open to interpretation

Including North Carolina, where weapons may also be concealed.

To return to the OP; they also said:

"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"

What is your position on the use of violence by Antifa, Madge? When there has been no violence offered them?

in many countries you are allowed to defend yourself where you have reasonable belief of a threat to your safety

totally legal, so there we are

Now who is being disingenuous...

I mean, I'd love to offer my personal opinion but it is irrelevant as we are having a theoretical discussion.

I leave it to the law to argue whether or not armed chanting nazis represent a credible threat. everyone must do as their conscience buds in response, the law sanctions it.

Ok, I'll put it another way:

Do armed, chanting white supremacists present a credible threat to armed, chanting Antifa protestors, who have, entirely voluntarily, put themselves in the same location as the former?

did your autocorrect change nazis to white supremacists? funny.

they are basically the same thing though, mind

Or another way:

Do armed, chanting Antifa protestors present a credible threat to armed, chanting white supremacists, when the former, without a permit, turn up in overwhelming numbers to a legal march organised by the latter?

again with the pesky autocorrect.

I referred to nazis

They weren't all Nazis; they probably weren't even all white supremacists either. And no, they are not the same thing.

I don't feel quite as free as you clearly do, to fling labels like Nazi around.

see what I mean- bad faith a-go-go

are you really arguing that nazis are only violent when provoked by anti fascists? truly?

yikes

Where has the OP gone? I wonder how s/he feels about the thread's progress, or whether it was intended to provoke. It started out well.

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.

This thread has borne out her comment, sadly.

I would think, if I were a marching sort of right-singer, that if I found myself in the midst of a demo, surrounded by people wearing nazi insignia and chanting racist slogans, that if I continued to March alongside them, people may well mistake me for one of them

to be honest, they'd by right to