What do you think of Andy Ngo?

[ThroughTheBarsOfARhyme]

This is a bit of a tenuous link to feminism, it’s probably more about free speech, but I saw that a member of Mumford & Sons was criticised for praising his book (about antifa) and that his book had previously been banned from Amazon. It seems a bit like TRA tactics and a similar response to Abigail Shrier’s book. I’ve just bought his book to read but I was interested in other’s opinions of him and/or the book. Is he speaking the truth and people are trying to suppress it (similar with feminists) or is he exaggerating and not someone to praise?
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/mumford-sons-winston-marshall-taking-time-to-examine-blindspots-after-praising-andy-ngos-unmasked-book-12241592

I appreciate this really isn’t feminism so I will ask for it to be moved if people think it should be.

I think Andy Ngo's camera work is very valuable, he's obviously taken great personal risks to get videos of heated situations in the streets. I don't take his word for his written claims, though.

Left wing terrorism - usually based on extreme socialist/Marxist/Communist, anti capitalist anarchism, which would ultimately result in the poorest, most vulnerable people being exploited by a totalitarian state.

Right wing terrorism - Usually promoted by Neo- Nazism, fascism, nationalism, white supremacy (although this could also be black supremacy as in Mugabe's Zimbabwe), aims at overthrowing governments (democracy) and replacing them with nationalist, fascist regimes. Also results in the poorest, most vulnerable people being exploited.

It’s not. Not even close.

Are you for real? Far right and white supremicist groups are now the main terrorist threats in the US and have killed 330 people in the last decade. When the last time an anti-fascist started firing off shots and murdering people in Walmart or massacred young people the way Anders Breivik did. If you think someone chucking a milkshake, or confronting far right violence on the streets is in any way comparable then I really don't know what to say, except it's pretty clear whose side you'd be on if we ever did face a real threat from the far right here - which always begins with demonisation of communists/left wingers/anti-fascists as a violent problem which needs to be firmly dealt with.

Overall OP, you're going to best informed by reading critically from a plurality of sources, even Andy Ngo (shock horror).

To be fair I did say I’ve bought his book. I am going to read it but when looking for reviews all I could find was the LA Times dismissing him and I wasn’t sure how woke they are as a paper and whether he was being dismissed fairly or because only one view is allowed. So many posters on here are well-read and informed as well as balanced so I wanted to pick their collective brains.

Are you for real? Far right and white supremicist groups are now the main terrorist threats in the US and have killed 330 people in the last decade

Like, did u forget about 9/11 or the LGBT club shooting in Orlando?

I don’t even consider Islamic terror a major threat in the US but it’s more of a threat than ‘far-right terror’

massacred young people the way Anders Breivik did

You specifically said the US.

begins with demonisation of communists/left wingers/anti-fascists as a violent problem which needs to be firmly dealt with

The problem is that they are not firmly dealt with and that’s why Andy’s coverage is so important.

Like, did u forget about 9/11 or the LGBT club shooting in Orlando?

911 was nearly 20 years ago. In the present day ...

T"he report, published Thursday by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, found that white supremacist groups were responsible for 41 of 61 “terrorist plots and attacks” in the first eight months of this year, or 67 percent.

"The finding comes about two weeks after an annual assessment by the Department of Homeland Security warned that violent white supremacy was the “most persistent and lethal threat in the homeland” and that white supremacists were the most deadly among domestic terrorists in recent years."

www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/us/domestic-terrorist-groups.html

The problem is that they are not firmly dealt with

Mask slipping a bit there.

911 was nearly 20 years ago. In the present day

And? It’s still by far the deadliest terror attack. Especially when your figure of ‘white supremacist terror’ includes the 1994 Oklahoma City bombing figures. More than 20 years ago, correct?

I don’t even think Islamic terror is a big deal in the US (it’s a devastating problem in the Middle East rather). But one needs to put these figures in context.

This, however:

T"he report, published Thursday by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, found that white supremacist groups were responsible for 41 of 61 “terrorist plots and attacks” in the first eight months of this year, or 67 percent

is laughable when you have antifa looting, rioting and burning down buildings all of last year. Basically overshadowed the BLM protests sadly.

But the DHS is gonna DHS. They have overstated the threat from Islamic terror and now are doing the same for ‘far-right terror’.

Antifa never think this will be thrown back in their faces too, but it will once they stop being useful idiots. You don’t think Biden et al are going to tolerate antifa antics for long, do you?

Mask slipping a bit there

What mask? I’m telling you straight that antifa are a known problem that was allowed to fester. They hijacked the BLM riots for their own political purposes and then went looting and rioting. And who’s gonna get the blame? Not those white trust fund kids playing at revolution.

But the DHS is gonna DHS. They have overstated the threat from Islamic terror and now are doing the same for ‘far-right terror’.

The threat is not just from those the far right have murdered, which is a lot of people, but on the influence the far right movements can have on society. When I was growing up almost half of the local Asian shops had to permanently board their windows and were covered in swastika and National Front symbol graffiti. Racist attacks on individuals and businesses were commonplace, left wing meetings were frequently violently attacked, people selling left wing papers often had to have security due to far right violence. The police didn;t give a shit and many were involved themselves in far right groups. Queer bashing was so common people would only leave LGBT venues in groups and nobody would have dared show same sex affection in public, whilst people of colour who attended football matches face an onslaught of racism and potential violence. During all this period the far right held regular street protests to bolster their movements whilst Thatcher's Tory Party and the Tory press, much like today, hyped up the far right with constant press attacks on minorities and diatribes about loony left thugs bent on destroying society.

It was only through anti-fascists actively organising to physically confront the violence coming from the far right that this was brought to an end. That didn't always look pretty, it was rarely perfect, but it was effective and it will sadly no doubt be necessary again.

Are you for real? Far right and white supremicist groups are now the main terrorist threats in the US and have killed 330 people in the last decade. When the last time an anti-fascist started firing off shots and murdering people in Walmart or massacred young people the way Anders Breivik did.

Yes, the far-right is the bigger terrorism threat in the US; but with rioting and street violence (which can still kill people) then antifa and the far-left may be the bigger threat.

Both of those things are significant issues.

If you think someone chucking a milkshake, or confronting far right violence on the streets is in any way comparable

That's apologist spin. Antifa doesn't merely throw milkshakes or "confront far right violence". What was Andy Ngo doing when he got attacked? He was completely peaceful right?

Some on the far-right are just as hungry for street violence, but antifa will often be starting it. Many events could be peaceful if antifa didn't turn up to attack people. It's not "self defence" unless you want to twist the meaning of that term.

The only piece of Andy Ngo's I have read was the one where he came to London and was shocked by the number of Muslims walking around. I haven't bothered with him since that.

It was only through anti-fascists actively organising to physically confront the violence coming from the far right that this was brought to an end.

That's not true though, is it. Steps forward were made incrementally and peacefully over many decades by many different groups of people. There was no sudden salvation by antifa violence. Racism isn't solved today. It was not brought to an end.

Queer bashing was so common people would only leave LGBT venues in groups and nobody would have dared show same sex affection in public

Queer meant something else then and there was no T on LGB. These days, lesbians are persecuted by extreme left wingers as well as the right.

None of this is relevant to Andy Ngo, whose injuries and persecution remain inexcusable.

So... is mumsnet alt right now?

Because it looks pretty alt right based on this.

Like, Ngo is a literal nazi.

...and you're calling him brave while parroting far right rhetoric. I'm baffled.

You know these people think we should all be housewives, right?

I know literally nothing about Andy Ngo other than his journalism is about Antifa. I’d like to see some proof of his actually being a Nazi before agreeing, as I’ve lurked on this board a long time now and know well how people have been smeared (terf, funded by right-wing fundamentalists etc) to discredit their very important discussions.

So... is mumsnet alt right now?

Many people are revolted by violence as a tool of silencing. Ngo should be able to say what he likes without getting a beating and brain damage. Do you disagree?

Left wing gender critical women like me should be able voice our opinions without rape and death threats. Perhaps you disagree with that too?

The antifa apologetics are disgusting, honestly. They BURNED DOWN BUILDINGS WITH PEOPLE IN THEM. They dragged people out of their cars and beat them. They beat the subject of this thread so severely he suffered brain damage but apparently none of that counts as "violence towards actual people" because not all people are people to the antifa apologists,

Hibari

I know nothing about Ngo. Could you give me some examples of him being 'a literal nazi'?

Just for clarity: you and a couple of other people saying 'he's a nazi' is not an acceptable example.

When I was growing up almost half of the local Asian shops had to permanently board their windows and were covered in swastika and National Front symbol graffiti.

And in America at the moment many minority-owned shops are boarded up and graffitied for different reasons - or at least, the graffiti affects a different political allegiance, but it's worth considering whether we should allow anti-fascists to self-identify.

Hibari I don't actually know who Andy Ngo is, and I have been reading this thread with interest.

But I do have some preconceptions about what a "literal Nazi" is, and I'm finding it incredible to believe a contemporary American journalist has a membership card. So I'm a bit confused there.

Would you like to explain what you think a Nazi is, please? I think it would help discussion.

I don't know much about him. I followed him on Twitter because he was capturing some remarkable footage on his go-pro. The attack on him by antifa was terrible.

If there is evidence that he is a 'literal nazi' then please can we have it? Please can we have it swiftly because I've just bought his book - and because the reviews said there are some amazing photos in there I bought a physical copy instead of kindle, so it's not too late to cancel my order if you're quick.

I watched his most recent triggernometry interview earlier in which he described himself as a conservative. I understand that US conservative tends to be to the right of UK conservative.

I don't care. There are no neutral sources. I'm happy to read Andy Ngo and what antifa have to say, just like I'm happy to read the Times and the Guardian and the Morning Star and the Daily Mail ... and do my own fact checking and make up my own mind.

Unless he's a 'literal nazi' obviously. It would be great to see the evidence of this in time to cancel my book order.

PotholeParadies Yes. He is Asian, openly gay and an independent journalist. At least two of those things would have had him murdered in Nazi Germany.

Even if he were, I still wouldn't wish a beating on Ngo. Since when do we meet extremist views with self sanctioned violence? What does that achieve?

I'm tickled that the evidence against this journalist was that he was at some group of dubious people and he wasn't obviously standing there taking notes in Pitman's shorthand in full view of everyone.

Well, case closed then. Everyone knows investigative journalists come to meetings and just get the notebook out.

The 'milkshake' contained quick-drying cement.

For those who haven't seen the attack on Andy Ngo, the some of it was captured on film, and can be found on

To help distinguish between the participants, the small, gay, Asian American journalist being attacked is the agent of homophobia and white supremacy, whilst the masked people attacking him are peaceful protesters, opposed to the right-wing violence which he is using to threaten them.

I believe that if he isn't seen actively taking notes on the attack on his own self as it happens, that's shows that he endorsed his own beating, correct?