The News Thread

Marching against free speech? Quite the slide.

No one was restricting anybody's free speech. Quite the equivocation.

They have the freedom to speak their mind. The rest of us have the freedom to speak ours. There were more of us, so we drowned them out.

According to the police dispatch I listened to, it wasn't as peaceful as he implies.

I'm seeing a lot of talk about the peaceful counter-protesters in Boston attacking police. :lol:

What the hell are you guys listening to or reading?

There were verbal altercations between protestors and cops, and moments when cops pushed through protestors standing in their way. There were no attacks on police officers, aside from confrontations outside the rally and that weren't attributed to the march itself. There were no fights or brawls between the two sides, aside from one incident that took place outside the rally.

Twitter trolls and other online nonsense would have you believe otherwise, however.

Here's a local outlet's reporting:

As of the press conference, police had made 27 arrests, mostly for disorderly conduct but also “a couple” for assault and battery on police officers and other charges, according to Evans. He said some officers were hit with bottles of urine, and police tweeted that rocks were being thrown at officers. No serious injuries or significant property damage occurred, Evans added.

Evans didn’t attribute the bad behavior to rally-goers or counter-protesters, but rather a third group.

“Obviously I wish the troublemakers stayed away,” he said. “ … They weren’t here for either side. They were here just to cause problems.”

Evans said, “99.9 percent of people here were for the right reasons, and that’s to fight bigotry and hate.

You guys hear about one or two incidents and suddenly it becomes indicative of the entire protest.
 
Last edited:
You guys hear about one or two incidents and suddenly it becomes indicative of the entire protest.

What the fuck, in that very quote you pasted it says that police were attacked with rocks and bottles of urine? Yet you accuse us of reading Twitter trolls and so on?

Kiss my ass dude you just proved what I said with your own quote. 99.9% of people there were peaceful? So, what, it was all carried about by one single lone Antifa douchebag? Give me a break. :lol:
 
You're being so myopic here, please stop laughing and just give this a second thought.

One or two Nazis and suddenly it's WWII again, but of course it's us blowing things out of proportion.

I knew this comment was coming!

I don't think it's WWII again, for what it's worth. I do think it's unsettling that we have a president who seems ambivalent toward white supremacist values, something that's become painfully obvious over the past week.

Let me clarify what I meant by "indicative." What I meant is that the media propagates a few examples of violence and suddenly the entire rally becomes one big slugfest in the minds of viewers. That is not what happened, not at all, the vast--vast--majority of the rally was nonviolent. If you guys don't take my word for it, then you can take the police commissioner's word for it. If you don't buy that, then... you have my sympathies.

Now, I do happen to think that leftist violence is indicative of a general sentiment among many at the rally who would have loved to punch one of the alt-right gatherers in the face, and there were some crawling throughout the rally trying to provoke just that. But, if I can toot my own horn here, I'm someone for whom reason prevails over irrationality--something I can also extend to the 99.9% of people at the rally. Do I deny that I experience feelings of frustration toward the alt-right that manifest as violence in my fantasies? No, I won't deny that.

But I can also separate those feelings from rational, measured, practical responses to what I perceive to be a disturbing trend happening. The very same way that many, many conservatives and/or republicans can separate their sense of bias (which they have, we all do to some extent, it's not something we can will away) from rational, measured, practical ways to discuss and deal with these biases in the public sphere.

I also don't think these are entirely "free speech" rallies. They're rallies organized under the banner of free speech so that people with confederate flags and swastikas can walk around the streets shouting racial epithets. I don't believe these kinds of things can go unchecked, and if they have the freedom to say those things, then I have the freedom to shout them down.
 
something I can also extend to the 99.9% of people at the rally.

This is a really bad opinion if you actually believe this.

You have violent fantasies? LOL!


It also seems obvious that lefties greatly outnumber this supposedly fearful white supremacist movement so not really sure anyone is worried outside of micro level interactions away from protests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dak and CiG
@Einherjar86 FYI majority of my vitriol isn't even directed at you, you're a sensible person obviously.

I have no problem with leftists who oppose fascistic drivel coming from the right, I just happen to also oppose the fascistic drivel coming from the left.

#SpankiesForTheTankies

It also seems obvious that lefties greatly outnumber this supposedly fearful white supremacist movement so not really sure anyone is worried outside of micro level interactions away from protests.

This seems to be a point lost on everybody, but don't let that stop you from tearing down offensive statues.

*Minus the Lenin one
 
This is a really bad opinion if you actually believe this.

It is something I can logically extend to the 99.9% of people at the rally, seeing as they didn't actually do anything. That's a bad opinion?

You have violent fantasies? LOL!

Sure. When I see an asshole shouting "Jews will not replace us!" I think to myself, "man, if I was an asshole like that person I wouldn't mind slugging him in the face." But I'm not, and so I don't. :p

@Einherjar86

I have no problem with leftists who oppose fascistic drivel coming from the right, I just happen to also oppose the fascistic drivel coming from the left.

So do I! But let's table a meta-political discussion on the origins of totalitarianism and the muddled perceptions of what constitutes communism, socialism, and fascism, and simply acknowledge that the counter-demonstrations from Charlottesville and Boston are aimed at a quantifiable white supremacist valence issuing from the right, and it's something that many of us feel is not worth tolerating without speaking out against it.

The alternative would appear to be "It's not important, just ignore it." I don't think that's a viable solution.
 
I think it's a misplacement of priorities myself, after all actual fascists are busy van-attacking and suicide bombing people all over the western world, but far be it from me to tell Americans to stop being so insular, after all the American left are only internationalists in theory I guess.

In the end my biggest problem is that the American left seems to be holding hands with the American far-left as they piss on liberal values in synchronicity and then act confused when people are annoyed that they're siding with literal Stalinists and Maoists who wave hammer and sickle flags with more pride and vigor than the alt-right can slander a Jew.

Fine with the vocal opposition, confused and disgusted by the violence and statue vandalism.
 
That's a bad opinion?

Yes, the logical conclusion based on that observation is ridiculous. I would definitely argue that demonstrating against a dying and small.movement because Twitter tells you to fear them is the opposite of rational. But you've gone off the deep end in the last year. That academic bubble is too apparent.

The violent fantasy thing is so bets and borderline embarrassing. I hope your wife pegs you later <3
 
I think it's a misplacement of priorities myself, after all actual fascists are busy van-attacking and suicide bombing people all over the western world, but far be it from me to tell Americans to stop being so insular, after all the American left are only internationalists in theory I guess.

I understand your comparison, but one is on the homefront being treated nonchalantly by the administration. I think that's a priority.

The other group is being actively targeted by our administration who are also trying to prohibit any possible "fascist" from entering the country. I'd say that problem is being taken care of, even if I've expressed suspicion over the implementation of immigration measures.

In the end my biggest problem is that the American left seems to be holding hands with the American far-left as they piss on liberal values in synchronicity and then act confused when people are annoyed that they're siding with literal Stalinists and Maoists who wave hammer and sickle flags with more pride and vigor than the alt-right can slander a Jew.

Equal pride, I'd say.

Fine with the vocal opposition, confused and disgusted by the violence and statue vandalism.

Well, no one vandalized any statues here in Boston, and we still commemorate slaveowners.

My problem is that I came on here to promote what I saw as an overwhelmingly nonviolent rally--27 arrests out of 40,000 people, and we want to highlight the altercations!! --and I'm being accused of participating in a violent movement and marching against free speech. I'm not accusing any of you of being racists, anti-free speech, or violent. This was an example of people organized nonviolently and exercising their free speech against a small group of right-wing activists, and I'm proud that it happened. I'm not proud of the few instances of assholes who pissed all over it (literally).

Yes, the logical conclusion based on that observation is ridiculous. I would definitely argue that demonstrating against a dying and small.movement because Twitter tells you to fear them is the opposite of rational. But you've gone off the deep end in the last year. That academic bubble is too apparent.

A dying movement whose participants and organizations are expected to increase over the next year? It's clear that you're opposed to anything remotely intelligentsia-oriented because it clashes with your dominant world view, which I'm assuming ends at the street outside your window.

It's illogical to say that many people at the rally may have entertained violent fantasies but they didn't act on them, insinuating they thought better about it. Yes, that sounds absurd.

Your arguments are as convincing as your prose. I do not consider you to be cognitively capable of even knowing what "the deep end" is.

The violent fantasy thing is so bets and borderline embarrassing. I hope your wife pegs you later <3

:heh: Watch your back, pretty boy...

And don't try to tell me you don't have any. Everyone does. It's not embarrassing to admit, but it is embarrassing to see people deny it. Maybe Dak can tell you something about intrusive thoughts.
 
Last edited:
Expected to increase? LOL from .0001 to .00015% look at how fearful you are mister rational.

It's ok, as TERFs rise and more hypatia problems occur I'm sure you'll still protest a movement with no power. And your parameters of rational and irrational are as flawed as your claim of integrity, one where you have it at work and lose once the wife gets home. There's no intention here to persuade you, you are as bad as mort in regards to stubbornness.

You've already wasted your time at the science protest, now this. What next will the Twitter mob tell you to spend your weekends?

And no, I don't fantasize about hurting people because I'm too scared to act out. That's you, and that's why you're perspective of a male identity is flawed and embarrassing.
 
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...e=fb&utm_medium=s3&utm_campaign=sharebutton-b

In the U.S., explicitly white-supremacist groups know they are vastly, vastly outnumbered by everyone who hates them — their paltry numbers being an easy thing to forget in the age of social media and especially so this week, in the wake of a real-life white-supremacist murder. So their only hope for relevance is to maximize every potential bit of media coverage. And the best way to do this is to create media moments: scary, evocative images like the torch photos from last weekend, but also as many violently photogenic confrontations with counterprotesters as possible. Producing violence is an underlying, often unstated, goal of many white-supremacist protests and gatherings.

When violence does break out, videos of it race through the internet’s white-supremacist underbelly, serving as incredibly valuable PR material. It doesn’t matter who gets the better of a given confrontation: When the Nazis get punched, it’s “proof” that anti-fascists or liberals or [insert minority group] or whoever else did the punching have it in for “innocent white Americans just trying to protest peacefully.” When the Nazis punch back, it’s proof that their enemies are, to borrow a word from alt-right parlance, “cucks” who are easily bested in the streets. Even when white supremacists lose street fights, they win the long game.

This sort of tactic, said Jeffrey Kaplan, an academic researcher and the author of a number of books on terrorist movements, “is a constant in terrorism or any form of asymmetric warfare,” whether the group in question is jihadist or white supremacist or whatever else. Kaplan, who is an incoming professor at King Fahd Security College in Riyadh, summed up the extremists’ logic like this: “Our numbers are paltry, we are despised by our countrymen and we couldn’t get a date for the life of us, but any action that has enough impact to strike at the heart of the enemy by getting media coverage is a major triumph.” Violent confrontations allow extremists to make a tantalizing offer to the angry, disillusioned young men — they are almost entirely men — whom they hope to groom to become tomorrow’s haters and killers: We are part of a movement to change the world, as you can see from this latest video that movement is working, and you can be a part of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CiG
It's ok, as TERFs rise and more hypatia problems occur I'm sure you'll still protest a movement with no power. And your parameters of rational and irrational are as flawed as your claim of integrity, one where you have it at work and lose once the wife gets home. There's no intention here to persuade you, you are as bad as mort in regards to stubbornness.

This is too much fun. You can't step back and read the posts I've made without implicating your passionate disapproval of everything I stand for. I've made generally middle-ground statements in order to arbitrate a discussion, which I think CIG has been fair in responding to. You, on the other hand, just laugh and call bullshit and question my integrity, because that's about all you can do.

You've already wasted your time at the science protest, now this. What next will the Twitter mob tell you to spend your weekends?

I didn't go to the science protest.

I spend my weekends like a normal person, I chill with my wife, drink beer, watch TV, and argue with idiots on a metal forum. Then I go back to working on my dissertation during the week.

Also, my wife went with me to the rally this weekend. We actually support one another in our political views.

And no, I don't fantasize about hurting people because I'm too scared to act out. That's you, and that's why you're perspective of a male identity is flawed and embarrassing.

Yes, you do. They're called intrusive thoughts (which can include other kinds of unsettling thoughts, not just violent ones), and they have nothing to do with being "too scared." That's the difference between thinking and acting; but then, it figures that's tough for you to understand.
 
The other group is being actively targeted by our administration who are also trying to prohibit any possible "fascist" from entering the country. I'd say that problem is being taken care of, even if I've expressed suspicion over the implementation of immigration measures.

We all know homegrown terrorism is basically an equal threat, regardless of the ideology attached. Hence why I have never supported Trump's asinine "Muslim ban," for that plan to work he'd have to also censor the Internet so heavily that nobody could be radicalised online and last time I checked, Donald Trump wasn't a Tory.

I understand your comparison, but one is on the homefront being treated nonchalantly by the administration. I think that's a priority.

Is that really true though? He condemned them, just not in as isolated a way as you wanted and this one alt-right car attack is slowly widening into condemnation and slandering of the entire American right, like a jug of SJW piss dropped on a carpet.

Equal pride, I'd say.

Equal pride, but not equal condemnation. It's almost as if the hammer and sickle isn't associated with the oceans of blood of the innocent.

Well, no one vandalized any statues here in Boston, and we still commemorate slaveowners.

It's all a matter of time. If these people didn't rant about how evil America is every ten minutes I'd almost think they're trying to erase racism from the memory of the people, that's not a recipe for repetition at all.

My problem is that I came on here to promote what I saw as an overwhelmingly nonviolent rally--27 arrests out of 40,000 people, and we want to highlight the altercations!! --and I'm being accused of participating in a violent movement and marching against free speech. I'm not accusing any of you of being racists, anti-free speech, or violent. This was an example of people organized nonviolently and exercising their free speech against a small group of right-wing activists, and I'm proud that it happened. I'm not proud of the few instances of assholes who pissed all over it (literally).

That's fair.

A dying movement whose participants and organizations are expected to increase over the next year? It's clear that you're opposed to anything remotely intelligentsia-oriented because it clashes with your dominant world view, which I'm assuming ends at the street outside your window.

I think the actions of Antifa, counter-protesters (#NotAll) and everybody else currently engaging in promotion of vigilante violence and doxxing will only inflate these movements' numbers myself, same with de-platforming.

By putting proponents of ethno-nationalism on a platform, we have a better chance of allowing them to destroy themselves and thus turn away naive, possibly angry white people from the shit ideology. I know it's controversial to be a liberal and promote the idea of non-violent discourse and debate, but to me that is the best way to deal with these problems in a country where hateful views are protected by the constitution and to intrude on the right to spew them only fucks ourselves in the process.
 
Last edited:
:D

Not to ignore all your comments, but I posted a NY Mag article above that promotes nonviolence and argues that violent protest only fuels the opposition. It's an argument that I happen to agree with.

And in other news, Noam Chomsky himself has spoken out against antifa violence, that communist miscreant!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CiG
:D

Not to ignore all your comments, but I posted a NY Mag article above that promotes nonviolence and argues that violent protest only fuels the opposition. It's an argument that I happen to agree with.

If that's the crux of the article I probably need not read it, most violence is reciprocal after all so I totally agree. The alt-right street mobs are reactionaries that we can in some part thank the Antifa goons for.

you are as bad as mort in regards to stubbornness.

That's wildly unfair. :rofl: