The News Thread

[Einherjar86]

is that the one where numerous white "neo nazis" got beat up, assaulted and even had a boo-boo homemade flamethrower used on them?

oh right, that's what happened...

You actually think the right are responsible for more random violence, assaults, attacks, property damage and intimidation than AntiFa?

I think it's impossible to prove to the point of being nothing more than an ideological talking point. Loads of non-deadly violence are committed by right-wing and left-wing extremists in this country. I can't believe how obsessed some people here are with posting every reported act of left-wing violence, as though it's a plague or something.

 

[CiG]

I think it's impossible to prove to the point of being nothing more than an ideological talking point. Loads of non-deadly violence are committed by right-wing and left-wing extremists in this country. I can't believe how obsessed some people here are with posting every reported act of left-wing violence, as though it's a plague or something.

Because it bucks the mainstream narrative that the left are peaceful, non-violent, tolerant, anti-fascistic people on "the right side of history" and the right are the evil of the world. Also because the MSM is usually dead air when it comes to left-wing insanity, or they try to spin it.

I don't believe AntiFa is a plague, that's reductio ad absurdum. They are a pest though.

 

[Einherjar86]

Because it bucks the mainstream narrative that the left are peaceful, non-violent, tolerant, anti-fascistic people on "the right side of history" and the right are the evil of the world. Also because the MSM is usually dead air when it comes to left-wing insanity, or they try to spin it.

The left are largely peaceful. So are the right. You're conflating left and far-left.

Antifa are not new. They're a latter-day version of the anarchists and "black bloc" groups who, over the years, have often challenged police and broken windows during May Day protests in Seattle and Portland. Their membership is hard to track, but it appears to be expanding beyond the West Coast. They are also embracing other leftist causes beyond just fighting white supremacists.

Still, their numbers are tiny in relation to the mainstream political left. And, say experts, it's misleading for right-wing groups to suggest that the Antifa are more violent than right-wing extremists.

"The far left is very active in the United States, but it hasn't been particularly violent for some time," says Mark Pitcavage, a senior research fellow at the Anti-Defamation League's Center on Extremism.

https://www.npr.org/2017/06/16/533255619/fact-check-is-left-wing-violence-rising

I don't believe AntiFa is a plague, that's reductio ad absurdum. They are a pest though.

You're reductio ad absurdum.

 

[CiG]

You're reductio ad absurdum.

Your mother is!

The left are largely peaceful. So are the right. You're conflating left and far-left.

https://www.npr.org/2017/06/16/533255619/fact-check-is-left-wing-violence-rising

I thought it was safe to assume that in the context of this conversation you'd know when I say "right" I don't mean Mitt Romney and when I say "left" I don't mean Noam Chomsky. I guess I assume too much, because you didn't point out earlier that I said "right" and not "far-right" or maybe you're just biased and doing that thing you do where you throw a topic down a rabbit hole in order to avoid the actual topic at hand, preferring to drill into meaningless drivel and the meanings of words etc.

NPR: "Still, their numbers are tiny in relation to the mainstream political left. And, say experts, it's misleading for right-wing groups to suggest that the Antifa are more violent than right-wing extremists."

Not sure what more violent actually entails, but I see nothing here that disproves the view that AntiFa are responsible for more non-deadly violence than any right-wing equivalent.

 

[Dak]

Antfia far outnumber the far-right in both numbers and acts of violence. I don't believe this is due to proclivity but due to differences in law enforcement where Antifa are primarily active (the PNW and NE, both more homogeneously white areas, ironically). There would probably be more WN activity if it weren't brutally suppressed in the way Antifa is not.

 

[Einherjar86]

Antfia far outnumber the far-right in both numbers and acts of violence.

I don't understand how this is provable or even arguable based on evidence.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Right-wing political violence is largely a myth in America. The statistics include any homicide committed by a member of a skinhead/neo-Nazi gang. Go to prison for robbery, join a skinhead gang, get out, then kill a white 7-11 cashier for quick booze money? Right-wing violence, according to "experts" in academia.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Someone posted it on FB I think. I was going to just link the raw video but it's pretty disturbing. I didn't know Big League Politics was shitty or super biased or anything, article reads fine to me. Sure there's a lean away from far-left politics evident in the way it's written but it doesn't seem crazy to me or anything.

Is there something objectionable in the article?

The relation of antifa to the event is a red herring, IMO. More accurate is how the story was entitled by the Oregonian: "Police kill man who pulled gun at Eugene school; no students hurt"

Antfia far outnumber the far-right in both numbers and acts of violence.

MAYBE a case could be made for this in some areas of Europe, maybe, but not in the US, sorry.

 

[CiG]

The relation of antifa to the event is a red herring, IMO. More accurate is how the story was entitled by the Oregonian: "Police kill man who pulled gun at Eugene school; no students hurt"

They titled it that way because it was very early coverage and next to no facts had yet come to light. The fact that the deceased was a member of a far-left anarchist pro-firearm group is relevant in any context, just as it would be if he were right-wing and a member of a pro-firearm group espousing radical politics. I do agree though that the mention of AntiFa is just red meat for the reader base, same as when leftist articles throw around "alt-right" or whatever other buzzphrase they love at that moment. However the man himself was an avid supporter of AntiFa and before his Facebook pages were taken down you could easily see it.

Maybe someone archived it.

 

[Einherjar86]

I thought it was safe to assume that in the context of this conversation you'd know when I say "right" I don't mean Mitt Romney and when I say "left" I don't mean Noam Chomsky. I guess I assume too much, because you didn't point out earlier that I said "right" and not "far-right" or maybe you're just biased and doing that thing you do where you throw a topic down a rabbit hole in order to avoid the actual topic at hand, preferring to drill into meaningless drivel and the meanings of words etc.

I thought the same thing back when we were discussing immigration, yet every time I simply said "immigration" I'd get shit on for conflating illegal immigration with all immigration.

So I wasn't sure if you saying that antifa's existence blows apart the myth of the left--generally speaking--as a party of peace. I think calling either party the "party of peace" is bullshit. They're both largely peaceful.

As far as the narrative of antifa being peaceful, I don't know where you're getting that--unless it's from already biased sites who say the MSM treats antifa as a peaceful organization. The problem with your statement is that there is no myth of the far-left/antifa as the "party of peace."

Here's an article on fucking Vox from August: https://www.vox.com/identities/2018...s-protests-charlottesville-dc-unite-the-right

Sunday’s counterprotests against the white nationalist “Unite the Right 2” rally in Washington, DC, were largely peaceful. Thousands of people held multiple rallies across the city to celebrate diversity and push back against the hateful views the white nationalists espouse.

But a few left-wing “antifa” (short for “anti-fascist”) counterprotesters did engage in violence, throwing eggs and water bottles and shooting fireworks at police officers and some journalists who were covering the demonstrations.

WaPo has published similar pieces. The "left-wing media" describes antifa as violent all the time, so I'm not sure where this myth comes from.

NPR: "Still, their numbers are tiny in relation to the mainstream political left. And, say experts, it's misleading for right-wing groups to suggest that the Antifa are more violent than right-wing extremists."

Not sure what more violent actually entails, but I see nothing here that disproves the view that AntiFa are responsible for more non-deadly violence than any right-wing equivalent.

I also see nothing that suggests they're responsible for more, either.

 

[The Ozzman]

>Vox

 

[Einherjar86]

>Vox

I posted that link because people here always harp on it being a shit leftist rag, blah blah blah. And here it is calling antifa "violent." Your disregard for it is part of the point.

 

[CiG]

As far as the narrative of antifa being peaceful, I don't know where you're getting that--unless it's from already biased sites who say the MSM treats antifa as a peaceful organization. The problem with your statement is that there is no myth of the far-left/antifa as the "party of peace."

The narrative isn't that AntiFa are peaceful, it's that AntiFa are often conveniently left out of the conversation when people claim that the left are more peaceful.

Here's an article on fucking Vox from August: https://www.vox.com/identities/2018...s-protests-charlottesville-dc-unite-the-right

Notice how it only condemns the violence directed at journalists and police? How brave of Vox.

WaPo has published similar pieces. The "left-wing media" describes antifa as violent all the time, so I'm not sure where this myth comes from.

Describing them as violent and condemning them for being violent aren't the same thing. How many people defended the violence of hairspray flamethrower guy? I've read a few articles just this morning about him, and how they glorified what he did by comparing it to a battlefield and the fight for justice must include casualties blah blah.

The thing is, most of the left-wing media have a paradoxical relationship with AntiFa, they know AntiFa hate and even attack journalists but the enemies of AntiFa are a common enemy of theirs so while they describe AntiFa as violent, they frame it in the context of justified violence.

I also see nothing that suggests they're responsible for more, either.

Besides the ratio of stories?

 

[Einherjar86]

The narrative isn't that AntiFa are peaceful, it's that AntiFa are often conveniently left out of the conversation when people claim that the left are more peaceful.

Which conversations? When does this happen? In public discourse? Or in conversations you have with people?

Notice how it only condemns the violence directed at journalists and police? How brave of Vox.

This is not the first time antifa protesters have been violent. In August 2017, about 100 anarchists and antifa members assaulted far-right demonstrators who were marching peacefully in Berkeley, California, with pepper spray, water bottles, and direct physical assault.

Describing them as violent and condemning them for being violent aren't the same thing. How many people defended the violence of hairspray flamethrower guy? I've read a few articles just this morning about him, and how they glorified what he did by comparing it to a battlefield and the fight for justice must include casualties blah blah.

So you're okay with the media moralizing... you just want them to moralize the way you want. Got it.

The thing is, most of the left-wing media have a paradoxical relationship with AntiFa, they know AntiFa hate and even attack journalists but the enemies of AntiFa are a common enemy of theirs so while they describe AntiFa as violent, they frame it in the context of justified violence.

I agree that there are sites that do this. I disagree with you over the extent to which it happens.

Besides the ratio of stories?

There are stories about right-wing violence. My sense is that you just don't see them because of the sites you frequent, or your social media feed, etc. Data and studies suggest that right-wing violence exceeds left-wing violence in the U.S.

https://qz.com/1435885/data-shows-more-us-terror-attacks-by-right-wing-and-religious-extremists/

An analysis of the Global Terrorism Database by researchers at the University of Maryland published in 2017 shows a “sharp increase” in the share of attacks by right-wing extremists, from 6% in the 2000s to 35% in the 2010s. The share of attacks by religious extremists also increased, from 9% to 53% between the two decades.

Meanwhile, the share of attacks by left-wing terrorists and environmentalist extremists dropped from 64% in the 2000s to 12% in the 2010s.

Researchers point out that many recent attacks on US soil are carried out by individuals without any strong links to a terrorist organization—known popularly as “lone wolves.”

The study defines “right-wing extremism” as “violence in support of the belief that personal and/or national way of life is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent,” including anti-globalism, white supremacy, nationalism, suspicion of the government, and beliefs in conspiracies.

An analysis by Quartz of the same Global Terrorism Databaseconfirmed that the trend persisted in 2017, when most attacks in the US were committed by right-wing extremists. Out of 65 incidents last year, 37 were tied to racist, anti-Muslim, homophobic, anti-Semitic, fascist, anti-government, or xenophobic motivations.

 

[CiG]

Apologies I didn't click the Vox article, I just assumed you quoted the most relevant bit about calling AntiFa violent. My bad.

So you're okay with the media moralizing... you just want them to moralize the way you want. Got it.

Objective and amoral journalism is a myth. Yes, I'd be okay with the media condemning violence, regardless of the violence or the group causing it.

Data and studies suggest that right-wing violence exceeds left-wing violence in the U.S.

https://qz.com/1435885/data-shows-more-us-terror-attacks-by-right-wing-and-religious-extremists/

Would need to have a proper look at this but from the bit you quoted the way they define right-wing violence is kind of lolworthy. "suspicion of the government, and beliefs in conspiracies"? "anti-government"?

 

[CiG]

The study defines “right-wing extremism” as “violence in support of the belief that personal and/or national way of life is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent,” including anti-globalism, white supremacy, nationalism, suspicion of the government, and beliefs in conspiracies.

Am I the only one that thinks this is a weird way to define what is or isn't right-wing extremism?

 

[Einherjar86]

Am I the only one that thinks this is a weird way to define what is or isn't right-wing extremism?

This is part of the problem. Definitions for left-wing extremism are no better.

To be clear, the terms “right-wing extremists” and “left-wing extremists” do not correspond to political parties in the United States, such as Republicans or Democrats. Opinion polls in the United States show that most Republicans and Democrats loathe terrorism. 3

Instead, right-wing terrorism commonly refers to the use or threat of violence by sub-national or non-state entities whose goals may include racial, ethnic, or religious supremacy; opposition to government authority; and the end of practices like abortion.4 As Bruce Hoffman writes, right-wing terrorists generally criticize the democratic state for “its liberal social welfare policies and tolerance of diverse opinion—alongside its permitting of dark-skinned immigrants in the national labor force and of Jews and other minorities in positions of power or influence.” 5 Left-wing terrorism, on the other hand, refers to the use or threat of violence by sub-national or non-state entities that oppose capitalism, imperialism, and colonialism; focus on environmental or animal rights issues; espouse pro-communist or pro-socialist beliefs; or support a decentralized sociopolitical system like anarchism.6

https://www.csis.org/analysis/rise-far-right-extremism-united-states

Antifa is, in fact, one very small subset of left-wing extremism, and it's less organized and smaller in size than right-wing extremist groups in the U.S. Antifa does commit violent acts, but not in numbers that significantly outweigh those driven by right-wing values. In fact, the right-wing media inflates the public's impression of far-left violence by focusing intensely on those acts. The media in general may not pay as much attention to small-scale acts of violence, but they don't pay much attention to violence from either far-left or far-right. So the increased attention by right-wing media platforms gives rise to an inaccurate impression that far-left violence occurs more often than far-right violence.

 

[Satanstoenail]

Nike faces recall demand as Muslims protest 'offensive' sneaker design

 

[Dak]

\
Antifa is, in fact, one very small subset of left-wing extremism, and it's less organized and smaller in size than right-wing extremist groups in the U.S.

The only data that I am aware of that might back this assertion up is including any militias as "right wing extremist groups", regardless of the lack of domestic disturbances they may cause.

 

[CiG]

This is part of the problem. Definitions for left-wing extremism are no better.

I think it's bizarre that anti-government actions makes one a right-wing extremist, I'll have to look further into it.

Antifa is, in fact, one very small subset of left-wing extremism, and it's less organized and smaller in size than right-wing extremist groups in the U.S. Antifa does commit violent acts, but not in numbers that significantly outweigh those driven by right-wing values. In fact, the right-wing media inflates the public's impression of far-left violence by focusing intensely on those acts. The media in general may not pay as much attention to small-scale acts of violence, but they don't pay much attention to violence from either far-left or far-right. So the increased attention by right-wing media platforms gives rise to an inaccurate impression that far-left violence occurs more often than far-right violence.

AntiFa is less organized but this makes them more chaotic and harder to deal with, and unlike many right-wing groups (and as you have said in the past to which I agree) AntiFa isn't a true group, it's a coalition of like-minded individuals and movements who often come together in opposition of something, with a core of specifically AntiFa black clad/masked activists who tend to hold it all together. BAMN for example isn't AntiFa specifically but is certainly AntiFa-adjacent and engages in AntiFa tactics.

Right-wing groups tend to operate within the boundaries of local guidelines, this is why all the edgelords at UntiteTheRight still couldn't just do a spontaneous rally without permission, they had to get permission way before which allowed everybody to find out where they were, what they were doing etc. AntiFa by contrast just show up, do what they do, and then leave and nobody sees anything because they mask up, attack anybody with a camera and flee from the cops.

Even at the furthest edges of right-wing politics they still feel the need to follow some rules, yet anti-government action is "right-wing extremism"?