zlacker

I think my post was pretty clear.

The fact that nazis exist doesn't invalidate it. Again you probably know this so I'm not going to bother replying further.

>>nailer+(OP)
Equivocation between literal facicts and people who want to fight literal facists doesn't make a lot of sense.

So no, I really, truly have no clue what you're getting at. Like as far as I can tell you're saying "being willing to punch a Nazi makes you a Nazi". Which, like, no.

>>joshua+R
Demonising your enemies as racists or fascists, ie nazis and employing mob tactics to "no platform" them or otherwise shut them up as in "no free speech for racists", strike me as exactly the sort of tactics the real fascists employed in the 1930s. So in that sense, yes, Antifa groups/coalitions/collectives/networks frequently behave like fascists. Which is no surprise really if you subscribe to the horseshoe model of the political spectrum.

>>joshua+R
My post:

>> Naming yourself "the good guys" doesn't mean anyone who opposes you is bad. It's like if someone said disliking 'Make America Great Again' means you don't want America to be great. Or opposing the Patriot Act makes you not a patriot.

Your reply:

> Like as far as I can tell you're saying "being willing to punch a Nazi makes you a Nazi".

ok

>>nailer+Yc
Yes, I'm still confused by the equivocation between facists and antifacsists, and your dodging that question doesn't help.

Please elaborate. Please don't just re-quote yourself. You know, follow the guidelines and engage in good faith. I did, it why I asked a genuine clarifying question which you seemed to ignore.

>>joshua+xL
> Which, like, no.

No, you did not address GP in good faith. And GP did address your question by quoting himself: the problem is not "fighting against the bad guys", the problem is whom you consider the bad guys. Anti-fascists calling themselves such in no way means that everyone they oppose is actually a fascist.

>>julian+o41
> No, you did not address GP in good faith.

I did. Please don't presume to know my thoughts.

> Anti-fascists calling themselves such in no way means that everyone they oppose is actually a fascist.

This doesn't address my comment, nor is it what GP said. Id suggest you reread their comment. And mine.

I'll break it down:

> Antifa literally exist to use violence upon people who don't share their politics

This is overbroad. Many people don't share antifa politics. I don't. They don't threaten me with violence. Something is missing here.

> which is one of the hallmarks of fascism

So this is only sensical in an overbroad generalization of antifa to mean "violent left wing people who are violent towards anyone not suitably left wing", which isn't antifa under any reasonable definition, and is an entirely circular argument.

So yes, please: explain.