Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Trump and the FBI are probably not on the same page on quite a few issues. All they can do is warn the executive branch, the rest is up to who voters choose to put there.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Daily Show host Trevor Noah says people see Antifa as "Vegan Isis"
- Thread starter kitsunelaine
- Start date
Trump and the FBI are probably not on the same page on quite a few issues. All they can do is warn the executive branch, the rest is up to who voters choose to put there.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
#NotALLWhitenationalistgroups
uncelestial
Member
LOL!
Okay, be sure to send a memo to Antifa letting them know that Fox News is covering them in a negative light, and that Fox would be kind to them if they were Polite Liberals.
I can't believe people are serious with arguments like this.
It would be great to fix the state so that fascism cannot easily take hold. I'm all for it. So are all of the anarchists and communists you're so afraid of. Unfortunately, until we get to that new system, fascist movements will continue to exist and we therefore need to be resisting them.
It's not a political movement in the sense that they are not concerned with electoral politics. You can call them terrorists if you want. After all they are literally trying to terrorise fascists out of marching and demonstrating. But that still doesn't mean they are trying to overthrow the state and "replace" it with antifa (whatever that means) which is what I meant by a revolutionary act. You think that any method not explicitly endorsed by the state is somehow an attempt to overthrow and replace the state. Which is incorrect.
I don't know why you keep insisting that antifa isn't addressing root causes or trying to enact change. Antifa is a broad coalition. It's a tactic employed by people of varying ideologies. These people do want change, they do have feelings about big-picture policies that can help people. That doesn't mean they can't also directly oppose fascism.
and the fact that everything about antifa isn't carefully branded and focus tested for mainstream liberals to consume as infotainment isn't some indictment of antifa. You think that punching Nazis is the entire extent of these people's ideology and praxis? That's on you. Many of the people you see marching under union flags and BLM banners and IWW signs are the same people who put on the black bandana and fight fascists in the streets when the situation warrants it.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
OK, now tell that to the assaulted journalists and harassed PoC concert-goers...
Maybe they should be. The Civil Rights movement wasn't without violence, but it sure was more organized and effective than the antifa.
e_e
There is no justice in assaulting journalists.
Jezbollah
Member
Fair enough, if you say so.
RedSparrows
Member
Anyone still implying that there wasn't violence against Nazis where it really counted, i.e. Germany, needs to read the history they keep putting on a pedestal. Shit's very complicated.
Also, wasn't this more about the window of a Starbuck's? Not the rather more clearcut case of Charlottesville? Is this now sliding to 'any violence against things we don't like, i.e. speeches by Milo Cockface at a university, is ok because of Charlottesville'? Cos it used to be noplatforming and other controversial things, but not smashing stuff, asfaik...
Also, wasn't this more about the window of a Starbuck's? Not the rather more clearcut case of Charlottesville? Is this now sliding to 'any violence against things we don't like, i.e. speeches by Milo Cockface at a university, is ok because of Charlottesville'? Cos it used to be noplatforming and other controversial things, but not smashing stuff, asfaik...
Muffin1611
Banned
Yes. The reason Americans tend to dismiss hate speech laws as slippery slope is because they don't trust into their system not to abuse them.
That doesn't mean hate speech laws are wrong, the system is.
And? We're not talking about BLM or unions. We're talking about Antifa. "They're members of other movements" is a wholly insufficient response to Antifa's lack of an ideology beyond punching Nazis.
The Greek Freak
Member
Trevor Noah is a no charisma robot created by the CCCC.
Cowardly Centrist Cunt Corporation
And no where did I defend that specific act. Antifa does not exist to assault journalists.
Antifa exists to commit extrajudicial violence, no? I don't really know why the journalist got assaulted, but it's not like we don't live in a world where people make mistakes or there's no collateral damage.
Most people didn't bother to actually watch the segment.
They showed clips from Berkeley event. This is all indeed part of The Milo stuff and notplatforming. I don't think anything has changed. The people who don't agree with notplatforming (generally centrist liberals or right wingers) are the people who would repeat the same criticism of Antifa. The Daily Show has always been in this spot politically.
Yes, obviously, the state should crack down on racist movements.
I don't know what "take precedence" means, though. Why are you constructing this false choice where breaking the law automatically means trying to overthrow the state.
I get that there are some scary looking college kids in black hoodies breaking mailboxes and that to a certain kind of liberal Bioshock Infinite type worldview that might seem "just as bad" as fascists openly marching in the streets.
But it's not. I'm sorry, it's just not. These people - like so many people before them - are deliberately breaking the law because they feel that, in a specific instance, the state is incapable of dealing with a problem.
I don't know what "take precedence" is supposed to mean in this case other than some ridiculous strawman where antifa somehow take over the country Bane style and set themselves up as some kind of black bandana wearing junta. I'm not interested in having that argument because it's patently stupid and intellectually lazy.
MHWilliams
Member
There are a few issues with the premise, but the strongest one.
Wouldn't Fox News do the same regardless? See their current stance against BLM. If they don't have something... they, just make something up.
Essentially, you're according that segment as a rational actor willing to stand against facism and nazism but only if collective action is never violent (which, to be quite honest, can be difficult to pull off in large groups where tensions are quite high.) You are more likely to have a rally about civil rights potentially than one about say, climate change, or regulation of the banks.
Like, step back for a second. If your choices are a group that openly marches on killing you or actively hurting you (you as a person directly in this example), that occasionally turns to violence, or a group that fights against that idea that occasionally turns to violence, which side do you support? Logically, you ask neither side to be violent, but one is calling for your death, so you wouldn't support them or stay neutral right?
As I've said before, a civil injustice is not good. Simply on the moral face of it, standing and doing nothing in the name of pacifism doesn't make you a better person. If you support BLM and their aims, except when one chapter goes astray here and there, then do you really support them?
I could see if perhaps you joined a different group with similar aims, but for many, it seems like they're just looking for reasons to disengage from having to deal with an argument at all. If someone breaks down my window for some reason, in the name of stopping facism, I'll want that person arrested, given a day in court, and restitution made to me for damages. But I'll still also be against nazis, because there's no "both sides", unless side #2 also has the stated aims of segregation, genocide, and hate. I can understand saying, "hey, this isn't the best look, be better", but it's tempered by a heavy, heavy degree of "Hey Starbucks guy, why are you okay with nazis or standing idle while nazis work?"
I would say that's overly simplistic. Right now they seem to show up to protect counter protesters. No violence in Boston and they were there. Numerous counter protesters in Charlottesville claim they saved their asses from Nazis. Trying to label them with a single ideology when they do not have a single ideology is why their optics are a problem, and that's being propagated by the media. I heard very little about how they saved protesters in Charlottesville, or protested in Boston nonviolently. Instead it's only about someone breaking a window or punching a Nazi, which we don't even know was unprovoked.
Perhaps these people should use a different name for their group or something, but alas it is what it is. It's our job to judge the actions of individuals, not lump all individuals under the same moniker and pretend they're all the same. Some are good, some are bad.
gutter_trash
Banned
That may not be their manifesto but they do anyways because journos to them are mainstream media, and mainstream media is corperate in their eyes.
Black bloc members inside the Quebec City ANTIFA group attacked journos 2 weeks ago.
Committing violence in the name of vigilantism is, as you literally agree in the preceding paragraph, putting yourself above the law. That's what I mean.
You can pretend like they're not inherently in conflict with one another. But they are.
I'm aware of that situation, and it's still disingenuous to act like this is a common occurrence.
gutter_trash
Banned
An Old Man on the Left Wing side and the Anti-Racism Protest side got assault by the ANTIFA group just because he complained about them doing vandalism.
instead of figuring that the Old Man was on their side with the Anti-Racism group. The Black Bloc faction of ANTIFA assaulted the man and spray painted him in the face.
It's a yearly occurrence on March 15th (anti police-brutality day)
and now May Day Protests have gained more ground in North-America, they are now a yearly occurrence on May 1st as well
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
Yeah, and this message is fine and I agree with it.
But honestly, nothing compares to ISIS.
I'd rather be a brown guy (see avatar) stuck in the middle of a neo-nazi rally than stuck around a few ISIS members who know I'm a non-Muslim who was born and raised in America.
LordKasual
Banned
Trevor Noah is just smarter than alot of you of who lose your minds over someone suggesting unfavorable traits about something you think should never draw criticism because of its message.
What's he's saying is perfectly logically sound -- When you operate under a banner, and a large part of its success depends on the opinions of those who aren't affiliated with you, you are not allowed to ignore the capacity to which the enemy can twist your words or message.
Trevor is essentially saying that some operations that are under Antifa have no real foresight.
The alt-right, neo-nazis, murderous police, our president, these people have been operating under no veil and the law and media always finds a way to protect them or distance themselves. Antifa doesn't have the tools that the Alt-right does to get away with shit like this, they just turn it into fuel to fan their own flames.
A peaceful counter protester got ran over by a Nazi and our president essentially sided with the nazis. Come on.
The examples that Trevor listed aren't examples of "statements", they're examples of people not being able to think critically outside of their own visions of their short-term operations.
I really don't have a problem with a protection force for counter protesters, but that's not who the Daily Show was attacking, and i really believe that it would be in the best interest for supporters of Antifa to agree with him.
What's he's saying is perfectly logically sound -- When you operate under a banner, and a large part of its success depends on the opinions of those who aren't affiliated with you, you are not allowed to ignore the capacity to which the enemy can twist your words or message.
Trevor is essentially saying that some operations that are under Antifa have no real foresight.
The alt-right, neo-nazis, murderous police, our president, these people have been operating under no veil and the law and media always finds a way to protect them or distance themselves. Antifa doesn't have the tools that the Alt-right does to get away with shit like this, they just turn it into fuel to fan their own flames.
A peaceful counter protester got ran over by a Nazi and our president essentially sided with the nazis. Come on.
The examples that Trevor listed aren't examples of "statements", they're examples of people not being able to think critically outside of their own visions of their short-term operations.
I really don't have a problem with a protection force for counter protesters, but that's not who the Daily Show was attacking, and i really believe that it would be in the best interest for supporters of Antifa to agree with him.
Equating the actions of an individual with the ideology of a group is exactly what Fox news and the right wing do. We can not be so overly simplistic. Don't stoop to their level.
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
He seemed to draw lines in Antifa because it had no centralized leadership. He praised the guy who was trying to publicly out Neo-Nazis, he mocked the teens who were more or less wrestling with Gamer Gate for Japanese video games, and he condemned the members breaking windows and sucker punching people.
I'm sorry, but I'm getting tired of being expected to differentiate between the people who say stuff like "but what about ANTIFA punching journalists and destroying property?!" and the people who say stuff like "but what about BLM members who destroy property and attack cops?!"
This country is in a weird place right now. People are going to end up acting a bit uncouth. You don't have to invite them to your country club, but it'd be cool if people would stop trying to help the right build a bogeyman that distracts from the fact that the head of the Republican party counts white supremacists as his most loyal support base.
This country is in a weird place right now. People are going to end up acting a bit uncouth. You don't have to invite them to your country club, but it'd be cool if people would stop trying to help the right build a bogeyman that distracts from the fact that the head of the Republican party counts white supremacists as his most loyal support base.
Muffin1611
Banned
Things like this are a common occurrence in the Antifa movement.
The fact that you are incapable of distinguishing between the rights of a seat on a bus and the rights of a citizen tells me that you are definitely someone I can trust with the power of extrajudicial violence.
LordKasual
Banned
Yes, pretty much.
It should be obvious what he was getting at -- if you're working towards a goal, it would be in the best interest of everyone involved to establish a clear message that you're working towards.
It should not simply be a name which you rally under after a small group of you come up with a brilliant idea in a basement.
It helps control the media surrounding it, it gets your message across better, it makes you stronger
and most importantly, it makes it far easier to carve out sections operating under you that aren't doing you any favors
Your argument falls flat because the bolded is contradictory. The opposition will ALWAYS portray you out to be villains regardless if you show up empty handed or not.
Ninja Edit: In fact, not showing up to counter protest at all seems to be the logical conclusion of "we can't let them misconstrue our cause" because if people show up they're going to agitate violent confrontations anyway.
Phrynobatrachus
Neo Member
black bloc isn't a faction, nor do I think most self-described antifa would condone that action.
don't take photos that can be used to identify protesters, and ask people before you shoot anything. those are the main problems people have with journos, other than the sensationalizing of a knocked over trash can or whatever.
MHWilliams
Member
The statements within this seemingly contradict.
A:
Or B?
These are two different ideas within opposing viewpoints. A would suggest Neo-Nazi change tactics. B would suggest that Antifa should in fact, get some of the tool Neo-Nazis are using.
Which is it?
A:
Or B?
These are two different ideas within opposing viewpoints. A would suggest Neo-Nazi change tactics. B would suggest that Antifa should in fact, get some of the tool Neo-Nazis are using.
Which is it?
Muffin1611
Banned
The problem here is, that most self-described antifa don't really make an effort to seperate them from people like that and don't focus on a purely anti-fascist message.
They are very similar. While their prominence is relatively new in the US, they are also decentralized and as such comprised of dozens of different groups, some of which only directly protest neo-Nazis, some of which also go around burning cars for anarchist or anti-capitalist reasons.
That's life dude. Life is not black and white, and you have to take the time to differentiate this kind of stuff, because otherwise you let your knee jerk and your biases and preconceptions take control.
As to your second point, that's literally what Trevor calls out in the video.
off duty ninja
Member
Just like the police though, by not condemning these actions antifa and their supporters are complicit. Have you seen how many people in this very thread are completely willing to dismiss these incidents as acceptable collateral damage?
gutter_trash
Banned
ANTIFA's ideology is Anarchy.
yeah their name is "Anti Fascism" but their world view includes banks, capitalism, cars, anybody to the Right of them as Fascists.
say, I'm a Liberal Party of Canada voter. To them, I'm a Fascist because I'm to the Right of them just for voting for Trudeau. That's ANTIFA's problem, everyone is a Fascist.
"ah! you brought your kids to watch the Ice Capades by using your car?" Smashes car windows. that's who they are
This nails it. We should be condemning extremism on both sides. ANTIFA in the way Trevor is describing them is not how society works.
The issue here is that the Right has been almost completely corrupted by extremism from center right on.
So Canadian antifa is the exact same as American antifa? I reject that assumption.
The fact that you see people marching in the streets advocating for genocide while the leader of the country nods in tacit approval and your first concern is with those people's rights as citizens tells me that extrajudicial violence is indeed necessary.
Edit - also lol at the establishment and perpetuation of racial segregation actually being about the rights of bus seats
The civil rights movement was much longer and messier than you probably think. It wasn't some organized group all on the same wavelength ideology-wise.
Anarchists make up Antifa, so do Communists and other Socialists. But it's not just limited to them. If you look at them historically that should tell you a little more than your propagandised version of the group. But alas, I know you don't actually know anything beyond the scope of the centrist lens. You do after all believe in horseshoe theory so that really says it all.
I mean, the way American society works is through institutionalized white supremacy that has culminated with a sociopathic, likely demented, white supremacist in our highest office and an entire party behind him that's more than willing to look the other way to hold onto their power, and that's just me being nice and assuming that they're not all giddy about what's happening.
Is "that's not the way society works" supposed to be a compelling counterpoint?
Muffin1611
Banned
Which is entirely the problem.
Phrynobatrachus
Neo Member
I'm not sure who exactly you want a statement from. I would hope the people involved would be called out by whomever they went to the march with.
wrong. there's lots of anarchists, but antifa do not adhere to any specific ideology in general.
gutter_trash
Banned
horseshoe theory applies when it comes to both being against the EU, against trade, against NATO, Pro-Russia and so on.
That there isn't a unifying ideology? How about Anti-fascist, which you know is the entire purpose.
So you pick and choose when to apply it. Got it.
you mean martin luther king didn't walk across a bridge and suddenly everybody was equal?
or that everyone agreed with him and was following his directions and leadership?
really makes you think
Similar threads
- Locked