By David Futrelle
Seems like only yesterday that everyone to the left of Donald Trump was mad at the Nazis. Now for some reasons a lot of these same people are yelling about AntiFa. Nancy Pelosi has officially denounced AntiFa, and a piece in the generally liberalish Washington Post today declared that AntiFa are the “moral equivalent” of the literal Nazis they oppose.
Now I’m not exactly the most militant dude in the world but WHAT IN HOLY CRAP IS GOING ON. We are up against LITERAL NAZIS. One of them LITERALLY MURDERED A WOMAN with a car, and then the rest of them LAUGHED ABOUT IT and SAID IT WAS JUSTIFIED. They go to every so-called “free speech” rally they organize with the intent of doing bodily harm to as many people as possible. and unless we stop them it’s only a matter of time before they kill more people. So fuck this shit. Hug an AntiFa today.
On to the tweets. First, the dumb shit.
Pelosi puts out statement condemning Antifa violence in Berkeley. pic.twitter.com/0RlU6RlWmX
— Alex Seitz-Wald (@aseitzwald) August 30, 2017
Opinion: Yes, antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-Nazis https://t.co/dt9vInRh1q
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) August 30, 2017
Now, some rebuttals. First, a good short thread on how the discussion has shifted from ACTUAL FUCKING NAZIS to endless hand-wringing about antifas.
I am perpetually amazed at the ability of lockstep, bad-faith arguments on the right to steer and transform national conversations.
— . (@swordsjew) August 30, 2017
And here’s a response to the Washington Post thing by a Mother Jones journalist who was there at Berkeley.
https://twitter.com/shane_bauer/status/902969494808625152
Some historical perspective:
https://twitter.com/thalestral/status/902614776269955074
Every time I see news coverage of a protest I remember this image pic.twitter.com/ZAL0TwI61R
— Tom Hatfield (@WordMercenary) August 30, 2017
More AntiFa stuff:
https://twitter.com/pixelatedboat/status/902790386619318272
https://twitter.com/daniecal/status/902542063543009280
Antifa dropped a piano on my head and when I popped out of the top moments later I had a lump on my head and had its keys instead of teeth
— Jules (@Julian_Epp) August 29, 2017
I defended the honor of George Orwell against an Alex Jones employee.
Orwell went to Spain to fight the fascists. With guns. He wrote a book about it. https://t.co/vdulXAE58e
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) August 30, 2017
Snopes also has a thing to say about the attempts to portray the fascists and AntiFa as somehow equivalent:
Lmao Snopes dot com is to the left of Nancy Pelosi https://t.co/Pf9aYyNBHR
— Ann 'tifa' Coulter Classic™ (@AntifaCoulter) August 30, 2017
AntiFa may have dealt with a lot of undeserved shit today, but happily our dear leader Donald Trump was also dealing with some richly deserved shit.
https://twitter.com/fmanjoo/status/903027267940491264
Turns out Trump is not making America great again. Fox News poll finds an 11-point jump in dissatisfaction with the way things are going. pic.twitter.com/YwPvEVxSoB
— Geoff Garin (@geoffgarin) August 30, 2017
Not sure that 58% believing Trump will finish his term when he's just seven months in is quite the accomplishment someone might think it is. https://t.co/QZM073IuaA
— The Darkest Timeline Numbersmuncher (@NumbersMuncher) August 30, 2017
Trump's approval rating among people aged 18-29 has reached a new low of 20% in Gallup's tracking poll. https://t.co/5VWTe33ZFN
— Axios (@axios) August 29, 2017
Huckabee Sanders: Trump was correct to say he'd seen Harvey devastation first hand because he'd been briefed on it pic.twitter.com/y4MmUp0aoZ
— Rhys Blakely (@rhysblakely) August 30, 2017
W. screwed up royally during Katrina but at least he didn't make a speech about how rich people need lower taxes WHILE IT WAS STILL RAINING.
— L O L G O P (@LOLGOP) August 30, 2017
Meanwhile, the creator of Pepe is taking the Pepe Nazis to court and winning:
https://twitter.com/MaxTemkin/status/902700195577823232
And here are some animals!
https://twitter.com/awwcuteness/status/902839313276252160
https://twitter.com/CuteEmergency/status/902748977531162625
https://twitter.com/MeetAnimals/status/903024790675611648
https://twitter.com/lordflaconegro/status/902687000544911362
@Leo
Okay. Willful nazi sympathizing.
WHY THE FUCK ELSE WOULD THEY MARCH ON A CITY WITH TORCHES AND GUNS THAN IMMEDIATE VIOLENT INTENT? WHY THE FUCK ELSE WOULD THEY MAKE PLANS TO SMUGGLE WEAPONS IN? WHY THE FUCK ELSE WOULD THEY CANCEL A RALLY BECAUSE THE POLICE PROMISED TO CONFISCATE ALL OF THEIR WEAPONS IF THEY CAME? WHY THE FUCK ELSE WOULD ONE OF THEIR NUMBER HAVE PREPARED A CAR FOR USE AS A MURDER WEAPON BEFOREHAND?
No, there is no distinction. Violence against nazis in public spaces is self defense if you’re anyone but a blonde-haired blue-eyed able-bodied cishetero white man with 100% white ancestry, and defense of others if you are that man. White supremacists is one of the few situations where no matter what you have to do to stop them from being in society, you will almost never be morally or ethically wrong.
So you want to wait until they have that political power before you want anything done?
I’ll note here that antifa have been active since at least the mid-1980s. Has it occurred to you that you might be privileged not to live under an openly fascist regime right this moment because of the past actions of antifa disrupting their organizing? Antifa just started getting mainstream coverage yesterday, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t around before.
1920: That party with that Hitler fella…. They’re fringe. They’re not worth going to jail over.
1942: Defeating Nazis are worth dying for.
2017: Those Nazis are fringe. They’re not worth going to jail over.
@Policy of Madness
That’s why I was trying to use specific examples. Antifa haven’t just acted at Charlottesville where the Nazis were more easily identifiable, I’m not sure if the Alt-Right are all being counted as Nazis or not, and Lauren Southern has been with them. So that isn’t a hypothetical.
I’m not squeamish about her getting beaten up just because she’s female, I do think the optics wouldn’t go over well.
I thought punching Nazis at rallies was precisely what Dali, and at least some other Antia, were advocating? Since the amount of force was not specified (I did ask), killing them would seem a possible outcome, that can happen if you punch someone. A bike lock was used as a weapon at Berkeley.
I’d only be eliding the two if the pre-emptive use of force were the only way to achieve freedom from Nazis.
Nazis and others on the far right have murdered a hell of a lot more people than Heather Heyer. Who cares if she’s the only one killed at a protest so far?
As long as we continue legitimizing them, they’ll continue to get bolder.
You keep talking about pre-emptive even though other people have pointed out time and again that Nazis are violent and violence against them is not pre-emptive. You don’t seem inclined to debate that, you’re just ignoring it like it hasn’t been said. What gives? Are you aware that your position is kind of indefensible, and that’s why you’re not bothering to defend it?
Like I said, antifa has been around since at least the 80s. They’ve been disrupting Nazis and the KKK for decades and are one reason why these groups have previously been trying to organize in the dark. Antifa are not some kind of fire-and-forget missile, they are intelligent humans who can use their brains to tell whether a march was organized by Nazis. You’re also drawing a line between the alt-reich and the Nazis which is pretty unwarranted.
And God knows that optics are all we should fucking care about. It’s all you seem to care about.
@kupo
Yes, but I didn’t think they had all openly advocated genocide.
@IgnoreSandra
It’s in no way sympathising to wonder what their immediate aims are.
But we’re not just talking about Charlottesville, are we?
I’d think another reason for all the weaponry might be to intimidate, and that they regard it as part of their regalia/symbolism. I’m no American, so, attitudes to guns are a bit baffling to me. Did he prepare the car beforehand?
“I hate it when people say I’m pro genocide, I’m completely neutral on the issue”
Unfortunately, at the risk of channeling Bush, this is one cause where if you’re not with the anti fascists you’re against them.
It’s that thing about neutrality siding with the oppressor, or condoning the things we walk past.
@Policy of Madness, Bobbie LobBomb
Right, and we’re not ignoring that history, which is why they’re rightly seen as a threat. It’s also why they might not be able to gain political support again, not in the same way, because there was a before and an after. Do most Republicans really like Nazis either?
Sure, but it’s the use of a specific tactic I was asking questions about, not Antifa’s existence and work as a group.
@weirwoodtreehugger
They have, but it has bearing on whether their intent at rallies is immediate violence.
@Policy of Madness
Again happy to use a phrase other than pre-emptive. My queries (it’s not even an argument as much as a request for clarification) are entirely defensible as a) I’m not sure if a bunch of Nazis standing in front of a statue are an immediate threat (a threat, yes) b) other marchers were being included as targets.
I was not trying to draw an unwarranted line between the Alt-Right and admitted Nazis, in at least some cases there doesn’t appear a distinction, but I was asking for clarification as to whether the Alt-Right are to be regarded as legit targets in themselves. It does influence how it will come across, the optics of Antifa beating up an admitted, identifiable Naxi are different to those if the Nazi is pretending to be a free speech protester for today.
I care about the optics because I want to see long-term progress, because I care about what happens to people otherwise. The Dems will never change unless they have to.
@Alan Robertshaw
Yes, but you can be with Antifa without thinking hitting someone with a bike lock -whether the person in question did something to merit it or not- is a good move tactically.
Edit: Ah, now I getcha. Yes, genocide does not seem to phase them, they are vile. I think there’s a distinction though between whether a ‘meh’ on genocide, while claiming not to personally want genocide, represents the same threat as someone calling for it.
There may have been people on Stormer who didn’t openly call for genocide, but it’s not like they called out their fellow travellers who did.
If your attitude to genocide is indifferent “Meh, I can take it or leave it.” then I think you’re pretty much on board with the idea.
Personally though I doubt there’s a single Nazi or alt-rightist who isn’t in favour. It’s pretty much their core philosophy. Even if they’re not building camps yet, they’re happy for the people they don’t like to be killed in more subtle ways.
@ leo
I do understand what you’re saying about optics. The thing is though, such considerations only apply if you’re trying to persuade people. But there’s no argument to be had with Nazis. What’s the compromise?
“We want to kill every marginalised person”
“How about a quarter of them?”
“Half?”
“Deal!”
So unfortunately it’s not about winning the debate, it’s about winning the war.
Also, being happy for people they don’t like to be killed in more subtle ways is potentially kind of a big difference to open genocide, because bog-standard Rebuplicans are definitely fine with that, too. Dems can be, too.
The compromise isn’t with the Nazis, it’s with the ‘moderate’ Dems (and ideally, the socialist sympathising ones) who won’t like it if they read Antifa beat up a free speech protester. Hence the focus is indeed on winning the war. It’s much bigger than these Nazis.
@ leo
It’s certainly perceived differently, and that’s probably the problem.
But if I can kill someone by giving them an injection, or alternatively kill them by denying them an injection, the end result for that person is ultimately the same.
@Alan Robertshaw
Yes, exactly, really, though I suppose the example could be a tad more precise – it can be seen as ethically more culpable to kill someone with action (giving the injection) than allow them to die through inaction. But I do get the point. So, moral arguments (not necc. all tactical ones) for Antifa showing up with the intent of pre-emptively using force against these Nazis at rallies, do potentially apply to Republicans as well. Republican ideaology kills even more surely than that of these Nazis, given the former have more political power. They demonstrably represent a threat, and that can be shown historically as well. They can be as impossible to reason with as admitted Nazis, in some cases, though that’s perhaps more a tactical than moral consideration.
I’m not sure how many things are MUCH bigger than nazis!
.
If this war is against facism….then Nazis are kinda the problem.
ETA: I missed the part about THESE nazis. Move along folks! Nothing to see here but some of THESE nazis.
@ leo
But again we have this problem:
“We’re not going to support anti fascists if they go around swinging bike locks.”
“Ah, so if we stop with the bike locks you will do something about the Nazis?”
“No.”
The thing is we have now seen lots of ‘respectable’ people coming out against Nazis when they try to congregate. But that seems to be a consequence of Charlottesville. So in terms of ‘optics’ then maybe it did work?
@Leo you say that we’re not ignoring the threat. But is this so? What does it mean to ignore the threat? We had Sebastian Gorka wear the medal of a Nazi allied organization to the inauguration and explained it away. We had Bannon, who published articles about ‘renegade Jews’ and explained it away. They’re out, but the man who chose them are in. The philosophy still sits at the Resolute Desk. Meanwhile, you’re equivicating around the question of ‘how thoroughly does a person have to endorse genocide before we get worried’? This is exactly what ignoring the threat looks like. You’re doing it right here, right now, and you’re doing it passionately and with a sense of righteousness. Exactly in the way it’s been done before, and just like it always empowers genocidal regimes. You, like so many, are actively turning your back on the lesson we need to learn. And the cruel, gallows humor is that you’re casting aspersions on those who aren’t. Those who remember the lessons of history are, in your estimation, the bad guys. Unbelievable.
@cornychips
It’s not just a war against that, though, is it? The problem of white supremacy goes beyond them.
‘These Nazis’ as distinct from the ones in WWII.
@Bobbie LobBomb
I’m not saying not to be worried. I’m asking about tactics.
@Alan Robertshaw
Yes, I think in terms of optics, including the Nazis themselves blowing it by not even pretending not to be Nazis, Charlottesville and the protests afterwards really worked. Of course it was down to the attack, as well.
If Antifa stop with the bike locks, ‘respectable’ Dems might not do anything about Nazi rallies, but they are more likely to look favourably on Antifa, then Antifa and leftwingers in general have that ‘in’ to win them over ideologically. If they’re panicking about violent commies or whoever, we lose that. Even us vegans got lumped in, and we didn’t even do anything this time!
(as daft as that sounds, remember when it happened with Corbyn, the apparently incredibly dangerous commie vegetarian? We won people round by convincing them he was nice and normal, I think. That, and red scare tactics just aren’t that effective here in the UK)
Full disclaimer : only reason I don’t swing bike locks is because I’m nowhere near fit to be in the thick of it, physically speaking. There’s other things I can do and it looks like I may have to rethink my plans for September as France is headed into a storm.
At any rate, in what world is it “good optics” to be “someone who doesn’t punch nazis” ?
It’s a fucking no-brainer. One of those very few clear-cut cases where you’ve got pure fuckin’ evil on one side and there’s just nothing else to do for decent folks than to be on the other side. There’s not really any way around it, and it seems most have figured that out now. So the optics question is going to be a moot point eventually, if it isn’t already.
What tactics do you deem appropriate, then? Wringing our hands? Muttering, “oh, my!” at the television? The Nazis are actively violent against us, both in their political actions and in physical confrontation. Why is violence in our own defense wrong?
If they’re not going to take action, then why should we give a fuck whether they look favorably on us?
Edit: They should fucking care whether history will look favorably on them.
Edit #2: If you don’t think they’re advocating genocide you haven’t been paying attention.
@Alan Robertshaw There are some who call for peaceful relocation of non-whites. But it bears remembering the the Third Reich’s final solution wasn’t their first. At first, they figured they could relocate non-‘Aryans’ to Madagascar. Then, they figured there could be a reservation in Poland. Finally, the moderates, in a ‘pragmatic’ move, conceded that extermination was less costly. So. Today’s ‘Peaceful Relocation’ is absolutely tomorrow’s genocide.
@Leo
Awesome! Problem sorted, glad we had this chat… There’s a ‘but’, isn’t there?
Black ? people ? and ? allies ? were ? called ? terrorists ? for ? marching ? and ? singing ? church ? music! Dr King was more hated than anyone except Kruschev in 1963 (and he didn’t become liked until after he died, whoops). I’m sorry, everyone, for keeping on bringing him up, but the parallels are just too apt. There is no such thing as ‘giving them nothing to see’, cos their ‘sight’ is inherently white supremacist
Leo’s defending of the indefensible is making me nauseous. Literally making me nauseous.
Don’t be. Bring him up ad nauseam until people stop holding him up as this shining example of pacifism and well-liked protester.