|Community >> View Post|
Subj: Re: Regarding that mess in Virginia
Posted: Tue Aug 22, 2017 at 10:16:41 pm EDT (Viewed 175 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Regarding that mess in Virginia
Posted: Tue Aug 22, 2017 at 12:01:07 pm EDT (Viewed 176 times)
Quote:There were HUNDREDS of the left socialist groups, you know, the very ones that rioted and caused all of that damage on inaguration day!
Quote:Just saying that both the extreme right AND left were willing to fight to the death there...
Quote:Okay. But trying to equate these two sides to one another only serves to validate supremacy (be it white or otherwise) as a respectable ideology, which it isn't. History has shown that going down this road ends in a massive detriment to society.
Quote:There's no moral ambiguity between white supremacists and the people who protest against them, and if you're taking a neutral position between the two then you're pretty much part of the problem.
Quote:I disagree. Joseph Stalin killed more nazis than anyone. I'm referring to actual nazis, not the ignorant, racist, antisemetic low-lives we saw on display in Charlottesville. There was certainly moral abiguity when Stalin rolled tanks into Poland and "freed" them from nazis. An extreme case to be sure, but the point is made that there can be moral ambiguity, and not everyone who is punching a nazi is a hero.
Quote:Of course there's no moral ambiguity where Stalin is concerned. He entered into a pact with Hitler, a pact he was committed to until the Nazis invaded Russia. Stalin killing Nazis was a matter of Russia's continued existence; he certainly wasn't fighting them in opposition to their white supremacy views or their attempt to commit genocide against the Jews.
So then you have to agree with the premise that not everyone who fights nazis should be automatically given moral superiority. You have to agree that each case must be looked at on it's own merits.
By mentioning that Stalin was not fighting against white supremacy, you are implying that others were. But that is a myth. Neither was the U.S. fighting in WWII to battle against white supremacy. The U.S. entered WWII to stop the axis aggression and attempted world domination. Let's not pretend that the U.S. would have intervened had Hitler not invaded other nations, but still killed Jews, gays, blacks, etc within his own country. There is nothing to support that. And I say this believing the U.S. to be the greatest source of good in the world.
In WWII the U.S. armed forced were mostly segregated. The Red Cross initially would not accept blood from blacks early in the war. And once they did, the blood remained segregated between white blood and black blood. The idea the U.S. was fighting against white supremacy is fiction.
The U.S. had no knowledge of the concentration camps on December 7, 1941.
The myth that WWII was a war against white supremacy is a fairy tale. The U.S. fought because they believed the axis would not be satisfied taking over Europe and Asia, and that the axis would eventually invade North America. You said Stalin fought the nazis for Russia's continued existence. The U.S. fought nazis for the same reason. No other.
My point is...the moral posturing that "America fights nazis, it's what we do" as any argument against racism or antisemitism is revisionist history. It's not a valid argument for violence against anyone.
Quote:The Antifa thugs are known for violence. They showed up looking for violence. This was not the case of a peace full group of local people, who once being pushed by the nazi group pushed back.
Quote:I honestly can't speak on Antifa, as I haven't read much about them. As far as I know they're anti-fascists who meet fascism's history of violence with their own violence.
If you don't know much about them, how can you have such strong opinions regarding not assigning them equal blame in Charlottesville?
Quote:I am 100% not validating (as you claim) supremacy as a respectable ideology by believing in the right to free speech for those I vehemently disagree with. They should be shunned by everyone, they should be ignored and mocked. Their repugnant ideas should be opposed with enlightened speech. But violence against people who's opinions we don't like is not the answer.
Quote:"Their repugnant ideas should be opposed with enlightened speech." We've been trying this for decades, to futile ends.
So what is the solution? Violence against nazi thoughts and speech? Even before they have acted against anyone? This is an honest question. If your stance is that combating repugnant ideas with enlightened speech is futile, what is your proposal?
Quote:If you're black, or Jewish, or Mexican, or Muslim then these groups represent a fundamental threat to your existence in this country, a country that many of our relatives and ancestors bled and/or died for. What's more, these groups' ideologies are unchanged from their progenitors, thus they should share the same blood on their hands ... thousands of lynched blacks and millions of Holocaust victims. Basically, their ideology and methods are far too deadly to be treated as mere opinion.
Their ideology is too deadly to be treated as opinion? So what do you propose?