Ask ANTIFA anything

ask ANTIFA anything


youtube.com/watch?v=Qi7rq70fD5I&t=156s

Other urls found in this thread:

itsgoingdown.org/unite-right-organizers-say-next-stop-charlottesville-final-stop-auschwitz/
youtube.com/watch?v=ThInHdlC3dg&t=337s
aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2015/11/anarchy-future-greece-151122113214286.html
youtube.com/watch?v=ZKyi2qNskJc
youtube.com/watch?v=5RSaBoDl_9k&t=234s
researchanddestroy.wordpress.com/2017/02/20/the-landing-fascists-without-fascism/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Why are you a fascist?

does antifa exist or is it made up like the LOLocaust?

just because you fight fascists dont make you into one, shit, fighting fascists is the american thing to do and that comes from a anarchist marxist

Fellow anarchist here, why do you believe in 'No platform'? I don't and I want to hear a legit point of view. Pretty sure even Kropotkin himself didn't agree with destroying free speech to secure anarchy.

its real, as real as the NSA and the patriot act. it exists everywhere, in all of us, even in you

was the guy who spidermaned the trump tower with you guys?

"free speech" is a euphemism of contemporary american neo nazis, they try to promote their minority-hating conspiracy theories. well we've already seen how its ends up. we fight them and they turn to the liberal "freedom of expression" argument.

The stupid precept “my freedom ends where that of another begins” is received
today as an unassailable truth. Even John
Stuart Mill, though one of the essential agents of
the liberal conquest, noticed that an unfortunate
consequence ensues: one is permitted to desire
anything, on the sole condition that it is c nocdesired
too intensely, that it does not go beyond the
limits of the private, or in any case beyond those of public “free expression”.

>on the sole condition that it is c nocdesired
>on the sole condition that it is not desired
too intensely

My main problem is with policy that gains traction on the back of conspiracy theories (Clintons, msm pushing Russian Collusion, Trump pushing China fabricated climate change) and not the ideas themselves. I disagree with alt right perspectives on things, but it's absolutely not worth censoring for the sake of securing a so-called anarchist society.

t. Anarchist that was punched by an Antifa activist because I was wearing Thor's hammer

Also i'd be willing to bet that a whole lot of secret service trickery is going on within Antifa due to the long and painful history of infiltration in these types of movements. Just another hairbrained conspiracy theory though :^)

"alt right perspectives on things" is full blown fascism and good old nigger hating, fascists are always counter revolutionary since thier aim is to direct popular anger in times of capitalism's crises at minoritys, as if a melon picking mexican at a farm, a black ghetto dwelling youth, or a peasant jew in poland are the source of our trouble and not the people that actually run shit. it potentially can get genocidal. smacking them brings them down the earth

itsgoingdown.org/unite-right-organizers-say-next-stop-charlottesville-final-stop-auschwitz/

Except it's not bringing them down to earth. So what if someone hates niggers and loves Hitler? No chance of it becoming revolutionary at all til' political traction starts developing. Already the populist right is reaffirming their 'Need for strong governance and capitalism' because all they can see in the controlled MSM is Antifa burning shit and attacking demonstrators. No, anarchism is not an ideology of peace but it's not an ideology of beating the shit out of those who have thoughts and feelings that differentiate from the libertarian line.

Following your logic if I were a democrat, the government would be wholly justified in suppressing anarchist literature because anarchism seeks to overturn capitalism and governmental hierarchy.

its true that "liberal democratic" [if we ignore the draconian "anti terrorism laws"] government is not supposing anarchist literature, but it does suppress anarchist activism. now, those new fascists, hiding behind green frogs and memes are marching thru our police-occupied town and city's. this is how political traction starts. we block them, more or less violently, nothing wrong with that, we are not liberals and neither are they. although they pretend to be citing "freedom of expression" to gain legitimacy from liberal and centrists who aren't really about anything

youtube.com/watch?v=ThInHdlC3dg&t=337s

So you're saying we should punch Antifa, like Cap is punching Hitler? Got it!

Free speech means Nazis?

Does that also mean that truth is now lies, apples are now oranges, and Antifa are heroes?

you dont see antifa activist giving the sieg heil nazi salute, Hitler was also rindind on the free speech wagon, after he came to power it was free speech only to himself. actually words are material thing, they aren't non physical manifestations in some abstract universe but are part and parcel of a war already taking place

The shills are out in force.

Leftists like myself consider it hilarious when alt-rightists say 'We believe in freedom of speech' and subsequently say 'I wish I could throw anyone remotely leftist out of a helicopter'

Coming straight from an anarcho syndicalist, freedom of expression should never, ever be violated. Not by left, nor by right. Not for the sake of protecting anarchy either, because we've not declared war on culture, or the thoughts that people develop. We've declared war on statism, authoritarian nationalism and all forms of fascism.

As much as you'd like to believe, we're not out to get whitey. We're out to get the system that enables destruction of humans and their reduction to a commodity.

Historically, it's a necessity. States, especially the American states. have been predatory towards any remotely libertarian or democratic movement (See; Salvador Allende)

I hate Soros too you know. Anarchists rebelled against the Red Army when they encroached on civil liberties in the Ukraine in the 20s. Do you think we'd willingly accept playing the role of useful idiot?

How long till you leftist faggots all kill yourselves? It'll be much less painful than what Fuhrer Trump has planned for you genderqueer, latte sipping, freedom hating faggots.

if i join
will there be some nice violence
for me to participate in?
>off the record ;)

Oh, and for the record, I want the world to burn, too. I just would prefer if you burned first.

well, if you want violence just for the fuck of maybe you should just join a boxing club

>Fuhrer trump
>Anarchists are freedom haters

Are you well, cunt?

No, this is a blatant attack on the idea of free speech. Free speech isn't just a core human right, it is THE most important human right. Because without free press, the right to protest, dissenting points of view, and alternate parties, there It allows out to point out abuses, contest authority, and defend all our other rights.

You're trying to abolish free speech, and replace it with the party line. With a single point of view, and no dissent is allowed. But because that's transparently evil, you realized you'd never win that war. So instead, you're trying to tar free speech by associating it with everything evil you an think of.

I don't give a fuck about the alt-right. But I hate you, because you're fucking evil.

>there It allows out to
there's no way to

This.

So when do I get to kill these fucking worthless liberal leeches?

Nah. Being well isn't fun now, is it?

what "party line"? you think antifa is a political party runing for office?

see, that what you alt-right shmocks dont get about us, you cant conceive a life without an over lord. you are fundamentally slaves, and when you see us rebel you boil with what Friedrich Nietzsche slave resentment "i cant be free so you shouldn't either"

> with what Friedrich Nietzsche called slave resentment

all rules and regulations makes for a very there's no fucking brawl involved you fucking faggot if i wanted to play fisty cuffs like a little bitch I would get back in touch with my autistic friend

all I'm asking is if you guys are a bunch of panzies or whats up
I went to a trump rally thing here in TX, it was small and nothing interesting happened. Just a miniscule parade with a bunch of autists basically. luckily i cant rly feel embarrassment anymore kek
cant respect a bunch of posturing panzies

>ANTIFA

>anarchist organization

what a meme

hey man im not in Texas but if ill ever be maybe ill give you a call and we could fight lol

Okay, let's start with this: I'm not alt-right. Just because someone thinks you're a fucking monster doesn't mean they're this boogeyman you created. Stop that shit. It's the same thing you're doing with free speech, making up false associations with no basis in an attempt to smear the idea.

And yes, it's the party line. Whether or not you're a political party (you're more of a cult), you have a very specific and narrow set of beliefs that are permitted. Anyone who disagrees in the slightest way is OUTCAST UNCLEAN. That's a fucking party line.

Stop being evil.

Nice hitler dubs

Also yeah it's loaded with feds, I'd not touch it with a barge pole.

Ah, fuck it, all trolling aside, I'm still trying to figure out why trump bothers holding these rallies. He realizes he's the president, right? And that maybe he should spend a bit more time governing instead of trying to excite his tiny cheeto to a bunch of hillbillies who are dying to have orange dust lining their toothless mouths?

there is a differance between a set of believes, an ethos, and a party line. party line is hegemony. institutional exploitation and the racism which is a tool of it is hegemonic, resistance to it is not. there is no symmetry, no equivalence here

Bullshit. The term "party line" was clearly used in a very specific way. It was a reference to the forced conformity, and the inability to tolerate dissent. Learn how words are used. Context matters. You can't just impose your own bizarre definition on a word, and claim that's what someone else who used the word really meant.

>I'm not alt-right.

even if you are not alt-right you still consider me "evil" which is another way of sying "enemy", you are still a partisan, only you are a partisan of the status quo

nigga WE ARE DISSENT. you think you are free and we are some dictators from out of space? you think this realty in which we are forced to live is the only possible one?

Again, horseshit. You're attempting to wipe out freedom of speech, which makes you evil. Pretending that somehow freedom of speech supports the status quo is an example of doublethink, because aside from armed revolution it's literally the only tool that can be used to fight the status quo.

Ah, yes. The "we're revolutionaries" argument that has been used by every Marxist status quo that has ever existed.

But you're right in one way. Freedom of speech ALSO applies to you. It supports all kind of dissent, from your evil to the evil of the alt-right.

They believe in protecting everyone’s ‘right’ to ‘free speech’ and think speech is something neutral. In prioritizing ‘free speech’ as a concept above its content, the protest marshal fails to understand that speech comes from a position oriented to history and does not exist in a vacuum of neutrality. Speech from white supremacists perpetuates white supremacy. Despite explicitly advocating for ‘free speech’, the protest marshal implicitly knows that speech is not neutral since they themselves censor speech that is deemed too ‘hostile’. They smile when the crowd chants the harmless ‘love trumps hate‘ but scold those yelling ‘fuck the police‘, insisting on respect because they know where chants like that might lead. The protest marshal speaks as though speech exists in a vacuum but acts in accordance with the reality that speech exists in a war.

The protest marshal is determined to ‘keep the peace’ and promote ‘non-violence’ at events. They assert that ‘violence’ is antithetical to their ‘non-violence’. In doing so, they neglect the reality that the ‘peace’ they are defending is merely the well-ordered violence of those who’ve won—i.e., the violence of the state, going back to Columbus and European slave traders, through rape culture, and carrying on today. This violence is so normalized that it has ceased to register as violence, since it goes into remission once established and only emerges to maintain the status quo. The protest marshal’s insistence on ‘non-violence’ is a grotesque proposition when people’s lives are threatened everyday. They’re willing to betray anyone who would use any means to defend themselves against a world that makes life more and more unlivable. The protest marshal believes that ‘violence’ and ‘non-violence’ are poles on a spectrum, when this spectrum is really only a tool of control to allow for some actions while condemning others that challenge the normal operation of power.

>Do you think we'd willingly accept playing the role of useful idiot?

lmao that ship sailed a long time ago, queerboy

Okay, look. Speech is speech. Words can be powerful, but they can only be powerful if they resonate with other people.

I don't give a fuck whether they're neutral. That's got shit to do with nothing. But they don't and can't impose themselves on someone unwilling.

The rest of your post seems to be a random partisan shit. A free speech advocate supports "fuck the police", whether a shit like you says it, or a shit from some other side says it.

And what the hell is a protest marshal?

What the hell are you talking about? You don't seem to be addressing anything we've been talking about, and are you just making up fanciful and irrelevant distinctions.

typical fascist moving the goal post and opening locked doors for no reason other than to prove a point

>Maybe She's Born with It, Maybe It's Maybelline
So which one is it. I gots to know!

i think i know what your problem is. you think Trump and his boys are fighting the status quo, but its not so. trump and his boys ARE the status quo. they are a response to the crisis of 2008 and occupywallstreet, a response to black dissent like BLM, the system is threatened and his street troops are on the march. trumps blames some melon picking mexicans made illegal from preventing them the right of strike as to deflect popular anger

What goal post? And what's this about locked doors? Try to compose something coherent.

And if a strong defense of freedom fo speech is the new definition of fascist, sign me the fuck up. (But it's not. You have no idea what the word means. You're not even using Eco's sloppy definition.)

>i think i know what your problem is. you think Trump and his boys are fighting the status quo,
No, I don't. When did I say anything like that? I didn't mention Trump, I didn't even allude to Trump.

You've created this fictitious opposition in your head, and you're fighting them, instead of the person in front of you.

>tump protesters use freedom of speech
>freedom of speech is our weapons of dissent
>tump protesters =dissent
>antifa shuts them up
>antifa is against dissent

Far as I can tell, nothing in your list is related. If you're attempting to present a QED or even just showing a path of free association, it's a failure.

can someone please inform me as to what antifa is actually about?

have heard about the direct action, which sounds like a reasonable and somewhat admirable idea although it says fuck all about what to actually take action towards

but more often than not when ive spoke to people supporting or being part/have previously been part of the antifa i usually just get a barrage of arguments for "fighting the man", the world order being all fucked up and our socio-economic system being evil. does that in any way reflect the group at large or are these people ive met just fucktards who cant seem to comprehend that these systems, in some way or another, are necessary if we want to live in a post huntergatherer society?

get out of my City Faggot

>can someone please inform me as to what antifa is actually about?
I think it's about as well defined as Occupy Whatever.

well, the movement is diffident in diffident parts of the world, the most advanced fraction is in greece. the purpose is ultimately to free ourselves of money and police, of all alienation "the economy will provide" to rig our self of the God names "the economy", you can read about the efforts in greece here. sure there are many, many activists who are not strategizing in the least. you can google "the coming insurrection" to read some intelligent people

aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2015/11/anarchy-future-greece-151122113214286.html

youtube.com/watch?v=ZKyi2qNskJc

Why are you humanity's shitstain?

hahahahaha

which humanity?

there's two.

Look forward to putting a bullet in your face you fascist piece of shit.

Do you want to know what's even more American and engrained in Americana itself? Fighting Communism.

Communism will never go away. not from America and not from the World

youtube.com/watch?v=5RSaBoDl_9k&t=234s

Communism is a completely failed ideology that has had its chance multiple times. Every single one of them a failure.

National Socialism though was only tried once and make an entire country go from ashes to needing the entire world to defeat it.

It's never existed in the world. It's a fantasy, a pipe dream. And whenever anybody tries to make it real, it turns into a horrible despotism and kills tens of millions of people while ivory tower academics sing it's praises and practice apologism.

Were you born a colossal faggot or did you have to work at it?

When are you planning to move out from your parents house? When are you gonna go out and get a job? Why don't you kill yourself for being the worst kind of shit in the Universe?

No it turns out exactly as its jewish creators envisioned it would. As a way to kill millions of goys and putting the jews on top.

that was state-run centralized capitalism adorned with red color and masked with Marx's imago.

Well, I'm pretty sure the plan was to wipe out all of Europe in a swiftly manner of starvation. Then have America defeat it. Would've sped thinga up much quicker.

and thats why we are not a party runing for office or competing for power like some fascist. thats why nazi lost and will loose. we are the hearts and mind you want to conquer

> It wasn't REALLY communism, blame capitalism.
Ah yes. Typical apologism.

So anyone who competes for political power is a fascist?

>ask a LARPer anything
Fix't it for ya, OP. Now run along and gag on Nazi cock like a good boy.

in a way, he is. but one should remember the fascism is a certain mode of production predicated on the welfare-nasion-state model, today in the global neoliberal mode of production its a particular fascism. ill continue

If it’s true that liberals are now conservatives in the literal sense of the term, it’s also true that Trump’s programmatic vision, an America made great again through racialized economic nationalism, preserves in its heart the very conservatism it pretends to expel. The means with which Trump and his coalition would remake American capitalism are the technocratic tools of his predecessors, Reagan and the Bushes, Obama and the Clintons. His infrastructure project is not a return to the government-funded building projects of the New Deal, but instead imagines that roads, bridges, internet bandwidth, and power plants will magically appear as the result of tax breaks and deregulation, something that challenges reigning macroeconomic orthodoxy not one iota. Why it would succeed now, having failed under more propitious conditions back when it was called “supply side economics,” remains unexplained, necessarily so. Similarly, his plan to bring manufacturing jobs to the US imagines that lowering the tax rate, deregulating industry, and smashing unions is all that it will take to encourage the repatriation of capital and spur investment. This is the very assumption that Bush and Obama made in response to the economic crisis of 2008: if you bail the banks out they will begin lending again and, with lending, capitalists will invest and said investment will create jobs. But builders won’t build and corporations won’t invest if the roads go nowhere and the plants can’t make things people need — in other words, no one will build capacity if there’s already massive overcapacity, which there is. Labor costs have a long way to fall before it’s cheaper to manufacture here, and if firms do invest, it will likely be in totally robotic factories. In other words, Trump’s economic proposals seem, at first pass, as if he plans to make America great by employing the very same methods that have accompanied four decades of decline.

It’s always possible that he will change course, and break with such orthodoxy, economic and otherwise. The situation is dire and we can expect experimentation. Trump assembled an administration that seems split between those who offer a more radical extension of the status quo and those who seem committed to breaking not only with economic orthodoxy but with democratic governance in general. On the one hand: the CEOs of oil companies and fast food empires who would continue in the ruts of the long declension, cutting taxes, deregulating, privatizing, and union-busting. On the other: true counter-revolutionaries like Steve Bannon who would raise tariffs, destroy trade relations, and attempt an economic isolationism of the sort that can only hurt the bottom line of multinational companies like Exxon and Carl’s Jr, not to mention financial firms whose entire trade is in hot money. We might think of the former as hyper-neoliberals; the second are close enough to the project of historical fascism to deserve the name.

But this alliance between billionaire CEOs and the second-rate generals’ junta-in-waiting can hold only for so long without one side dictating terms to the other. Trump probably knows that if the Koch-bred austerians and privatizers are allowed to have their way, we’ll never see growth or jobs; as yet he is unable or unwilling to act without them. The question, then, is whether this will be a brief moment of crony capitalism, the billionaires enriching themselves, stuffing their pockets with loot, and then blowing up the crime scene behind them, as so often happens in the global south — or whether we will really see a reorganization of capitalism along new and newly fascistic lines.

What? Trump never pretended to "expel" conservatism. He embraced it.

we've seen what happend since those words were written, bannon got fired. the CEO's rule the administration, nothing but chip nigger-hater-ism, no real jobs, no nothing

Wait... you're saying Trump is a revolutionary (in the Marxist sense) and Bannon is a counterrevolutionary?

i think the author was referring to him being an outsider to the classical conservative establishment, he could have sided with bannon which would have made him into a line breaker. this was written when he just got elected

If you're quoting, use greentext

Why is your narrative better than mine?

oh ok. this is the source if anybody is interested

researchanddestroy.wordpress.com/2017/02/20/the-landing-fascists-without-fascism/

shit nigga, whats your narrative?

why are you a stupid idiot?

well said user

If you want to starve so much why not go to africa?

no, i think Trump is a very empty, concept less person. bannon is a counter revolutionary because he wanted to restructure the economy in a kind of, at least partial, welfare-state, say in the rust belt for the sake of establishing a lond term base for trump and his clique. neither are revolutionary by marxian terms, marx saw times of capitalists crisis as an opportunety to bring the whole shit down