"Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

What's happening in your world? Discuss it here.
Forum rules
Play nice. We will be watching

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby NoodleFox » Fri Aug 18, 2017 11:09 pm

sunglasses wrote:At this point in time I'm ready to agree with this tweet, but that's just because I've had a very looooong day

But yeah, IMO, that pastor is taking things a bit far. And I'll be honest, that's the first I've heard of it.


Make it happy looking doggos in cute outfits and I'm good. #verygoodboys

I get where they're coming from, I do, but there has to be a certain point where you stop and think, "Aren't we smart and morally just enough never to do this again anyway?"
I can't understand why some are so fixated on the past that it becomes a major talking point to what their purpose is. Yes, slavery was horrible and it was one of the main factors for the Civil War...but it was over 150 years ago...are people afraid that we'd become so backwards that we'd start rounding up black Americans again or something?

Or maybe it's just me being able to understand that the past had a different way of living and viewing society which is vastly different to the current way we live and see society.
Trying to shove today's views and morals into something that is hundreds of years detached isn't really...important compared to now and the future.

I hope that makes sense... or is there something I'm just missing?

(@Cobra I was more so pointing out how ironic it is that people who poo-poohed Trump's slippery slope argument now see that he's not wr-wr-wr *hueeeh*
(Like how the 'prophet' Alex Jones's famous "THE WATER'S TURNING THE FROGS GAY" quote turned out to be sort of right in that certain chemicals found in waste water runoff WERE causing some real messed up sex mutuations in frogs))
  • 4

User avatar
NoodleFox
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 8:16 pm
Location: Kekistan
Show rep
Title: Third Person Facepalm-er

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby Kate » Fri Aug 18, 2017 11:17 pm

Slavery was this country's original sin. We are still suffering from the effects, and African Americans are especially so. The south is still suffering economically from the civil war and also many places in the south still have restrictions on their autonony from the civil rights era. We're not over slavery yet, and the founding fathers are complicit. I can understand how if it was not okay regardless of histotical context to fight for secession to keep the institution of slavery safe from free states joining the country and upsetting the balance, some people could take that to the level that it would also not be okay to enshrine slavery in the constitution.

I can see how it could feel like an insult to venerate someone who may have owned your ancestors, too, when it is so relatively recent and had such a devastating effect on your family.
  • 10

JT's Art Thread - JamesT's awesome stuff.
User avatar
Kate
Gul DuKate
Gul DuKate
 
Posts: 2961
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 10:08 am
Location: Assembling Future Kate
Show rep
Title: Sheepwoman

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby cmsellers » Fri Aug 18, 2017 11:24 pm

NoodleFox wrote:(@Cobra I was more so pointing out how ironic it is that people who poo-poohed Trump's slippery slope argument now see that he's not wr-wr-wr *hueeeh*

There are people who think we shouldn't have stuff honoring MLK because he was a commie (which is wasn't, but they sincerely believe that), so it's not surprising that there are people who want the stuff honoring Washington and Jefferson taken down. I'm sure if there were a monument to Mr. Rogers there would be people who found a reason for that to be taken down too, if only out of sheer perversity.

However unless cities actually begin debating their statues of Washington and Jefferson, Trump's slippery slope argument is as absurd now as it was when he tweeted it.

That's not the issue I had with it though, because even though I think his end point is absurd, I believe there really is the potential that this will lead to similar treatment of Calhoun and even Jackson (see my previous post), and I think that's a good thing. My issues with Trump's example are threefold:

  1. The equivalence of Washington and Jefferson to the founders of the Confederacy is a popular trope among Confederate apologists, and it sounds like a dog whistle to me.
  2. It's a false equivalence because the entire point of the Confederacy was to preserve slavery. Robert E. Lee fought out of a misguided sense of honor, but he still fought to preserve white supremacy, and for basically everyone else honored in these memorials preserving slavery was the whole point of secession.
  3. The statues of Confederate leaders were almost all erected with the goal of rewriting history, and most of them were erected with the goal of celebrating white supremacy. It's not a coincidence that most of them were built in two waves: Reconstruction and the Civil Rights Movement.

Note that given that places named to honor Calhoun were mostly named during his lifetime to celebrate his defense of slavery, I'd say that the same applies to him.

Jackson is a more plausible example for a slippery slope, and like I said that's why I'm somewhat ambivalent about what to do with his legacy.
  • 11

User avatar
cmsellers
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:20 pm
Location: Not *that* Bay Area
Show rep
Title: Broken Record Player

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby Tesseracts » Sat Aug 19, 2017 12:36 am

Personally I am afraid of racism coming back. The slavery ship has probably already sailed, but white supremacy is a threat regardless.

Here is a Confederate memorial that actually has the words white supremacy in it.

IMG_7289.JPG
IMG_7289.JPG (69.74 KiB) Viewed 6962 times
  • 16

User avatar
Tesseracts
Big Brother
Big Brother
 
Posts: 9653
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 5:31 am
Show rep
Title: Social Media Expert

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby iMURDAu » Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:20 pm

NoodleFox wrote:I get where they're coming from, I do, but there has to be a certain point where you stop and think, "Aren't we smart and morally just enough never to do this again anyway?"
I can't understand why some are so fixated on the past that it becomes a major talking point to what their purpose is. Yes, slavery was horrible and it was one of the main factors for the Civil War...but it was over 150 years ago...are people afraid that we'd become so backwards that we'd start rounding up black Americans again or something?

Or maybe it's just me being able to understand that the past had a different way of living and viewing society which is vastly different to the current way we live and see society.
Trying to shove today's views and morals into something that is hundreds of years detached isn't really...important compared to now and the future.

I hope that makes sense... or is there something I'm just missing?


Imagine being a person of color and going to court where you walk past a statue of a Confederate general. Think you'd be treated fairly?

Imagine being brought up and being told the whole time that white people are superior to everyone else. When you go to court and see a Confederate general's statue standing tall would it not reaffirm your beliefs?

Idk how much time you've spent in the South but "yankee" is still a derogatory term that is used openly towards anyone without an accent.
  • 9

“This is going to become a bad meme,” Todd observed.
User avatar
iMURDAu
TCS Chomper
TCS Chomper
 
Posts: 6752
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 10:08 am
Location: twitch.tv/beakstore
Show rep
Title: King of Fuh

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby IamNotCreepy » Sat Aug 19, 2017 2:55 pm

cmsellers wrote:Personally I'd draw the line right around Andrew Jackson. I would prefer to rename everything named after him, but that will never happen. I do want him off our money when the next redesign comes along, but I would prefer to leave statues of him up unless they were specifically erected to celebrate his innovations in the field Indian removal.


We could always change Jacksonville back to its original "Cowford".

iMURDAu wrote:Idk how much time you've spent in the South but "yankee" is still a derogatory term that is used openly towards anyone without an accent.


I don't think I've ever heard anyone unironically call someone a Yankee, but I guess Cowford isn't quite as "Southern" as the Bible Belt.
  • 5

User avatar
IamNotCreepy
TCS Admin
TCS Admin
 
Posts: 1521
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:00 am
Location: Inside the "Cone of Uncertainty"
Show rep
Title: Chasing after the Wind

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby D-LOGAN » Sat Aug 19, 2017 8:58 pm

Okily dokily. Little late to the party, but I suppose I’ll give my take. First up, I support the right of white nationalists/alt-righters/whatever-ers to have their little march, let the babies have their bottle and all that. And while I support the right of counter-protesters, I personally advise against it, I mean I advise against having a neo-nazi march or even being a neo-nazi in the first place, but if they’re gonna do it and aren’t breaking any laws, I think the best response is to leave them to it.

We have similar stuff in this neck of the woods too like. Up the North they have Loyalist marches that specifically go through Catholic neighbourhoods and Republican marches that specifically through Protestant neighbourhoods. Now I’m sure if you asked them they’d tell you “Oh we only march through those spots to commemorate the great battle of such and such way back in 14 hundred and whatever” but, and I don’t think I’m being too cynical here, I feel safe enough in saying it’s really just a “fuck you” to the people you don’t historically get along with.

And again, I say let ‘em. Even if they’re just doing it out of mean spiritedness, as long as they’ve got all their paperwork and permits and whatnot filed out and it’s all legal, have at it folks.

Now as to the incidents in Charlottesville, I gotta say I don’t have the same reaction as many to Trump’s first comment on this. I think both violent extremist sides should be condemned, not just the white nationalist side. And to be frank I’ve seen people vociferously oppose condemnation of anyone but the white nationalist side, or that mentioning the violence of the far-left individuals means you sympathise with Nazis, or are somehow minimizing Heather Heyer’s death, hell I’ve seen people declare there’s only one way of looking at this- the Nazis and the anti-nazis and you’re either for one side or the other.

But I understand why people have said they wanted more immediate and specific condemnation of the white nationalists. While I don’t believe that Trump is a white nationalist or whatever or supports or actively courts them, I get other people do, and more disturbingly a lot of white nationalists think he does, so I think it’s a fair expectation people have to hear him denounce them first and foremost. But I definitely feel this in no way makes it okay for the people I see actively either downplaying or denying the violence of Antifa types here or in general.


(Oh just for the sake of brevity, I shall be referring to the people in the Unite he Right march as White Nationalists regardless of whether each of them actually were and referring to the counter-protesters who became violent as Antifa, but to be clear I have no beef with counter-protestors who didn’t engage in violence and will be leaving them out of this altogether.)

My take on all this is as such, I am MORE against the Antifa group in general than I am for the White Nationalist group in general in this event. I am MOST against what James Fields did, however as of course what he did was infinitely worse than what anyone else did. But the reason I’m more against the Antifa portion is, I believe they went there with the intention of violently suppressing another group’s right to legal assembly, which they did. Of course not all the counter protesters did this, but I’m focusing on the ones that did.

I have no reason however as of yet to believe James Fields actions were what the white nationalist side went there to do. I believe when he drove that car into that crowd, he was acting for himself alone and that was not part of the white nationalist side’s plan.

Now I absolutely assume some of the white nationalists went there expecting far-left types to show up and start a fight, not to mention there were white nationalists who attacked people of their own accord when it all kicked off, which obviously I’m also against too but I still believe the group showing up there to start a fight is worse than the group which was engaging in their legal rights.

And Antifa certainly did engage in brutality, I mean a journalist was punched in the face, a man was pepper sprayed causing eye damage and according to a New York Times reporter on the scene-
“I saw a club-wielding ‘antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park”.

These people are no joke.

So to anyone of the opinion that Antifa’s violence is less-bad because they attack bad people, first of all I say I disagree, attacking people who aren’t actually breaking the law is always bad and secondly, they most certainly don’t always target bad people, a journalist was hospitalised in Richmond whilst filming an anti-klan/homophobia march and was beaten over the head just before all this. Not to mention the fact they pepper spray women for wearing hats that merely look like MAGA hats, they bash in unconscious men’s heads with poles, they smash people’s skulls with bike locks etc. These folks aint nice.

Call me old fashioned but these are not the people I want to be giving the right to randomly assault people on the streets, frankly no one is.

As for the whole Nazis being created in a vacuum or not stuff. While it’s certainly true that neo-nazi types have been around for a long long time and would still exist with or without the current strained political systems, I also have to concur I do see reasons in my opinion for some of the current rise in it.

The reason these jokers think there’s so much anti-white sentiment is because … there is! I see it. I hear prominent people espousing it. Aside from all ‘ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE RACIST” and “TOXIC WHITENESS” stuff, I see politicians and media types calling for there to be less white people or that’d be a good thing if they were a minority. I mean I know some people have trouble seeing a problem with that, but I can’t abide any talk of it’ll be a good thing if there’s less of this or that ethnic group, regardless of how they want to go about having less of them, ever!

That just would not fly here. And I can’t see it flying anywhere else.

I genuinely believe the rise of this, at least in part is a reaction to the rise of identity politics stuff, because that’s what white nationalism is, it’s just another version of it. Hell, Richard Spencer himself has openly said the alt-right is- “identity politics for white Americans and for Europeans around the world".

This identity politics/ intersectionality stuff is in my mind evil. It is cancer. Fuck it. The answer to hateful identity politic rhetoric is not to embrace just as or more hateful identity politic rhetoric on the other side. But some people are weak and stupid and lost, and they'll make for easy pickings to be recruited by the malicious.

Personally right now I am more concerned with far-left extremism than the far-right type (although that may change soon if things keep up). To be frank, to an outsider like me looking in, I can’t help but think if you were to count all the murders, attempted murders, assaults, property damage, riots and violently or through force shutting down other people’s legal assembleys or speaking events, the numbers would sway towards the far-left side.

I suppose it depends on when you start the clock, like I would go with when the election cycle started as that’s when I think we started to see a new dynamic. And of course you’d have to be clear on what you’re talking about. I think maybe more murders have been committed on the far right, but I think assaults and vandalism are more on the far left-side, but as I say I would have to actually go crunch the numbers and figure out exactly where the clock is being started.

Personally I wouldn’t count eco-terrorists as far-left extremists though. I think environmental/animal rights extremism is its own separate animal and as such the left doesn’t have to eat them the same way the right has to eat neo-nazis. But I would count black supremacist police shooters like Micah Johnson and Gavin Long etc. But I think most of them happened before the election cycle.

Plus it’s a difficult one to get information on as the people folks tend to go to for this usually aren’t aren’t much help. For instance the SPLC (an organisation I despise and hope Majid Nawaz sues the fuck out of them) and the ADL don’t even keep tabs on groups like Antifa or BAMN. They’re mainly focused on extremism on the right, although the SPLC does keep a section on black seperatists at least so there's that.

So you’d have to go through all the numbers and know at what point you’re starting from to get an overall idea. But to be honest I see less wide-spread public condemnation of far-left extremists where things like the Klan, neo-nazis, skinheads etc. are almost universally despised and rightly so.

And as for what groups like Antifa wanted in the end? Well that’s easy- COMMUNISM MY DEAR BOY! They may be anarchists, but the flavour of it they swig from is anarcho-communism. Black and red be the colour of the flag they fly baby!

And they are not shy about it. That’s what they say they want. They hate capitalism, they hate freedom of speech, they hate western values, they think America is an evil, white supremacist patriarchy that must be destroyed and torn down and replaced with what they see as a perfect utopia. They’re practically a silly stereotype that’s been brought to life, dressed up as a ninja, handed clubs and mace cans and sent off to batter anyone to the right of Che Guevara. And they are not only happy to use violence to get it, they feel it’s their duty to do so. And if you’re not on-board with that, then you’re just a nazi-sympathiser. Remember folks “liberals get the bullet too”.

So in a nutshell, neo-nazis= bad. Anarcho-communists= bad. Political violence= bad. Identity politics= bad.

Allowing for freedom of speech and assembly, even for people you despise= good.

Winning people over through reasoned argument= good.

That’s how I roll.
  • 12

Not just yet, I'm still tender from before.
User avatar
D-LOGAN
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 3590
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:08 pm
Location: Éire
Show rep
Title: ALL PRAISE UNTO MIGHTY KEK!

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby cmsellers » Sat Aug 19, 2017 9:19 pm

I agree with most of your post, Logan. With regards to ecoterrorists, I group them on the left because I've seen right-wing commentators say "the left commits more acts of terrorism than the right does," referring to those ecoterrorist incidents, so I mention them to acknowlege the argument. (I also have a particular hate boner against ecoterrorists for personal reasons, and a tendency to bitch about them whenever I can.) But aside from the fact that ecoterrorism is rarely violent, ecoterrorists and particularly animal liberationists really are their own thing, just as Islamist terrorism in the West isn't really possible to categorize as left or right.

That said, I disagree with you on the SPLC. They specifically track hate groups, not all violent extremists, and in fact a hate group doesn't have to be violent for them to track it. Now you could argue that antifa groups which preach against anyone on the right are hate groups, but there's a number of issues with that, including that political affiliation isn't a protected class, and I'm not aware of any antifa organization which has yet said "we should destroy anyone on the right." I do, however, think it's somewhat hypocritical that they condemn groups as "Islamophobic" for wanting to limit Muslim immigration (which since people on TCS already think I'm "Islamophobic," I need to stress again I don't agree with), but don't condemn antifa groups for advocating the censorship and even punching of people affiliated with the alt-right.
  • 7

User avatar
cmsellers
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:20 pm
Location: Not *that* Bay Area
Show rep
Title: Broken Record Player

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby SandTea » Sun Aug 20, 2017 2:33 am

Was going to make this joke/point about the statues but fn Bill Maher beat me to it.


I thought about using like an abusive parent or awful ex or those satanic counter plaques and whatnot but I knew I'd have to go on and on about it for it to work. His is just funnier. Also was going to make another one I was sorta beaten to by some website, probably like huffpost, about just adding a beaten slave in chains held by the confederate statue but that still seems bad. I don't know why I brought it up then. *smoke bomb*
  • 1

"Draw me not without reason; sheath me not without honor."
User avatar
SandTea
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1257
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 5:01 pm
Show rep
Title: 3rdAeolus

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby tinyrick » Sun Aug 20, 2017 6:20 pm

I think Antifa are a bunch of thugs that are probably only waving a symbol around because it pisses off their parents. The same can probably be said of these neo-nazi idiots as well. Notice how you don't see very many old or middle-aged people in either group?

If you want me to denounce Antifa, I'll do it right now. I denounce Antifa. Their beliefs do not represent mine and I don't approve of their violence.

However, I posted the same sentiment on another forum that was alt-right and this was my first response.

Image

It really bothers me that these people ask me to denounce a group and when I do so, they treat me like a violent thug anyway. And then they "joke" about how commies need to be thrown from a helicopter and it doesn't take a genius to figure out that to them a communist is anyone who's to the left of Hitler since they called Clinton a commie and refer to California as Commiefornia.

But hey, it's just a "joke." Ok, then. Here's a "joke" I'd like to tell. I see some asshole waving the Nazi flag in my neighborhood, chanting, "Jews will not replace us." He suddenly gets swarmed and is left bleeding with several broken ribs and multiple concussions and is taken to the hospital. The cops come around and ask me what I saw. I say, "Sorry officer, I didn't see anything." Haha! Funny joke right?

Edit: I don't really mean that I would do this, but I can't help but feel it sometimes.
  • 15

YEEEEEEAAAHHHHH!!! Tiny Rick!
User avatar
tinyrick
TCS Regular
TCS Regular
 
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Underground Bunker, USA
Show rep

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby Marcuse » Sun Aug 20, 2017 11:09 pm

I think the real crux of the problem we're having with this is that we're struggling to ascertain to what extend and to what degree we associate with and are responsible for the actions of people we associate with politically.

For example, if I'm going to a Stop the War protest in 2003 because I really don't like the idea of invading Iraq, but there's a ton of communist party people there, and trade unionists, does that associate me with them? If I go to protest the inauguration of Trump, am I on the hook for the actions of people ten blocks away who I don't know and the only reason we're both there is because we don't like Trump? If I go to Charlottesville because I don't think a statue should be removed, am I on the hook for the Nazi flag the guys behind me are carrying?

The solution to that is very complicated. It's not really properly reasonable to say that everyone in a protest is responsible for the actions of every other person. If one person chooses to commit a murder, it's not fair to hold the other people present culpable (even in a moral and personal sense) for that decision, because they did not make it. It's also condemning people who did nothing wrong for something someone else did wrong, which appears unfair.

But then, are we considering that they hold no responsibility? On some level, marching alongside, associating with or entertaining the company of groups like Antifa or Neo-Nazis implies some tolerance of their view, more than one might tolerate a distant view one doesn't actually encounter in day to day life. If you can stand next to someone shouting Heil Trump, or carrying a Nazi flag, or covering their face so they can engage in violence, or claim Stalin did nothing wrong, are you in some way responsible for a failure to speak out against those views?

The trend right now is to collectivise responsibility for views, attitudes and ideologies. That's why people have been characterising all the protesters in Charlottesville as Neo-Nazis, and all the counter protesters as Antifa. It's the reason why we see things addressed to "white people" as though they're a uniform monolith which can be addressed in a generalised way with sense. Personally I disagree, but it's hard to argue that there's not some kind of collective responsibility at work here, even if it's indirect.
  • 18

User avatar
Marcuse
TCS Sithlord
TCS Sithlord
 
Posts: 6592
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 8:00 pm
Show rep

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby NoodleFox » Mon Aug 21, 2017 6:55 pm

Marcuse wrote:I think the real crux of the problem we're having with this is that we're struggling to ascertain to what extend and to what degree we associate with and are responsible for the actions of people we associate with politically.

For example, if I'm going to a Stop the War protest in 2003 because I really don't like the idea of invading Iraq, but there's a ton of communist party people there, and trade unionists, does that associate me with them? If I go to protest the inauguration of Trump, am I on the hook for the actions of people ten blocks away who I don't know and the only reason we're both there is because we don't like Trump? If I go to Charlottesville because I don't think a statue should be removed, am I on the hook for the Nazi flag the guys behind me are carrying?

The solution to that is very complicated. It's not really properly reasonable to say that everyone in a protest is responsible for the actions of every other person. If one person chooses to commit a murder, it's not fair to hold the other people present culpable (even in a moral and personal sense) for that decision, because they did not make it. It's also condemning people who did nothing wrong for something someone else did wrong, which appears unfair.

But then, are we considering that they hold no responsibility? On some level, marching alongside, associating with or entertaining the company of groups like Antifa or Neo-Nazis implies some tolerance of their view, more than one might tolerate a distant view one doesn't actually encounter in day to day life. If you can stand next to someone shouting Heil Trump, or carrying a Nazi flag, or covering their face so they can engage in violence, or claim Stalin did nothing wrong, are you in some way responsible for a failure to speak out against those views?

The trend right now is to collectivise responsibility for views, attitudes and ideologies. That's why people have been characterising all the protesters in Charlottesville as Neo-Nazis, and all the counter protesters as Antifa. It's the reason why we see things addressed to "white people" as though they're a uniform monolith which can be addressed in a generalised way with sense. Personally I disagree, but it's hard to argue that there's not some kind of collective responsibility at work here, even if it's indirect.

Since I started frequenting these forums again, I've seen myself generalizing on occasion, but I've been trying to cut down the generalizations - it's a toxic thought process.

That said, I agree that there's a collective narrative at work; I've heard many say that it's almost akin to a cult and I can see why they think that...
So for example, there's a group called BAMN - By Any Means Necessary - which was founded by Shanta Driver in 1995 and is sort of a branch of the AntiFa movement, but more exceptional by Anti's standards.

They were classified by the DOD as a "low-level" terrorist organization in 2009 and there are concerning events that not only give credence to the classification, but also that of a cult group.
Now, cults are well known for their crazy antics that go from highly eccentric (The Seekers) to downright self-destructive (Jonestown), but all follow these steps to bring a person into their collective:

1: Invitation to a normal event
2: Love Bombing
3: "Prize Dangling"
4: Accepting of an agreement for "Prize"
5: Shut down of dissent by withholding "Prize"
6: Establishing guilt
7: Carrot/Stick
8: Control of environment and information

Now, take these steps and see if any of them stick with this man's experience with BAMN: https://archive.is/Qt1gb
Add the fact that some BAMN members have been suspect of indoctrinating children
http://www.berkeleyside.com/2017/02/16/berkeley-teacher-asks-help-fox-backlash-court-papers-show-contentious-history-busd/
Spoiler: show
In October 2015, BUSD said Felarca sought permission to take students to immigration court in San Francisco for the hearing of a woman seeking asylum. BUSD said BAMN was involved in advocacy work for the case, and that Felarca failed to disclose that in her request for the field trip.

“It is clear that your request to take these students to witness the asylum seeker’s hearing was misleading and in clear violation of the previous directives that you had been given not to try to indoctrinate your students into your political viewpoints,” BUSD wrote. “This position taken by you and BAMN that U.S. border should be entirely open is a very radical and controversial idea that many students and parents would not support.”
having past ties to NAMBLA https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/02/11/18637510.php#18646176
Spoiler: show
Internally the RWL is a terrible cult. The RWL’s support of North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) was not a rebellious act against bourgeois society but an adaptation to its backwardness. In bourgeois society a relationship of a 50 year old msn with a 9 year old boy can only create emotional damage to the boy. The RWL applies this into its own cult; thus, youth in the RWL are abused sexually by the older cadres and some develop emotional trauma.

This put in perspective, BAMN is nothing more than a cult. The youth are abused sexually by the leaders, and those who disagree with the main leaders (like Shanta) are put in mental institutions. In this respect the RWL oppresses opposition like the Stalinists who put oppositionists in mental institutions in the Soviet Union. Leaders like Shanta have nothing to offer the youth of today but half-assed legislation, anti-depressants or a trip to the psych ward! We don’t want our youth to go there! RWL is worse than a child predator, and BAMN activists are their prey. BAMN can be seen lurking in our public middle and high schools trying to devour the minds and lives of future militants. We mustn’t tolerate this in the worker’s movement.
and inciting riots
and you got a pretty scummy group.

So why explain all of this? It all comes back to toxic generalization and a destructive identitarian narrative - if you're not with us, then you're either against us or we'll make you understand by any means necessary.

Which places us in the current year, where a haircut gets you labelled Nazi and stabbed in public:
https://nypost.com/2017/08/19/man-stabbed-after-haircut-gets-him-mistaken-for-a-neo-nazi/
warning: blood
Screenshot_20170821-135035.jpg
Screenshot_20170821-135035.jpg (773.9 KiB) Viewed 6592 times


If you're further interested in BAMN,
Sargon of Akkad has a pretty good rundown of the group:
  • 2

User avatar
NoodleFox
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 8:16 pm
Location: Kekistan
Show rep
Title: Third Person Facepalm-er

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby cmsellers » Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:15 pm

That's horrifying but I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove, other than that there's a crazy child-molesting communist cult out in California.
  • 4

User avatar
cmsellers
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:20 pm
Location: Not *that* Bay Area
Show rep
Title: Broken Record Player

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby Crimson847 » Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:17 pm

cmsellers wrote:That's horrifying but I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove, other than that there's a crazy child-molesting communist cult out in California.


Scientology?

Oh, you said communist, never mind.
  • 7

"If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them; but the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?"
- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
User avatar
Crimson847
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 3195
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 5:18 am
Show rep

Re: "Unite the Right" racist protest turns violent

Postby cmsellers » Tue Aug 22, 2017 5:11 am

Here's a funny tweet spoilered for references to the last GOT episode
  • 4

User avatar
cmsellers
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:20 pm
Location: Not *that* Bay Area
Show rep
Title: Broken Record Player

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests