Debate:Why antifa is necessary

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Why antifa is necessary[edit]

[1] No, don't start whinging and whining to me about pRoPeRtY dEsTrUcTiOn. Some measure of collective self-defense against fascists is warranted. Oxyaena Harass 19:53, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

But it is not self-defense. The property destruction resulting from large-scale clashes and protests around the United States, and Portland particularly, are collateral damage or clumsy looting, not deliberate action to stop fascists. Looting a Walmart doesn't stop fascists - if anything, it gives them propaganda by which they can come to power. Violence is the tool of fascism - both violence by fascists and violence (real or imagined or created) against fascists. By fighting them, even in "self-defense" (as an aside, self-defense in the US requires an immediate threat of bodily harm - except for a few specific situations, fascists at those rallies did not meet those criteria), you are enabling them. IveBeenFrank (talk) 20:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I would argue that a organization like Antifa could very well be necessary...if things were a lot worse then they currently are. When we reach the point where armed gangs of Proud Boys assaulting supposed "enemies of the people" is a regular occurrence in almost all major cities, then a left wing paramilitary is useful(especially because cops just proved they handle right-wing violence terribly). We are not at that point yet.-Flandres (talk) 20:48, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
"Organization" "Antifa" Please tell me you're joking. 2A02:120B:C3C4:35C0:BC55:C508:ADD9:9F10 (talk) 20:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
You clearly missed the word LIKE. As in, "similar to, but not identical."-Flandres (talk) 21:03, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
You worded that as if Antifa was an organization. 2A02:120B:C3C4:35C0:BC55:C508:ADD9:9F10 (talk) 21:09, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I apologize for your lack of reading comprehension, hmhmhmhhm...-Flandres (talk) 21:12, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Frank, did you read the link. Most of what antifa does is nonviolent. As for the property part, YMMV. Oxyaena Harass 21:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

In what context is "collective self-defense" in reference to property destruction nonviolent? From your one-sentence opener, you directly justify violence against fascism. IveBeenFrank (talk) 23:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
At best, the so called “movement” is infiltrated by looters. At worst, it’s systemic. Also, property damage is violence! [1] So claiming antifa is non violent when they cause property damage, an act of violence, is incorrect. If someone has their small business burned down, it could kill people and animals trapped inside, it could put people out of jobs, and it could cause the owner to commit suicide, or they might shoot the people doing it. The funny thing is, if antifa actually did form an organization, they could prove they are non violent by kicking out and denouncing the looters and vandals that call themselves antifa. Sievert 81 (talk) 23:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I would argue (and have argued with an antifa friend of mine) that Antifa is useful and possibly necessary as a shield between peaceful protesters and violent fascists. I'm no fighter, and if some Neo-nazi scumbag decides to kick my face in because I'm peacefully protesting against his ideology, I'd appreciate someone tougher than me standing up for me. That said, I think individual people who associate with Antifa do a disservice to all of us when they go, say, elbowing Richard Spencer in live TV. That's only going to shine bad light on progressive left. And it's also unjustifiable, unless Spencer is in the middle of curb-stomping someone in that live TV broadcast when he gets elbowed. Knight CommanderIn ServiceTo HerGoatness 00:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Antifa, aka semi-militarized counter-protesters and activists are a specialized tool. Outside of certain circumstances, they will do more harm than good. Further, there is a pattern, especially among younger (and probably less experienced) leftists, of trying to turn any protest event into an outlet for their ideologies. Needless to say, I'm not a fan of the latter-most example. All of this being said, I do think antifa, the larger movement, is still needed at this time, though I do think some need more training in critical judgement. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 00:45, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Property destruction really is a serious issue. Group X commits an injustice against Group Y. If Group Y then destroys the property of Group Z, Group Z is not going to give two shits about why Y is upset, all Group Z is going to say is "Gee, I don't want to live or set up shop in the same areas as Group Y". CoryUsar (talk) 02:05, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Exactly. That, or Group Z then says, “While, fuck those assholes! Clearly they are pieces of shit, and are probably lying about Group X!” Now we have more of the supposed injustice. Sievert 81 (talk) 02:08, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Antifa is more than just toughs in the street. It can and often does include peaceful counter-protesters and tech savvy and sometimes straight up tech professional use of the web and computers. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 02:18, 17 January 2021 (UTC)