Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

Full Version: The Maelstrom of Violence
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
(08-29-2017, 02:44 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 11:22 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 11:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 10:50 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 10:24 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Not equally evil, because antifa seeks to stop fascism before it starts. We have no idea what kind of government antifa would institute. But yes both are wrong because they are too violent and lawless.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateCommunism...iscussion/

Yes they are. So yeah, I think Hitler/Mussulini/Mao/Stalin/Khmer Rouge are all equally evil.

Yes, those 5 are. But antifa is not those guys/

Reports may have been wrong about what happened in Berkeley this week. My friend Teed and others there said otherwise.

quote from his facebook post:

Teed Rockwell This time around there was no property damage by the black block, and most sources say no physical attacks on people (although there was a lot of shouts and threats.)
LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · 12 hrs

Manage

[Image: 12196182_10156195576890223_6099208148310...e=5A19388C]
Nancy P. Stork NPR said the man you mention was assaulted.
LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · 10 hrs

Manage

[Image: 63050_436815643854_1597745_n.jpg?oh=f6b8...e=5A277653]
Susa Morgan Black In the news story this morning, it showed liberals refusing to join Antifa because of their violence. My group stayed on campus because we didn't want to be part of the violent confrontation.
LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · 7 hrs

Manage

[Image: 20664852_1457331957676731_23084607427716...e=5A2CA4C7]
Artemisia Barden I saw the anarchist black bloc of anti-fascists *escorting* white supremacists (including a guy wearing an Identity Europa T-shirt) over to the police. Without touching them. In cases where there were skirmishes, I suspect it depended on whether thealt-Reich led off being violent - the black bloc seemed pretty restrained. The one press guy (Somerville) who went off about them was taking pictures of them against their expressed wish for him not to. And yes Teed, no property damage.

"In the news story this morning, it showed liberals refusing to join Antifa because of their violence. My group stayed on campus because we didn't want to be part of the violent confrontation."

Uh, please read the above again. I think Antifa is evil ... because of their violence. 

PS.  Wrt Berkely riots, the property damage was in the winter.





Hmmm...... I think your buddy has been smoking some mother nature to miss this.


Yet another MSM awakes!





#NoMoreMasks. Cool

---
Rags ---  "Woke" all along.  

Philosophical question - what does "Never Again" mean and how do we make it more than just an inane platitude?

This "Alt-Right" / Duginist / Eurasianist / Traditionalist thing has been brewing now for years. They got their guy into the WH. They were proclaiming "Hail Trump." They have their modernized "Juden Rous!" Sure, it's free speech. But again, how do we put teeth into "Never Again."

The answer may not be compatible with 1st Amendment norms. The answer may be a paradox. In order to prevent a particularly terrible kind of violence, we may need to be violent. It would be hoped that legal mechanisms can impart such violence in a measured manner, knowing exactly when enough is enough. Antifa don't trust this. I don't blame them. Thus far the system has done nothing to push back the Fourth Reich or whatever title one wants to use. So, is it moral to jump to the Extra Legal route now? How early is too early? When ought the Jews have started to go all "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels" on the Nazi scum? 1933? 1936?

Again, commies and nazis are equal in historical bloodshed.  How can anyone support either ideology?

So, what are the objectives of "Duganists" ?  How, and tell me exactly how the objectives of antifa are any better.

The antifa thugs want a red revolution. These are for real Stalinists reds, commies, everything the Cold War was "fought" over. I think you have the money to emigrate to countries that have the end result of said red revolutionaries. I think we can set up a gofundme to pay for free one way tickets for the thugs to have the joy of living in their revolutionary ends.  Venezuela and Cuba are fine places where our thugs can commiserate with their comrades.   Jews?  OK, how about equal opportunity killing [the list of regimes I listed].  Which is worse?
You tell me over targeted killing.  The overall principle is mob rule vs. letting the state have the monopoly of force.
Morality:  Violence is never correct.  All you get with that route is something as bad as or worse new boss, instead of the old boss.  "Extra Legal" = down the rabbit hole of perdition.  You propose nothing in the way of civilization,
Mob rule shall at sometime occur, I assure you.  When it does, the night time of a new dark age shall arise from the ashes. Idea

I'll take a forced one way ticket for myself to emigrate to Russia over those hellholes.
They may want a revolution, and may be on the left. But as has been explained, antifa is a loose group, and its purpose is not to achieve those goals per se. They are not Stalinists; they are more like Bernie in their goals. It is just that some people on the left (as well as some others) feel the need to stand up to the fascists. Non-violent methods are preferable, even to antifa. But they feel the need to act before the white supremacists, Nazis, KKK, xenophobes, etc. get too far forward. Heck, they've already taken over the White House. What else might the fascists do? It is better to take their warning, rather than harping on about these admittedly-imperfect messengers. They aren't going to take over the USA, but the fascists have already got 30-40% of Americans behind them and have elected a president and a congress and a supreme court. So which is more dangerous?
(08-29-2017, 06:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]They may want a revolution, and may be on the left. But as has been explained, antifa is a loose group, and its purpose is not to achieve those goals per se. They are not Stalinists; they are more like Bernie in their goals. It is just that some people on the left (as well as some others) feel the need to stand up to the fascists. Non-violent methods are preferable, even to antifa. But they feel the need to act before the white supremacists, Nazis, KKK, xenophobes, etc. get too far forward. Heck, they've already taken over the White House. What else might the fascists do? It is better to take their warning, rather than harping on about these admittedly-imperfect messengers. They aren't going to take over the USA, but the fascists have already got 30-40% of Americans behind them and have elected a president and a congress and a supreme court. So which is more dangerous?

Read the below and take the red pill. You'll be fine.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/45...s-ideology

Loose group:   Like ISIS.
Stalin:  That info is in the information in my prior posts. Feel free to run a fact check on that stuff. I did to cull out media hype. There be hurricanes in the cyberspace. Lots of spin.

Violence. There are many options besides going full tribal. In fact, lots of white supremacists web recourses have been withdrawn.  Trump?  Uh, folks can just opt out like the 1970's. If you want to mess up Trump's stuff, just stop buying extra stuff.  You know, opting for a used care instead of a new one would put the hurt on Trump's economy. I also prefer economic distress over wanton violence. There, I've chosen my option.

Warning:  Antifa is the best promotion right wing crackpots could ever get. Look at all of that free media coverage they get,  you know sort of like Trump himself. 24/7 news coverage can't be beat.

Which is worse?  Trump or Weimar USA.  I'll take Trump even over organized mob fighting.Besides, Trumponomics seems to have a built in self destruct sequence.

I know of Bernie, Bernies a respectable person.  Antifa is not respectable.  Anyone who trashes other peoples' stuff is also violating folks' property rights. That's to be expected though.  Commies of any stripe have no use for property rights.
(08-29-2017, 07:02 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 06:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]They may want a revolution, and may be on the left. But as has been explained, antifa is a loose group, and its purpose is not to achieve those goals per se. They are not Stalinists; they are more like Bernie in their goals. It is just that some people on the left (as well as some others) feel the need to stand up to the fascists. Non-violent methods are preferable, even to antifa. But they feel the need to act before the white supremacists, Nazis, KKK, xenophobes, etc. get too far forward. Heck, they've already taken over the White House. What else might the fascists do? It is better to take their warning, rather than harping on about these admittedly-imperfect messengers. They aren't going to take over the USA, but the fascists have already got 30-40% of Americans behind them and have elected a president and a congress and a supreme court. So which is more dangerous?

Read the below and take the red pill. You'll be fine.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/45...s-ideology

Loose group:   Like ISIS.
Stalin:  That info is in the information in my prior posts. Feel free to run a fact check on that stuff. I did to cull out media hype. There be hurricanes in the cyberspace. Lots of spin.

Violence. There are many options besides going full tribal. In fact, lots of white supremacists web recourses have been withdrawn.  Trump?  Uh, folks can just opt out like the 1970's. If you want to mess up Trump's stuff, just stop buying extra stuff.  You know, opting for a used car instead of a new one would put the hurt on Trump's economy. I also prefer economic distress over wanton violence. There, I've chosen my option.

Warning:  Antifa is the best promotion right wing crackpots could ever get. Look at all of that free media coverage they get,  you know sort of like Trump himself. 24/7 news coverage can't be beat.

Which is worse?  Trump or Weimar USA.  I'll take Trump even over organized mob fighting.Besides, Trumponomics seems to have a built in self destruct sequence.

I know of Bernie, Bernies a respectable person.  Antifa is not respectable.  Anyone who trashes other peoples' stuff is also violating folks' property rights. That's to be expected though.  Commies of any stripe have no use for property rights.

Yes I get that you don't like violations of property rights and mob fighting. Trump over organized mob fighting, you say? Trump himself organizes mob fighting. He did that in his campaign. It's true though, the right wing successfully uses antifa for its own propaganda purposes. That's a definite downside to their methods.

No, antifa is not like the Islamic State, even a little bit. Antifa's leftist ideals are for justice and equality for all, whatever the result of their mix of violent and non-violent methods may be. The IS is about cutting off the heads of those who don't hold tight to their fanatical and deadly intolerance. And the IS is not a loose group. They are tenacious fighters and efficient tyrants.

Buying used cars is not going to dump Drump, or his GOP. It's going to take a lot of political organization. That's where the value, if any, of antifa, or even Occupy Wall Street, reaches its limit. Conversations can be changed, racism held to account, and warnings can be made. Beyond that, change in our government and politics is needed, as well as local organizing. Street riots will not change the system. Democrats are the only viable way to support change within the government, at least unless the Greens or another political system and/or alternative party takes hold. It might; this 4T is still young. Meanwhile, Democrats need to win to get us back even to a chance for incremental progress, which the radicals including antifa do not have the patience for. Right now, all we have is decline and fall.
(08-29-2017, 07:27 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 07:02 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: [ -> ]<snip>

Read the below and take the red pill. You'll be fine.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/45...s-ideology

Loose group:   Like ISIS.
Stalin:  That info is in the information in my prior posts. Feel free to run a fact check on that stuff. I did to cull out media hype. There be hurricanes in the cyberspace. Lots of spin.

Violence. There are many options besides going full tribal. In fact, lots of white supremacists web recourses have been withdrawn.  Trump?  Uh, folks can just opt out like the 1970's. If you want to mess up Trump's stuff, just stop buying extra stuff.  You know, opting for a used car instead of a new one would put the hurt on Trump's economy. I also prefer economic distress over wanton violence. There, I've chosen my option.

Warning:  Antifa is the best promotion right wing crackpots could ever get. Look at all of that free media coverage they get,  you know sort of like Trump himself. 24/7 news coverage can't be beat.

Which is worse?  Trump or Weimar USA.  I'll take Trump even over organized mob fighting.Besides, Trumponomics seems to have a built in self destruct sequence.

I know of Bernie, Bernies a respectable person.  Antifa is not respectable.  Anyone who trashes other peoples' stuff is also violating folks' property rights. That's to be expected though.  Commies of any stripe have no use for property rights.

Yes I get that you don't like violations of property rights and mob fighting. Trump over organized mob fighting, you say? Trump himself organizes mob fighting. He did that in his campaign. It's true though, the right wing successfully uses antifa for its own propaganda purposes. That's a definite downside to their methods.

No, antifa is not like the Islamic State, even a little bit. Antifa's leftist ideals are for justice and equality for all, whatever the result of their mix of violent and non-violent methods may be. The IS is about cutting off the heads of those who don't hold tight to their fanatical and deadly intolerance. And the IS is not a loose group. They are tenacious fighters and efficient tyrants.

Buying used cars is not going to dump Drump, or his GOP. It's going to take a lot of political organization. That's where the value, if any, of antifa, or even Occupy Wall Street, reaches its limit. Conversations can be changed, racism held to account, and warnings can be made. Beyond that, change in our government and politics is needed, as well as local organizing. Street riots will not change the system. Democrats are the only viable way to support change within the government, at least unless the Greens or another political system and/or alternative party takes hold. It might; this 4T is still young. Meanwhile, Democrats need to win to get us back even to a chance for incremental progress, which the radicals including antifa do not have the patience for. Right now, all we have is decline and fall.

1. Antifa is organized in loosely connected cells. That's how they roll, similar to ISIS and right supremicists for that matter. The interwebs are the glue that binds them all. 

2. Antifa's ideas are to essentially to label anyone a nazi who disagrees with anything they do. I fail to see why they support "liberals get the bullet" also, if they weren't as narrow as white supremicists.

3. All of the other stuff, I agree.
(08-29-2017, 10:36 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:16 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 10:24 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Not equally evil, because antifa seeks to stop fascism before it starts. We have no idea what kind of government antifa would institute. But yes both are wrong because they are too violent and lawless.

Actually we have a very good idea, since their goal is to 'destroy capitalism' and they fly anarchocommunist flags.  Stalinism is at the end of that road.  They might not be exactly equal - Stalin killed several times more people than Hitler - but they're on the same level.

They aren't even close.  Marxist-Leninists look at the Antifa crowd and laugh.  They are at most useful idiots for the Stalinists who follow in their wake, and they are always the first to the Gulags after the revolution.

Sure.  That's why I say "Stalinism is at the end of that road", rather than it being their goal.  They don't think they're Stalinists, but they pave the road for the Stalinists.
(08-29-2017, 08:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:36 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:16 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 10:24 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Not equally evil, because antifa seeks to stop fascism before it starts. We have no idea what kind of government antifa would institute. But yes both are wrong because they are too violent and lawless.

Actually we have a very good idea, since their goal is to 'destroy capitalism' and they fly anarchocommunist flags.  Stalinism is at the end of that road.  They might not be exactly equal - Stalin killed several times more people than Hitler - but they're on the same level.

They aren't even close.  Marxist-Leninists look at the Antifa crowd and laugh.  They are at most useful idiots for the Stalinists who follow in their wake, and they are always the first to the Gulags after the revolution.

Sure.  That's why I say "Stalinism is at the end of that road", rather than it being their goal.  They don't think they're Stalinists, but they pave the road for the Stalinists.

I was more objecting to calling them on par with "Stalinists".  They aren't even close.  Antifa's tactics are to smash stuff and hit people.  Their ideology is to label anyone they don't like a fascist, whether they are or not.  Which I find amusing about people who claim Trump is a fascist.  In a calmer, saner time, within the living memory of both Boomers and Xers he would at most be a pro-business Democrat.

In any event only two outcomes are going to arise from Antifa's antics. 
1.  There is a communist revolution headed by a Marxist-Leninist party
2.  The emergence of an actual fascist group to combat antifa by taking control of the state.

At present in the US situation 1 is unlikely.  Most of the ML parties in the US are poorly lead and terribly small.  And the CPUSA has been suffering from Browderism since the 1940s and is thus  spent force.  Situation 2 is more likely.  If the mild reforms Trump wants to push are frustrated too much someone who is less mild than him will be found, and Gen X has plenty of people like that running around.

Antifa rioting every weekend is the best thing that ever happened to the neo-nazi types.
(08-29-2017, 08:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:36 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:16 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 10:24 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Not equally evil, because antifa seeks to stop fascism before it starts. We have no idea what kind of government antifa would institute. But yes both are wrong because they are too violent and lawless.

Actually we have a very good idea, since their goal is to 'destroy capitalism' and they fly anarchocommunist flags.  Stalinism is at the end of that road.  They might not be exactly equal - Stalin killed several times more people than Hitler - but they're on the same level.

They aren't even close.  Marxist-Leninists look at the Antifa crowd and laugh.  They are at most useful idiots for the Stalinists who follow in their wake, and they are always the first to the Gulags after the revolution.

Sure.  That's why I say "Stalinism is at the end of that road", rather than it being their goal.  They don't think they're Stalinists, but they pave the road for the Stalinists.

Actually, kinser is closer to the truth on that one. Fascists using antifa as an excuse to take power is the danger. There is no viable communist party that could benefit from an antifa movement in the USA. Antifa's tactics are not just violent though; they actually prefer non-violence from what I'm reading; it's just that sometimes they get violent, usually when provoked. That's enough for the right-wing to use in their propaganda, and for the great mass of fools who believe it. I'm not sure if the "black bloc" is part of antifa or not, but it's often been those guys who smash things or hit people sometimes, rather than antifa per se.
(08-30-2017, 12:28 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 08:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:36 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:16 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 10:24 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Not equally evil, because antifa seeks to stop fascism before it starts. We have no idea what kind of government antifa would institute. But yes both are wrong because they are too violent and lawless.

Actually we have a very good idea, since their goal is to 'destroy capitalism' and they fly anarchocommunist flags.  Stalinism is at the end of that road.  They might not be exactly equal - Stalin killed several times more people than Hitler - but they're on the same level.

They aren't even close.  Marxist-Leninists look at the Antifa crowd and laugh.  They are at most useful idiots for the Stalinists who follow in their wake, and they are always the first to the Gulags after the revolution.

Sure.  That's why I say "Stalinism is at the end of that road", rather than it being their goal.  They don't think they're Stalinists, but they pave the road for the Stalinists.

I was more objecting to calling them on par with "Stalinists".  They aren't even close.  Antifa's tactics are to smash stuff and hit people.  Their ideology is to label anyone they don't like a fascist, whether they are or not.  Which I find amusing about people who claim Trump is a fascist.  In a calmer, saner time, within the living memory of both Boomers and Xers he would at most be a pro-business Democrat.

In any event only two outcomes are going to arise from Antifa's antics. 
1.  There is a communist revolution headed by a Marxist-Leninist party
2.  The emergence of an actual fascist group to combat antifa by taking control of the state.

At present in the US situation 1 is unlikely.  Most of the ML parties in the US are poorly lead and terribly small.  And the CPUSA has been suffering from Browderism since the 1940s and is thus  spent force.  Situation 2 is more likely.  If the mild reforms Trump wants to push are frustrated too much someone who is less mild than him will be found, and Gen X has plenty of people like that running around.

Antifa rioting every weekend is the best thing that ever happened to the neo-nazi types.

I don't think 1. would have to be by an established Marxist-Leninist party.  Some charismatic person who is either part of the movement or who had influence and wants to take advantage of the movement would be sufficient.  Even some factions of the Democratic party might work.

I agree that 2. is also a possibility, especially if the press keeps pushing the alt Right toward white nationalism.
(08-30-2017, 11:19 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Antifa's tactics are not just violent though; they actually prefer non-violence from what I'm reading; it's just that sometimes they get violent, usually when provoked.

I think your reading is exceptionally charitable.  Yes, if they can shut down free speech representing views they oppose without resorting to violence, they will, but that's nearly as bad as doing it through violence - possibly worse, since the violence at least discredits them to some extent.
(08-29-2017, 11:52 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2017, 11:30 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]I do dislike Antifa, in good part due to their violent habits.  I would not be surprised by partisan press spinning to forward their agenda.

Yes, mainly Republican partisan spinning that emphasizes their violent tendencies, and this apparently works well to make them the scapegoat and to support Trump's contention that "both sides" are the problem.
I've always viewed the two (Your Side & Enzige's Side) as being pretty much the same. Ain't much difference between a socialist/communist system and a fascist system and the people (low life's/criminals/cheats/weasels) who seem to favor/promote them. America has a problem. The Democrats are way to sympathetic to issues and qualms . The Republicans don't really give a shit unless it (the issue or qualm) directly involves them. Ain't much middle left to draw from and gain sympathy. The Democrats don't quite grasp the situation that they've been placing themselves in (the political hole that they've been digging for themselves).
(08-30-2017, 11:48 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-30-2017, 11:19 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Antifa's tactics are not just violent though; they actually prefer non-violence from what I'm reading; it's just that sometimes they get violent, usually when provoked.

I think your reading is exceptionally charitable.  Yes, if they can shut down free speech representing views they oppose without resorting to violence, they will, but that's nearly as bad as doing it through violence - possibly worse, since the violence at least discredits them to some extent.
You know what your dealing with when violence is openly used as a means to eliminate opposition. You don't know what's happening when shit happens and no one seems to care or views it as an action which directly relates to them/potentially impacts them in the future. My college educated pals didn't view college as a long term gig like their professors and administrators or life long college students may have viewed it at the time. They simply viewed college as a means to get better (higher paying) jobs. What went on in college, what people believed in college, what activists (professors and students) did during college didn't much matter to them because they'd be leaving and moving on with their lives in a few years. I have to admit that I don't much care what students do on college grounds. However, if one of them where to take it off campus and try to apply it off campus, I would meet them head on and destroy them.
(08-30-2017, 11:46 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think 1. would have to be by an established Marxist-Leninist party.  Some charismatic person who is either part of the movement or who had influence and wants to take advantage of the movement would be sufficient.  Even some factions of the Democratic party might work.

I agree that 2. is also a possibility, especially if the press keeps pushing the alt Right toward white nationalism.

As of yet no successful leftist revolution has occured in the absence of leadership by an ML party. I suspect the discipline of democratic centeralism is required to pull it off. Should the left gain ground, an unlikely event, at most we'll see a Spanish Civil War scenario being set up.

As for 2 it isn't just the Alt-Right, which I identify as right wing racial identitarians. According to Antifa anyone to the right of Mao is a fascist. Considering that includes just about everyone except open communists (and a few of them too, actually) a charismatic leader on the right is likely to appear.

Indeed the main reason why Hitler became Chancellor, and the NSDAP won major electoral victories in the early 1930s was because the population grew tired of the reds and the browns fighting in the street. One side had to be eliminated, and given the choice folks picked brown because they were more likely to be able to keep their private property.

As I've said before, fascism only really rises when there is a credible threat to capitalism by communism. That threat isn't arising. Neo-conservatism (IE Trotskyism masquerading as something right-wing) has been discredited. Neo-Liberalism is also discredited. Civic Nationalism is an out growth of bourgeois liberalism itself, so isn't a threat to capitalism.
(08-30-2017, 07:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]As I've said before, fascism only really rises when there is a credible threat to capitalism by communism.  That threat isn't arising.  Neo-conservatism (IE Trotskyism masquerading as something right-wing) has been discredited.  Neo-Liberalism is also discredited.  Civic Nationalism is an out growth of bourgeois liberalism itself, so isn't a threat to capitalism.

I see both Marx and Hitler being discredited.  I too don't see their heirs as credible threats.  This doesn't mean all autocratic rule has gone away.  The European forms have crashed but the Middle East hasn't found its way out of the old patterns yet.  Too many are focused on what they think they learned of the European variants of autocratic rule.  The world overall has been doing autocratic tyranny for far longer than Stalin's and Hitler's time.

This doesn't mean there aren't young testosterone filled youngsters wearing Nazi clothes and waving slaver battle flags.  It riles up folk.  It's not a true attempt to revive gas chambers and public lynchings, but it satisfies the need for attention.

We do have an urban / rural cultural divide and a strong division of wealth.  For decades the wealthy and rural have worked enough together to keep the unraveling memes on the see saw.  Bush 43 saw it at a peak.  He had neo conservatives, big oil, and televangelists.  These groups had different memes and values, but at least early on they managed to work together.  Too many may have been discredited since.  The old memes, the old ideas, have often enough crashed and burned. 

Trump pulled away much of the rural, while the Establishment elites ought to be at least a bit nervous.  Brietbart has an oar in the fight, but are sometimes portraying the Republican establishment as joining the left.  This doesn't feel true yet.  How well will Trump, Palin and others of the rural faction do in a collision with an establishment wealthy enough to provide money, but having trouble gathering the votes?  I don't know yet.  The time isn't quite now.  I don't feel it quite my fight other than hoping both factions end up discredited.  To get there, the left needs to feed Trump more rope.  The rural anti establishment folk haven't found a stable champion with gravitas, but the Trump - Palin personas are both eccentric and intuitive.  I don't know that they are looking for stable champions with gravitas.
(08-30-2017, 07:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-30-2017, 11:46 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think 1. would have to be by an established Marxist-Leninist party.  Some charismatic person who is either part of the movement or who had influence and wants to take advantage of the movement would be sufficient.  Even some factions of the Democratic party might work.

I agree that 2. is also a possibility, especially if the press keeps pushing the alt Right toward white nationalism.

As of yet no successful leftist revolution has occured in the absence of leadership by an ML party.  I suspect the discipline of democratic centeralism is required to pull it off.  Should the left gain ground, an unlikely event, at most we'll see a Spanish Civil War scenario being set up.

As for 2 it isn't just the Alt-Right, which I identify as right wing racial identitarians.  According to Antifa anyone to the right of Mao is a fascist.  Considering that includes just about everyone except open communists (and a few of them too, actually) a charismatic leader on the right is likely to appear.

Indeed the main reason why Hitler became Chancellor, and the NSDAP won major electoral victories in the early 1930s was because the population grew tired of the reds and the browns fighting in the street.  One side had to be eliminated, and given the choice folks picked brown because they were more likely to be able to keep their private property.

As I've said before, fascism only really rises when there is a credible threat to capitalism by communism.  That threat isn't arising.  Neo-conservatism (IE Trotskyism masquerading as something right-wing) has been discredited.  Neo-Liberalism is also discredited.  Civic Nationalism is an out growth of bourgeois liberalism itself, so isn't a threat to capitalism.


The 1915 Klan had many fascistic traits -- before Mussolini defined fascism in the mid-1920s. It arose before the Russian Revolution.
(08-30-2017, 11:48 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-30-2017, 11:19 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Antifa's tactics are not just violent though; they actually prefer non-violence from what I'm reading; it's just that sometimes they get violent, usually when provoked.

I think your reading is exceptionally charitable.  Yes, if they can shut down free speech representing views they oppose without resorting to violence, they will, but that's nearly as bad as doing it through violence - possibly worse, since the violence at least discredits them to some extent.

I don't think antifa can close down free speech without resorting to violence. They show up to express their speech too. If they use violence, then yes, that discredits them to some extent, although they can justify it. But it's not good tactics overall because of how the right-wing uses it to their advantage. And they are entitled to defend themselves if attacked.

They shut down Milo's speech at Cal Berkeley, by smashing windows and setting fires. Not good methods on their part. But Milo should never have been allowed to speak at Cal. A university has discretion in whom it invites to speak on campus. It should choose qualified speakers who do not stir up hate and violence. Hateful prejudice of the kind Milo represents has no place on a university campus. Nor does speech which incites violence, as Milo's does. The University is quite capable of inviting conservative speakers who are qualified.
(08-30-2017, 11:46 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-30-2017, 12:28 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 08:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:36 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-29-2017, 10:16 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]Actually we have a very good idea, since their goal is to 'destroy capitalism' and they fly anarchocommunist flags.  Stalinism is at the end of that road.  They might not be exactly equal - Stalin killed several times more people than Hitler - but they're on the same level.

They aren't even close.  Marxist-Leninists look at the Antifa crowd and laugh.  They are at most useful idiots for the Stalinists who follow in their wake, and they are always the first to the Gulags after the revolution.

Sure.  That's why I say "Stalinism is at the end of that road", rather than it being their goal.  They don't think they're Stalinists, but they pave the road for the Stalinists.

I was more objecting to calling them on par with "Stalinists".  They aren't even close.  Antifa's tactics are to smash stuff and hit people.  Their ideology is to label anyone they don't like a fascist, whether they are or not.  Which I find amusing about people who claim Trump is a fascist.  In a calmer, saner time, within the living memory of both Boomers and Xers he would at most be a pro-business Democrat.

In any event only two outcomes are going to arise from Antifa's antics. 
1.  There is a communist revolution headed by a Marxist-Leninist party
2.  The emergence of an actual fascist group to combat antifa by taking control of the state.

At present in the US situation 1 is unlikely.  Most of the ML parties in the US are poorly lead and terribly small.  And the CPUSA has been suffering from Browderism since the 1940s and is thus  spent force.  Situation 2 is more likely.  If the mild reforms Trump wants to push are frustrated too much someone who is less mild than him will be found, and Gen X has plenty of people like that running around.

Antifa rioting every weekend is the best thing that ever happened to the neo-nazi types.

I don't think 1. would have to be by an established Marxist-Leninist party.  Some charismatic person who is either part of the movement or who had influence and wants to take advantage of the movement would be sufficient.  Even some factions of the Democratic party might work.

I agree that 2. is also a possibility, especially if the press keeps pushing the alt Right toward white nationalism.

1. Democrats are nowhere near Stalinists. It's true that libertarian right-wing economics claims that regulating and taxing business is "totalitarian," but it is not; it is vitally necessary. You can see where absence of government regulation leads in Houston today. The Oil business is allowed to get away with anything by Texas libertarian government, and the result is that people are being unfairly poisoned by the flood, as they frequently are.

A charismatic Marxist-Leninist is highly unlikely to get anywhere in America. But show me one with a great horoscope score, and I might take a look. On the other hand, even the Green candidate Jill Stein has an outstanding score, and is going nowhere. I looked up an independent candidate named Laurence Kotlikoff whom my friend suggested, and his score is 13-2, but appears to be going nowhere. You have to be in a position to be recognized as a prominent candidate in order to get elected or nominated. Even Bernie's score was better than Hillary's, probably, but couldn't win because he's a "socialist" whom the Democratic Establishment was lined up against.

The "movement" called antifa is too loose for it to be taken by anyone toward any particular political goal other than to oppose fascism.

2. good.
(08-31-2017, 11:50 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]There is a solution to all of this shit. Most people would not like it. We have a fine military. They are generally aligned with the grand American Tribe. Identitarianism is not allowed in the military. Maybe they need to lead.

Sorry, but rule enforced by a neo-Praetorian Guard is about as bad an outcome as I can imagine.  Restoring the draft and making it inescapable would do more to temper things than any other single act I can imagine.  Skin in the game for all.
(08-31-2017, 11:50 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]There is a solution to all of this shit. Most people would not like it. We have a fine military. They are generally aligned with the grand American Tribe. Identitarianism is not allowed in the military. Maybe they need to lead.

I have a Better idea.  Only Veterans should be allowed to be citizens.  All other are civilians.  Civilians would be able to own property, have free speech and all that good stuff.  The two things they wouldn't be allowed to do would be vote and hold political office.

Some have read Starship Troopers by Heinlien and see a dystopia.  Actually I read it and thought to myself it was the closest possible to utopia.  Politics quite simply is too important to be left to the politicians.



I see the identity of the ruling elites evolving.  The agricultural age had a nobility that attempted to monopolize weapons and thus political power.  As first the longbow and then muskets become dominant, we had citizen armies and the old nobility became land owning aristocrats.  The land owning aristocrats eventually contested with the robber barons as the means of gathering wealth changed.

I’m not thrilled by any group of elites being in control, and would emphasize feedback mechanism that allowed the People as a whole to keep the elites in check.  This has tended not to happen with representative democracy, in great part as the representatives tend to become corrupt.  Thus, I’d like to see direct vote networked democracy tried.

Yes, the current military has its virtues, but power corrupts.  The key is allowing a clear enough vision to spot the corruption, and a clear enough tool to pull the corrupt.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39