First they came for the right wing bloggers...

[biggytitbo]

The point is more keeping a correct sense of proportion and not getting distracted from fighting our most important, dangerous and powerful enemies, by the unimaginably vast and all consuming propaganda network available to those said enemies.

[Pdine]

The point is more keeping a correct sense of proportion and not getting distracted from fighting our most important, dangerous and powerful enemies, by the unimaginably vast and all consuming propaganda network available to those said enemies.

That's not what you said. You called them 'pretend' [extremists]. You're withdrawing that now, it seems, and instead saying that they are misrepresented-as-new [extremists]. Is that correct?

On the larger point though, how do you conclude you have genuine political knowledge when you theorise there is an 'unimaginably vast and all consuming propaganda network'? Isn't it hard to maintain that you have justified beliefs given that prior assumption? To ask it another way: how do you avoid the pitfall of false framing that you see so many others fall into?

[Paul Calf]

The point is more keeping a correct sense of proportion and not getting distracted from fighting our most important, dangerous and powerful enemies, by the unimaginably vast and all consuming propaganda network available to those said enemies.

Yeah, you're going to have to say who 'they' actually are though.

[biggytitbo]

That ones easy - switch the tv off, stop reading papers. Pretend Nazis in that they aren't Nazis. The ones in Ukraine trying to start WW3 are Nazis, but shush we don't talk about those, they're *our Nazis*


On the subject of the media, we have one of the world's most respected and influential media outlets publishing a completely fake story (That is reported around the whole world) given to them by the intelligence services as part of their spiteful vendetta against a man who exposed the American military empires war crimes and mass spying. And there are no consequences, the lying journalists are promoted and enriched and the media outlets acting as this mouthpiece for securety service liars are free to pour their lies into our brains day in day, about everything - our endless war crimes, our latest designated enemy, mass surveilence, the economy and banks, Corbyn, us. All for the benefit of the most powerful and destructive forces in the world.


By comparison a rare spotting of a greater swasticaed street Nazi or someone pushing a trump support aren't really very significant. But thats the framing issue again, you can create any image you want when you own all the cameras.

[Paul Calf]

Who are they then? Who's the real enemy, bigs?

[biggytitbo]

That tightly knit network of plutocrats, military, intellegence, corporate, financial, political and media entities  who run the world for the benefit of the few - themselves, at the expense of the many - us, according to a strict set of doctrines, the premenence of the NATO US dominated military empire, and a slavish devotion at all costs to big finance and debt driven capitalism, unfettered free markets and corproate fascism.


With their pathetic footsoliders in the msm bending reality on a daily basis to protect and extend their power.

[Paul Calf]

Any names? Positions? Nationalities?

Who should we blame, bigs?

[Zetetic]

our most important, dangerous and powerful enemies,

How much do these three groups overlap?

I don't mean if you're a white man in white enclave who earns relatively large amounts of money literally twiddling his appendages, but if you're someone in the bottom 20% of wealth and income with the wrong skin colour or too many Zs in their last name.

[biggytitbo]

Any names? Positions? Nationalities?

Who should we blame, bigs?

[Paul Calf]

Oh, sorry. I forgot how full of shit you are.

[manticore]

Most people don't care about whether it "works". It's that fascists deserve to feel pain and it is gratifying to see them beaten up. It's probably not a pragmatic position unless there's a mass mobilisation of being beating up fascists, but it is an understandable one.

It's 'understandable' if your form of 'protest' isn't protest much at all, but rather narcissistic self-gratification for its own sake with no actual thought or concern for the good or evil it can do.

A lot of things being conflated in this thread, making much of the discussion meaningless: violent protest with protest as such; Nazis with Trump supporters; non-violence with non-resistance/not defending yourself, and more.

Do people think 'left' white men screaming in the face of a right-wing black woman is a good idea? Do they think turning peaceful protest into throwing bricks is a sensible way of combatting the far-right?

It's all part of a long tradition on the left of actionism for its own sake, the occluding of thought in favour of unconsidered practice, pseudo-activity.

[Pdine]

That ones easy - switch the tv off, stop reading papers. 

Judging by the sources you cite though, you don't follow this advice, and indeed you supplement it with reading an additional narrow range of tendentious sources that support your assumptions. Why are these sources (and you've linked some in this thread) not subject to the "unimaginably vast and all consuming propaganda network" you propose exists?

[marquis_de_sad]

That ones easy - switch the tv off, stop reading papers. Pretend Nazis in that they aren't Nazis. The ones in Ukraine trying to start WW3 are Nazis, but shush we don't talk about those, they're *our Nazis*

It's ironic that you tell us all to stop being brainwashed by the lamestream media when you're so partisan you can't even admit a group of Nazis wielding Nazi symbols chanting "Jews will not replace us" and "white lives matter" are actually Nazis, all because they support your guy. I look forward to you linking me to a Wikipedia page about gestalt theory or whatever's currently on-trend in conspiracy shitposting circles.

[George Oscar Bluth II]

Like how the Ukranian Nazis are the west's Nazis, Richard Spencer, the Proud Boys, Tommy Robinson etc are biggy's Nazis so what they get up to is ignored. Like a mirror image.

[manticore]

Thread no. 2079 where people decide to concentrate on biggy's obvious sillynesses and exaggerations to the effect of avoiding meaningful discussion of the subject at hand.

[marquis_de_sad]

It's so much easier to have meaningful discussions when your opponent doesn't point out when you're wrong.

[manticore]

It's so much easier to have meaningful discussions when your opponent doesn't point out when you're wrong.

Who is 'your opponent'?

[Monsieur Verdoux]

generally people who frequently indulge in disingenuous faux-naif concern trolling

[manticore]

generally people who frequently indulge in disingenuous faux-naif concern trolling

Who? So I can know what you're talking about here.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

[marquis_de_sad]

Who is 'your opponent'?

Someone you disagree with in a discussion. So glad we've stopped avoiding meaningful discussion of the subject at hand and moved on to semantic quibbling.

[manticore]

Someone you disagree with in a discussion. So glad we've stopped avoiding meaningful discussion of the subject at hand and moved on to semantic quibbling.

Who is the opponent you're referring to here specifically?

...

It's appropriate that you use an image to represent the phrase 'you, ya cunt' to put across your desire to smother discussion of an important question, like you use the phrase 'concern trolling' to effectively say 'no debate' when I disputed your use of another misogynistic slur.

'Concern-trolling' is a real thing, but its ascent on the internet as a phrase strategically used to stifle genuine questioning of ideas and actions is one more manifestation of the general inability of the left to reflect on itself and its ideas, motivations and political practice, preferring a politics of gesture and performance. It's one reason for the hobbling of genuine resistance and the associated ascent of the right and far-right.

I say a lot of the tactics of contemporary 'antifacism' are wrong or misguided both in principle and practice and said why, given examples, and asked questions based on that. This is not 'concern trolling', and the fact that you call it that is just another manifestation of the paucity of political discussion on this board.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

I'm not smothering any discussion, you're free to talk about anything at any length or depth you like here. But that doesn't mean that if you do your usual disingenuous "can you explain to me what this means, please?" in order to kick up a stink about something that you won't be called on it.

'Concern-trolling' is a real thing, but its ascent on the internet as a phrase strategically used to stifle genuine questioning of ideas and actions is one more manifestation of the general inability of the left to reflect on itself and its ideas, motivations and political practice, preferring a politics of gesture and performance. It's one reason for the hobbling of genuine resistance and the associated ascent of the right and far-right.

That is concern trolling. Or just deeply misguided. Or overly defensive flailing. I can't tell anymore. It's important to log off once in a while, or you start to map your pathological obsessions and paranoia onto the discourse at large when online activity only accounts for a fraction of it.




Oh yes, and TERF

[marquis_de_sad]

Who is the opponent you're referring to here specifically?

I have no idea why this is difficult for you.

1.
I disagree with biggy that the neo-Nazis at Unite the Right were pretending to be Nazis. He thinks that they were deep state agent provocateurs who infiltrated the pro-Trump movement. He rarely explicitly says this, but he coyly hints that this is his view then runs away when challenged. He also thinks that people getting kicked off social media platforms is a co-ordinated campaign pushed by 'neocons' in the Democratic party and the US security services to push a pro-interventionist foreign policy agenda. His position on these issues is clearly linked.

2.
By 'opponent' I meant someone with an opposing view. I oppose biggy's views outlined above. You think disagreeing with biggy on this distracts from the topic at hand, but I suggested that this is rather convenient for you, as it means you get to defend biggy for raising the issue but also avoid having to deal with his ridiculous interpretation of it. At this point your complaint that criticising biggy being a distraction has been far more distracting itself than my comments supposedly were.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

Amazed that anybody is still trying the "thinking that my posts are shit is what causes racists to win elections" thing in 2018. I mean come on now, learn to take a bit of flak online without mapping the downfall of democracy onto it

[manticore]

Oh yes, and TERF

Would have written a longer response, but the above sums the thing up pretty well.






(Also sweetheart, I don't know why you think I need to log off so much. I'm hardly a prolific poster on this silly board, and most of my time online is spent watching live foster cat cams, most recently the wonderful Seraphina and her crazy kittens. But that's by the by I suppose.)

[Monsieur Verdoux]

yawn

[canadagoose]

Bye Felicia

Although I wish you hadn't brought it up, Verdoux. If you can leave it until 31st February next time, that'd be good, thanks.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

duly noted, and apologies

[Hank Venture]

Do people think 'left' white men screaming in the face of a right-wing black woman is a good idea? Do they think turning peaceful protest into throwing bricks is a sensible way of combatting the far-right?

Is the protest in France a good look? Civil disobedience is never a good look. Nothing the left will ever do with any material significance is a good look because the left are not in a position to manufacture controversy like capital interests are. What is your idea of demonstration that is both i) a good idea/has good optics, and ii) hits the thing you are protesting against where it hurts? Not strikes, that's for certain. Not destruction of property. Not screaming into peoples' faces. Blocking people from their commute in protesting climate change? No, the theoretical commoner will be easily manipulated into disliking all of those things.

You're talking about actionism, pseudo-activity. I presume then, that you are able to offer an alternative. Because pseudo-activity is surely better than no activity.