Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

metocin wrote

tolerance doesn't include being tolerant of intolerance

sorry if that's confusing

9

ziq wrote

you're confusing antifa for anarchy. antifa aren't against punishment, they live and breathe it.

7

metocin wrote

Wondering if you could elaborate more on your thoughts about antifa and punishment

5

ziq wrote

What more is there to say? Antifa is a movement entirely devoted to waging war on and no-platforming the far right with a variety of tactics but especially street fights and bar fights. People identifying as antifa can be anything from liberal to demsoc to ancom to centrist to stalinist ideologically, with their unifying shared goal to shut down, silence, battle, defeat, crush, struggle against, punish the authoritarian right.

Anarchy is the rejection of all authority.

Two different things that only occasionally overlap, unless you're a USAmerican (or a German) where antifa has virtually displaced all anarchist discourse in favor of its nonstop militant street activism against the (slightly more) conservative political party.

8

ziq wrote

Uh oh did I kill the sacred cow in the eternal battle being waged between moral and moral?

6

metocin wrote

It's unclear if you are totally against militant street activism and I'm also curious about that.

4

ziq wrote

I'm against perfunctory synchronized morality parades.

3

ziq wrote

If a fascist were threatening me or others, a faux military march orchestrated to instigate a policed organized street battle between the left and the right wings for the media's spectacle isn't how I'd take care of it.

3

metocin wrote

I get that. Are you against any form of militant action to protect people from fascists?

3

ziq wrote

Starting to feel a little like entrapment. I'm never going to be as specific as you want me to be.

I reject the notion that the left 'protects' people by staging concerted street conflict with the right. It only helps grow their numbers by giving them an easy enemy to demonize.

I'm against organized collective military action.

I'm for direct action that isn't filmed by tv cameras or designed to feed the culture war and provide spectacle and bread and circuses for the left vs right, liberal vs conservative, communist vs fascist media circus.

6

metocin wrote

Not trying to entrap you. I guess I meant any kind of direct action in general, which could be how you describe it. Which is also the type of action I envision/would hypothetically prefer.

I hope you don't ever feel as if I'm trying to 'gotcha' you as I am genuinely interested in your takes as they have helped me a lot in developing my own thoughts/analysis.

6

ziq wrote

I know it wasn't deliberate but I'm trying not to advocate for any direct (illegal) course of action since my identity is public.

7

metocin wrote

I apologize for putting you in that position

4

[deleted] wrote

5

halfway_prince wrote

I like this contribution a lot. I think there's a slightly special brand of racism in the U.S. that is distinct from a lot of other countries (although i may just not be knowledgeable enough about others out there). Therefore the reality of violence and the magnitude of response necessitates something different.

4

ziq wrote

Marching and protesting and doing battle inside police lines while surrounded by cameras isn't direct action at all.

4

ziq wrote

Like all anarchist terms, the concept of direct action has been perverted by the left into being useless.

4

kin wrote

This question will only serve to people say shit about ziq in a while, their position is very clear to me and I agree with it despite of my own position.

Trying to cut the crap from anarchism is not a glorious task but someone need to step up

3

lettuceLeafer wrote

I think you have a very good take that I agree with on this one. Though I no doubt think you will get shit for.

/u/metocin I can add onto why I'm not a big fan of antifa either

Antifa at its core is about how we should wage a forever war against an idea. We should copy paste the tactics of the US government as praxis. But its a good idea this time bc its praxis. A good use of resources is to infiltrate, get people fired from their jobs, implement programs of mass surveillance, beat the shit out of people for talking about wrong think (shitty oppressive opinions but still words regardless), couch attacking people as defense because if we don't attack first the enemy will kill u, attack those who pose no threat even bc they may pose a risk in the future.

I don't want to be forever at war so I believe in defending people against fascism not trying to attack an idea. Maybe just maybe if your anarchist praxis is just mimicking oppressive government agencies you have gone down the wrong path.

My goals include trying to live free and at peace and I think antifa ideology is inherently contradictory to my goal. I'm not saying I'm a pacifist. I'm saying that my program to protect people from facism is training people to defend against facists attacking people, building places that are safe and secure, and other assorted self defense tactics. I'm not going to spend my time implementing an "anarchist" counterintelpro.

2

metocin wrote

I agree that mimicking the state is not in line with anarchist praxis but I'm not sure that all people who consider themselves "antifa" would want to do that anyways. I consider myself an anti fascist or antifa in so far as I am ready to defend myself or others from fascists or racists, but I'm definitely not about to start spying on or infiltrating groups or any of that shit.

I think there is a good reason to critique antifa but in areas where there is significant fascist action I think it is important as a movement. You can have a sensible critique online but if there are fascists marching in your neighborhood are you going to stay inside and let them spread their hateful, authoritarian ideology or will you join the counter protest?

I somewhat agree with yours and ziq's points but that wouldn't stop me from taking action against fascists if it would help keep people in my community safe.

Anarchy is the opposition to all authority, therefore if people are trying to promote an extreme form of authority, I think we must be able to work against that while also being aware of the implications of what specific actions and methods we use.

3

lettuceLeafer wrote (edited )

You can have a sensible critique online but if there are fascists marching in your neighborhood are you going to stay inside and let them spread their hateful, authoritarian ideology or will you join the counter protest?

I don't think I'm the one to ask this question. I've almost exclusively lived in rural America. White supremacy and authoritarianism is what most people like. People aren't marching in they are already rife. All I've personally seen counter protest do in my community but have people become even more hard line in response. I'm not saying antifa is at fault bc they aren't. Its just like I don't care about changing hearts and minds nor do I see much value in using violence so white supremacists hurt poc in the shadows rather than in the open. So I guess nah I wouldn't counter protest. Protest isn't really my thing or something that happens.

Plus I've seen how antifa protests go in my area on alt right youtube. Its like 3 high schoolers being berated or attacked by like over a hundred people. But I don't think my perspective in my discussion as antifa is far more effective or maybe even only really applicable to urban areas. I just said my perspective since u asked about my community.

I guess my reaction to seeing a bunch of white supremacists going "we are going to recruit people to fight minorities bc we love to fight" isn't yeah let me get together with a bunch of marginalized people to fight those people. Its more along the lines of how do I set it up so marginalized people are safe and protected from this threat by upping personal security and becoming powerful enough white supremacists would fail and assault or wouldn't dare attack.

idk, I just see a bunch of marginalized people getting beat up, hospitalized and sometimes killed by fascists and this being spurred on to prevent fascists beating up, killing and hospitalizing marginalized people. Maybe it does reduce the numbers total hurt. Idk, I don't particularly see the alt right as nearly as big of a treat as the current governmental powers either.

I think I'm far less against what you are saying than antifa as a whole. Tho I'm not sure if I'm a big fan of counter protest. I guess its the difference between counter protest and oh god some white supremacists are beating people up so lets eliminate the threat is the reason I don't like antifa as much as other anarchists.

Edit: I don't think I'm strong enough in my opinions to say I'm anti antifa but I like my ways to keep people safe better.

5

ziq wrote

i don't think you need to live in an american city to realize that putting on a uniform and tactical gear and marching in sequence through the streets to the beat of a drum while claiming you're protecting the people's freedom is mimicking the state

6

OdiousOutlaw wrote

I personally believe that everyone has "the right" to beat up anyone they don't like for any reason; in that, if they really wanted to do that, the only thing that would stop them from trying is ultimately themselves. It's just a matter of whether or not they have the means of getting away with it and how much they care about getting away with it at the end of the day.

In my case, beating up a nazi is always self defense; they affiliate themselves with an ideology dedicated to my extermination/subjugation and I never willingly associate myself with such people.

I'm "pro" beating up humanists; fascists are just extra picky about who counts as human.

7

halfway_prince wrote (edited )

A lot of these takes to me seems rooted in the experience of someone who isn't the direct recipient or target of fascist action. I don't know your experience/identity nor do i care to, but I would suggest reflecting on how this perspective might change if - for example - you were a trans person who had to fear being jumped by nazis in your neighborhood due to the way you present.

It seems very close to the whole white-hippie peace love bullshit that's easy to ascribe to when you've never been marginalized or targeted with violence due to your identity.

I think it's worth noting u/CaptainACAB has been the only person who identifies as a direct target of facist action and their response is (in my opinion) the most nuanced.

Also u/ziq what is with trying to but antifa under a "movement" banner? antifa is an ideology or practice of rejecting fascism. There's no common code or organizational structure to my knowledge. Please enlighten me if the definition of antifa has changed recently....

edit: I posted a while ago when the predominant discussion was in a comment thread u/ziq comment's on antifa. since posting that balance shifted, so i would just like to qualify my first paragraph as being written in a slightly different context of the conversation.

7

[deleted] wrote

4

halfway_prince wrote (edited )

Totally agree with this. It is often the only motivation brought up (lol clearly cuz it's the only one i put in this comment), but I believe it merited re-emphasizing when there was a lot of conversation straying into (in my opinion appeared to be) the overly theoretical by a lot of people who simply aren't targeted by the rising fascist action (in the U.S. and germany) that antifa specifically has emerged in response to. I think what you say here is an important counter to that argument, so thanks for putting it out there, but it's a counter argument that I think can only be taken seriously when it comes from someone who identifies as the target of this specific type of violence - which i'm assuming you would categorize yourself as, since you added

as a rural queer myself I can say for sure that right-wingers of any kind are the least of my concerns.

Another area where this comes up is when people who haven't experience food insecurity spend endless time criticizing food distribution non-profits because they've read enough theory to be able to deconstruct charity vs. mutual aid. Like you're right and pure ideologically, but for you to be a spokesperson you need to have experienced the effects or at least be able to point to consensus support from people who have been directly impacted.

That's why I made this post to note that the only person who (at the time) had identified as a person targeted by fascist activity was presenting a different view than what was the dominant position in the rest of the thread.

In other words, appreciate the perspective and totally agree with you. I just think that folks need to check themselves with these hot takes.

3

[deleted] wrote (edited )

5

halfway_prince wrote

Yeah i think you're on to something there, and I want you to know i'm definitely struggling with trying to walk a bit of a tight rope here and know that my communication around this isn't perfect and i stumble into problematic takes myself. if that happens and the reek becomes unbearable, then i appreciate being checked and will do some private reflection before throwing my hat in the ring again.

For now though, I would say that I differentiate my position in that i don't prescribe to one side or the other being a dominant voice. We don't need just lived experiences or just ideologically pure theory. I think that both theory and lived experience need to be in consistent dialogue, juxtaposed with one another for either to be taken seriously.

in what way does holding one’s tongue (or fingers in this case) benefit a conversation?

not that you're implying this, but at no point in my comments did i say people shouldn't have shared their opinions - just that it's important to contextualize those opinions and make sure the afformentioned balance is maintained.

I almost never advocate for people to not throw out opinions on this site (even when i totally 100% disagree with them) because i see this a safe space for testing ideas where most folks are engaging in good faith discussions.

Now that's not true of every space - i'm sure we all have experienced a time when a cis white man going off about theory in a public space (organizing or other) should very clearly shut the fuck up.

idk if that clears things up, but happy to respond (may be delayed for a few hours) more if not

4

lettuceLeafer wrote

The idea of identity being the sole axis of affinity is very silly

I was going to say that but u beat me to it.

3

halfway_prince wrote

It would certainly be silly if that's what i was saying!

3

lettuceLeafer wrote

?

I'm confused. I read your comment and thought u were disagreeing with me on something. So I went back to read what u were replying to and I just quoted what u said and said I agree.

So I either am misunderstanding ur comment or wasn't clear in that I was supporting what u said and not criticizing.

4

halfway_prince wrote

uhh not sure, but i think you quoted u/nbdy not me.

u/nbdy was saying (or implying or whatever) that i was using identity as the sole axis of affinity. I feel like that is a mischaracterization since i was just emphasizing the need to consider identity in conversations like this one, not saying it's the only way to find truth. like my response to them said,

We don't need just lived experiences or just ideologically pure theory. I think that both theory and lived experience need to be in consistent dialogue, juxtaposed with one another for either to be taken seriously.

3

halfway_prince wrote (edited )

idk just came back to this from a couple days ago cuz i felt a little unsatisfied with being called out and then not engaged with when i put thought into a conversation.

Not trying to stir shit up again, but i really just want to be understood in my position in these contexts because essentially the whole point of these threads are to learn and grow and test ideas. Disengaging randomly from conversations feels really disheartening and breaks a level of "good-faith" conversation that i think is critical to maintaining a healthy community.

For example, i think you, u/lettuceleafer and i do a good job of continuing to engage when we disagree until we both feel heard and understand one another at least somewhat (at least from my end that's my take). u/nbdy 's comment felt like calling someone out and then running away as a power move but maybe i'm just feeling salty.

3

lettuceLeafer wrote

Yeah I understand ur feelings. Tho people don't continue with convos for a variety of reasons so I would recommend against being quick to assume malice when a good faith reason could be assumed. But I don't doubt some people have disengaged for the reason u stated.

4

lettuceLeafer wrote

Oh you're right. My apologies.

Yeah I would agree that it would be a miscaractarization if your point this I still think you where putting far to much importance on identity.

3

halfway_prince wrote

ya i think it's very context dependent and am not totally sure of my position. if you have any lit references about how to approach this better, would much appreciate

3

subrosa wrote

I didn't show up to have a nuanced take, just to reject the premises where I'm "pro beating up nazis", where I have to justify it. Don't mean to waste anyone's time with that non-response, but I figured maybe from OPs inquiry something a little more interesting might develop.

4

halfway_prince wrote (edited )

fosho, i feel that. i don't think that every take needs to be nuanced, i more meant to call attention to the seeming dominance of this discussion's focus on takes by folks who do not identify as targets of fascist activity and how that may be skewing the conversation too much into abstract theorizing.

4

ziq wrote (edited )

antifa is a very american peculiarity and raddle has a very international userbase. where i'm from, there's a fascist political party and they have elected members in parliament. that doesn't mean antifa is a thing here. anarchists don't need antifa aka left unity parades to do direct action

6

kin wrote (edited )

Antifa™ (or Auntie Fa Inc. George Soros subsidiary) was something that changed over time. This recent anti Trump Antifa have local flavors.

What many people don't know is what are the origins of Antifacist Aktion in Germany, and the United Front in France, the Spanish republicans, etc - and It's like you said earlier Anarchist giving space to any stablished politicians and Marxist parties to fight a Capitalist problem (the rise of the fascism is very linked to Capital).

This somehow envolved to street politics with punks, skinheads, hooligans - many Antifa on the past were homophobes and misogynistic assholes.

So just to cut the long story short, punching Nazis don't mean Antifa "membership" and vice versa

Edit: not sure what exactly I want to say, but seems to me this whole debate is because many people outside anarchism (or even in anarchism dunno) don't know the history of Antifacist Aktion, Black Bloc, propaganda by the deed and other early concepts. And times and times this whole confusion start on the Yankeesphere of Internet

5

ziq wrote

I guess i kind of hijacked the thread to get on a soapbox and disassociate anarchy from Antifa when really the question was just about using violence.

violent force doesn't have to be punishment /u/moonlune - lots of violent acts are about self preservation and community defense, not punishment.

4

moonlune OP wrote

no problem you made things more interesting lol

5

halfway_prince wrote

would appreciate any background links u could offfeerrrr

3

kin wrote

For antifa,

Same people will hate me, but this text by Gilles Dauve:

When Insurrection Dies (bear in mind this gentleman is a staunch Marxist)

An Investigation Into Red-Brown Alliances (this one is not exactly on the topic, but explain much of the historic evolution and relationships between some farleft and farright organizations)

I was trying to search a good history book, but I don't remember any good author besides the famous George Woodcock's Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements.

The wikipedia articles are not bad for intros:

You can search the Anarchist Library, but you also will find the cult by special agent Alex Reid Cops, /f/Anarchism/128196

And if you want to full Platformistre are some historians that dedicated entire books to talk about the Spanish Revolution that navigate with this idea of united front

4

ziq wrote

because antifa is a movement. idk how anyone can deny it's not.

movement

actions or activities, as of a person or a body of persons.

movement doesn't mean common code or organizational structure

4

halfway_prince wrote

i guess i just can't quite reconcile these two statements of yours:

antifa aren't against punishment, they live and breathe it.

i said antifa participants have a diversity of tactics and diverse ideological beliefs outside of the one common one

maybe i'm missing some nuance or being too nit-picky, but i really just can't sus out your position here. I don't want to ask you to clarify for risk of suggesting entrapment, but i'm really struggling (as i believe many others on the thread are) to understand what you're arguing for.

Like how would antifa painting over a swastika (diversity of tactics) be punishment?

How would street medics (diversity of tactics) who identify as antifa showing up to a protest to protect black activists who are inevitably the primary targets of fascists a form of punishment?

3

ziq wrote

A political movement doesn't begin and end with any one tactic used by that political movement. Antifa is the sum of all its parts. Just as anarchists aren't just about mutual aid, we're about direct action, autonomy, anti-hierarchy and 50 other things - antifa is a lot of things, and the thing that most defines antifa as a movement is a united front with liberals, tankies, conservatives, centrists and other reactionaries to march against fascism.

That greatly conflicts with anarchy for a lot of reasons I've already mentioned including the enabling of entryism, providing cover for the genocidal white supremacist settler imperialists who actually run the world and the whitewashing of the authoritarian left.

That's why I don't identify with the antifa label. I'm an anarchist, so I stand against all authority, not just the Mussolini sect, and I don't subscribe to the left vs right, communist vs capitalist culture war that only fuels the system.

Antifa has no qualms with punishment because antifa isn't rooted in anarchy, it's rooted in left wing activism and the left wing of the state has no qualms with hierarchy, authority, strugglismo or punishment.

The anarchist response to nazis isn't to form a united front with red fascists and liberals to stage a counter march against the brown fascists. It's much more direct and much more impactful.

3

Garrias wrote

Doesn't antifa consider conservatives fascists? (And centrists as well in some cases)

3

ziq wrote

US Democrats are conservatives and plenty of them march with antifa

2

halfway_prince wrote

This i can totally agree with. If I had understood this position instead of just hearing,

antifa aren't against punishment, they live and breathe it.

which i think was just posted to stir the pot and initiate conversation as you have since said,

I guess i kind of hijacked the thread to get on a soapbox and disassociate anarchy from Antifa when really the question was just about using violence.

i wouldn't have felt the need to get any deeper into this conversation.

I would be interested in hearing about what you mean here

The anarchist response to nazis isn't to form a united front with red fascists and liberals to stage a counter march against the brown fascists. It's much more direct and much more impactful.

and how you came to the conclusion of "more impactful". I'm sure it's more ideologically pure (which is a valid reason in itself) but not sure how you are quantifying impact..

2

ziq wrote

yea no

3

halfway_prince wrote

awwww come on, we were finally getting somewhere

2

ziq wrote

Yea to entrapment

3

halfway_prince wrote

oh shit ya okay, won't push if you're getting stressed about that. I more mean that you had effectively convinced me that antifa's ideology is fundamentally flawed and non-anarchic. I just am not totally convinced their tactics haven't done some good in fighting fascism. But ya can definitely drop it.

2

halfway_prince wrote

for clarification, these are mostly rhetorical questions since i don't expect you to defend every comment you've ever made

3

kin wrote

I like ziq analysis but I cannot say it's describe how I feel.

Probably I have lots of personal issues to untangle before being coherent (fetishizing violence, toxic masculinity, street culture, tribalism, etc)

That have being said, bash the fash, punch every Nazi u can and fuck12.

6

subrosa wrote

I'm not into punching nazis.

5

ziq wrote (edited )

As long as they're only punching nazis and not liberals, centrists and tankies, they're hypocrities. Liberalism and Stalinism have done more damage to the world than nazism, which was all but killed off by liberalism and Stalinism decades before any of us were born. Because liberalism and Stalinism proved to be far more effective at subjugating the masses, funneling wealth, extracting resources and upholding white supremacy.

Those 2 political systems that defeated nazism in ww2 are far more insidious because their dual authority has persisted and become entrenched and normalized worldwide, subjugating literally billions of people for multiple generations and brought every species on this planet to the verge of extinction.

People who pick fights with nazis are just providing cover for the state by pointing to a particular tiny throwback group of loud white supremacists and saying 'these are the real enemy, direct all your attention to these tiki torch nerds' while ignoring (and even actively supporting) all the white (and Han) supremacists who actually have power, actually enslave, incarcerate, murder and ethnically cleanse non-whites all over the world every day of the year.

7

AnarcheAmor wrote

AnPac here, Nazis are inherently violent threat to others therefore people have the right to retaliate with necessary force when they need to defend themselves. Punishment is a form of hierarchical violence that should be rejected by anarchists at large.

5

d4rk wrote

When people think of punishment, we think of violence by which we enforce negatively proper values by which one is meant to be, when we beat up nazis, we do not enforce anything, it's better to think of it as killing a zombie rather than beating your kid with a shoe

4

ziq wrote (edited )

comment in reply to me was deleted while i was replying to it:

wait have we really bought into the whole "antifa is a movement" thing? sure there are some organized pockets in certain areas but i think it's still ridiculous to put a blanket label on "antifa" like it's some kind of coordinated organization or platform not just a bunch of people who individually decide that if there's facist action in their area, they're going to stop it...

Maybe the mainstream usage of the term antifa has changed in the last couple years and i'm not in the loop, but honestly seems like a really weird and reductionist take.

it's a label people voluntarily attach to themselves, it has a specific culture, specific tactics and shared ideological beliefs (opposition to fascism), it's a thing that exists

i never said it was homogeneous, or an official organization, i said antifa participants have a diversity of tactics and diverse ideological beliefs outside of the one common one

3

halfway_prince wrote

lmao i deleted this comment seconds after i posted it so i could consolidate the conversation into a single thread so that i didn't have to continue to respond in multiple places.

but i guess i can just repost my comment as well:

i guess i just can't quite reconcile these two statements of yours:

antifa aren't against punishment, they live and breathe it.

i said antifa participants have a diversity of tactics and diverse ideological beliefs outside of the one common one

maybe i'm missing some nuance or being too nit-picky, but i really just can't sus out your position here. I don't want to ask you to clarify for risk of suggesting entrapment, but i'm really struggling (as i believe many others on the thread are) to understand what you're arguing for.

Like how would antifa painting over a swastika (diversity of tactics) be punishment?

How would street medics (diversity of tactics) who identify as antifa showing up to a protest to protect black activists who are inevitably the primary targets of fascists a form of punishment?

sorry for formatting issues if this is confusing to read, it's all one response up in a different thread.

4