Reply to comment by /u/Pop in Voat - It's a shit hole. by /u/UnbanTwin


closed wrote

It could be interesting to think about how we might engage them and what goals would be meaningful

Clearly you're not talking about meaningful engagement: like Voat, the whole point of this site seems to be to disengage from and merrily ignore anyone who disagrees with you.

Combative engagement would be a major failure - your teams are similarly hate-filled but they severely outnumber you.


closed wrote (edited )

At this point, though, I've kind of posted all the stuff I use and think is really cool so far.

You've been posting generally interesting content, but perhaps should have paced yourself. A couple of posts a day for the subverse is probably sufficient to keep people interested, gives people more time to consider each post, and leaves more space for others to contribute.

I'm personally not interested in games.


closed wrote (edited by a moderator )

Is this meme produced by you or the Nazis? I have to guess it's one of theirs.

It's great that you're both promoting the same thing, you should get together and do a deal on poster printing or something.


closed wrote (edited by a moderator )

Thanks for the references, I haven't read them, but they look interesting. Feel free to dismiss me as a non-expert. I haven't heard many arguments apart from those understandably critical of Antifa violence, and my opinions are just my own observations.

Is physical violence a strategy they are officially adopting, as you have? That would be news to me.

@hectorgrey mentions that they have no intention of debating in good faith - there is no need for you to debate in good faith either, but it seems they are just the better debaters.

As for allowing them to organise and recruit. Sure, they're recruiting at public events, but they're also recruiting on the sly in person, and via a number of online forums, and there's no way to stop that with violence. Having 'violent Antifa thugs' to look down on, and pictures of bleeding comrades helps with their recruiting and solidarity. It's hard to garner sympathy for Nazis, but if they are are assembling peacefully (for now) earnestly showing their faces, and you arrive masked and clad in black with violent intent - it's natural that you'll get outsiders condemning you as the bad guys.

A policy of physical violence clearly has blowback when it comes to PR. Is it worth it? You cannot stop them from organising and recruiting - are you even preventing them from public displays of strength?


closed wrote (edited by a moderator )

I think resorting to violence only strengthens them, and discredits others who oppose what they're saying.

If we're really incapable of countering their words/ideas nonviolently, I fear they've already won.


closed wrote (edited by a moderator )

I think my understanding of social pressures is sufficient. Being given the silent treatment and a wide berth wouldn't bother me much - your local Nazi is made of sterner stuff than you think. After all, they seem to be walking about risking violent assault from you.. do you seriously think 'being awkwardly dismissive' is going to do anything at all? Some will probably take it as a sign of respect!

Again, you are telling me that you are incapable of besting this Nazi in public debate. That is very bad news.

I'm tempted to discuss eugenics with you, but you have a website full of people who don't appreciate Nazis at your disposal. I suggest you do a little group brainstorming regarding effective public debating strategies, and public responses to Nazi talking points. Many of you seem to waste your time categorizing imaginary forms of government that nobody cares about - you really should focus more on practicalities.


closed wrote (edited by a moderator )

I would prefer that those who strongly disagree with his advertised ideology voice their objections, whether that means merely passing remarks or engaging in a more extended conversation. Your 'awkward and dismissive' atmosphere sounds more like a free pass for this person. If I walked around with a swastika on my arm (believing in it) and nobody said anything, I think I'd feel relieved and emboldened.

Why is he able to 'spout rhetoric that easily proves his point' while you are seemingly unable to? Surely, even outside of deep conversation, there must be some simple verbal points that can be used against this master of public debate? These people were the personification of evil during WWII: for you to tell me that we are now unable to match them in simplified public debate isn't encouraging.

Personally, I think punching them without them initiating physical violence is going out of your way to concede the moral high ground: which is no small feat against a Nazi. I prefer to be nonviolent.


closed wrote (edited by a moderator )

They don't need you to legitimize them as people, they are legitimate people already.

Yes, they seek conversation, it spreads their ideas, expands and strengthens their movement and builds their own confidence in their beliefs.

Please try to explain exactly how a conversation between one of you and one of them should somehow aid their movement and hinder yours? Unless of course your philosophy is inherently weaker, which could be the natural conclusion of an outsider.

It's true I don't talk with any 'fascists' in person, I engage/converse with them regularly online, over periods of months.


closed wrote (edited by a moderator )

I have had many online conversations with people that'd you'd call fascists.

You can't expect to see, or have any change admitted by them in an adversarial conversation. Regardless of whether they change or not, the conversation is worth it, if only to get to know them better, test out different approaches etc...

They are people too, who believe their actions are for some manner of moral good. If you believe your actions are also just, then the aim should be to seek understanding.

Explicitly avoiding conversation just makes you appear intellectually weak and closed-minded, and really aids their cause.


closed wrote (edited by a moderator )

You sound a lot like an alt-right person demonizing a Jew.

Whether they think you are vermin is quite irrelevant. Engaging gives you the opportunity to change their opinion, learn more about them, and the opportunity to improve your own understanding and arguments as well.

They are usually happy to engage and are becoming more and more emboldened. You may want to pick your conversations, but this manner of closed-minded cowardice is a great way to defeat yourselves.