glorydaz
Well-known member
Heck, the left says the same about all Trump's supporters. They're simply filled with hate and can't see straight.
Alt-righter plows into crowd of anti-racists in Charlottesville
- Thread starter Town Heretic
- Start date
Heck, the left says the same about all Trump's supporters. They're simply filled with hate and can't see straight.
More fair than to assume motives and purposes. I don't think the reasons for being there are as straight forward as you do. It wasn't originally a neo-nazi event. Maybe some people wanted to still go so they could show that not everyone supporting the statue was a nazi. Certainly you'd want to differentiate yourself in some way, but perhaps you still go. Try to prevent the nazis from completely taking over the event.
Bottom line, I try to avoid assumptions and I see no need to pass judgment over every person there who was in support of the statue. I don't see a reason to do that except that it allows you to more easily condemn Trump and score some extra points. I have no desire to do that.
Good Post
But I don't have to, kmo. I know what the Klan, Nazis, and various assorted white supremacists think, what moves their ideology, and its end game.
That just leaves whatever sort of person would find their aid acceptable OR, as you note later, what sort would feel that marching alongside them might send a better or different message and if that's a reasonable hope carried by a reasonable person, whether we should accept or assume it in potential, or if there is a more reasonable position running contrary to that effort. I'll be arguing for the last proposition.
I don't know what the mystery would be.
Accepted. It was originally a protest over the removal of confederate monuments.
It is possible? I suppose it is. Is it reasonable or likely? I'd argue it's neither and that those who intended to protest for other reasons would disassociate themselves from those other elements understanding the taint that would touch anyone willing to march alongside them.
Or, it's not reasonable to say, "Yes, I see the Nazi's marching with me, but I'm different and this is going to demonstrate that their issue isn't my issue." Nothing in protesting with them would do that. Now separating and issuing a different statement condemning their attempt to participate might. Even that begs the question of their support and the foundation for removal of the monuments, but it's at least an attempt to accomplish their end without the taint of association with determined and undeniable racist elements.
I don't believe that kind of assumption has to be a part of this. You simply have to recognize a) what the Nazi and his fellows are and b) what sort of person feels more strongly about the cause of defending statuary (however they justify the slavery connection) than he or she does about standing with that sort to manage it.
Even without the underlying truth of what that statuary represents, it's a powerfully disturbing thought. I have a very hard time trying to pin "fine folks" on it.
Leaving aside that you don't appear reticent to issue at least one speculative assumption, I don't need additional reasons to object to Trump. He's like a Pez dispenser of reasonable objections. His own party and some of his cabinet members have done their best to distance themselves from some of them.
But that's exactly and all that you just did, kmo. At least between us. I don't believe you care what the onlookers think. Now it's okay with me. I'm fond of you anyway. I like optimists and that's the only sort of Chiefs fan there is...so I'd just say consider my points prior to this one and I'll leave off on this one except for the note. :cheers:
WizardofOz
New member
[MENTION=7640]Town Heretic[/MENTION] - you once posted "I can support the Klan's right to march without supporting anything they stand for. Because I believe in the right of peaceful protest."
Does this support extend to neo-Nazis? Why wouldn't you likewise support their right to protest in Charlottesville or anywhere else?
Personally I support free speech no matter how distasteful I find it
Does this support extend to neo-Nazis? Why wouldn't you likewise support their right to protest in Charlottesville or anywhere else?
Personally I support free speech no matter how distasteful I find it
WizardofOz
New member
How embarrassing. That was a long time ago...:chuckle:
Time changes what we might a[prove. KKK is far too hateful in this age had seen them gathering when I was very young] seen them
They were always about h; then, many people wanted to maintain a segregated society in the South, as well, many did not know how the Jews fit in
Sure. I haven't changed my mind on the public square.
What quote of mine is troubling you/leads you to the question?
glorydaz
Well-known member
I agree. I would have gone to protest the removal of the statues. That some KKK people showed up has absolutely NOTHING to do with why I would have gone. Clearly, as the Police Chief noted, the "anti-free speech" protesters (made up of Antifa and just plain ignorant liberals) were "marching on the same side". Which by no means suggests that those liberals supported the violence of Antifa.
glorydaz
Well-known member
And SCOTUS agrees with you.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P54sP0Nlngg
Rather than speculate on who was launching the original protest and why, they made a short film and told us-here it is.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Rather than speculate on who was launching the original protest and why, they made a short film and told us-here it is.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
WizardofOz
New member
It goes back to your conversation with kmoney. Let me start by asking whether you think all the counter-protesters were bad people. Were they all violent antifa or BLM or were some of them decent folks, in your opinion?
Now, why do you feel that the entire group that was originally set to protest racist, white nationalist, neo-nazis? Do you think it's possible that some (or even many) of the people that were set to protest were there to A) protest the removal of the statue for non-nefarious reasons or B) some people were there simply to protect the rights of these people to speak freely no matter how disgusting they find the message?
I brought up your past quote because I always figured you'd be one that would support the right to free speech regardless. And if you support that right unconditionally, it might mean rubbing elbows with folks whose message you find revolting.
It's the fight for the right to speak that is important. Like kmoney, I find it highly unlikely that all who were there to protest were bad people just as I doubt all the counter protesters were bad people.
If it comes down to one side suppressing speech entirely and another group fighting to spread a message I completely disagree with, I'll defend the right to the speech every time. If that means that I might someday find myself on the 'side' of neo-Nazis, then so be it. Because that right needs to be protected at all costs against those trying to silence the right to speak freely.
Spoiler
WizardofOz
New member
What's the problem with legal protest? :idunno:
WizardofOz
New member
:first: Well said, kmoney.
It depends on whether their violence was in defense or instigation. I don't approve of instigating violence.
Let's say we're talking about some who instigated it. I'm still less settled on them than I am on the Nazis. Why? Because I don't know their motivation. It could be that we're talking about the great grandson of an Auschwitz survivor who is just enraged. Or the grandson of someone who was victimized by the Klan. To them, striking against the Klan or Nazis might be like hitting the Brownshirts BEFORE they had enough power in Germany, or the Klan before it starting making dark fruit. If they're that I'll disagree with them and prosecute them, but with regret, because they've chosen the wrong way to oppose an evil. It wouldn't necessarily put them in the service of another evil.
If they're just people who believe in violence as an expression of who they are, as a tool of intimidation, etc. then they're indistinguishable from the Nazi and I feel exactly the same about them.
It feels like there's something missing in that. If I understand you, I've never said that the entire group set to originally protest the removal of Confederate memorials were racist, etc. I differed with the original protest, but that's another matter.
I not only haven't said that everyone on the other side of that question is nefarious, I've identified myself as someone who for a very long time held a similar (and I'd say errant) position, largely as the result of my cultural blinkers and projection. That is, I was sold the noble South myth and, knowing myself to not be a racist never went further in feeling solid about supporting the monuments as a tribute to sacrifice until I came face to face with a different perspective that made me challenge my assumptions and see an argument my bias had precluded.
I don't believe protesting the removal of Confederate memorials is about free speech, though it's certainly an exercise in it. Are you asking if some people showed up to defend the Nazi's right to speak? That would or should be the police's job. I'm not aware of groups doing that, are you?
You were right. I absolutely do.
I wouldn't say standing up against and/or debating them is rubbing elbows.
It's fundamental, but it's not what this is about. And I don't have to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Klan to support that right.
Unlike you guys then, I find it highly unlikely that there were good guys standing with Nazis for the reasons given prior. There's no necessity and nothing to be gained by it. And I have no knowledge and haven't read anything about groups joining the Nazis over speech rights. From what I know about those attending you had the hate groups and, I suppose (but don't know) some who were there for the original protest only. I can't imagine (for the reasons given prior and touched upon here) why anyone who thought they had a legitimate grievance would allow it to be co-opted by Nazis, etc. Better to withdraw and make a separate protest and clarify the distinctions.
Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? I don't see it, reasonably.
Sure. But I don't believe that should be the choice here. :cheers:
Foxfire
Well-known member
I would seriously consider contributing to a monument of Lee surrendering at Appomattox.
View attachment 25914
View attachment 25914