Politics Alt right storm usa capital

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

Violence associated with any right wing protest seems to generate a huge reaction compared to violence associated with a left wing protest.

Right now there is vandalism going on across multiple cities and it is barely a blip on the radar because nobody expects any better from violent leftists and this type of thing is so damn common from them.

The moment any violence occurs at a right wing protest the reaction from people not sympathetic to their politics is huge. Hence why before the capitol breach many left leaning poster on here had to keep referring to Charlottesville due to a single scumbag with their car.

They can refer to these events easily because they are so few and far between in combination with the huge coverage that you can remember them easily.

Violent left wing related protests happen so often that you would not even know where to start when citing examples and if they created a list they would look like this.

It also seems most incidents of violence I see at right wing protests involve "counter protesters" showing up to start a fight.

If a protest is right wing only without agitators showing up to fight there is less chance of violence compared to many left with protests where the presence of counter protesters is not needed to kick off violence and damage. The presence of another persons property is enough to kick things off.

 

[Lethality]

They were MAGA mate.

I heard the capitol hill rioters were blm too

 

[FredLeDeux]

Come on man, it was obviously MAGA pretending to be Antifa.

And painting anarchist symbols on the building.
It was probably the infamous terrorist sympathizer, enabler and fellow-traveller, Lethality's mate, Andy "I'm Not Lyin thru my Teeth This Time, I Swear" Ngo.

 

[bzparkes]

I heard the capitol hill rioters were blm too

Nah, Trump-mad Antifa supporters.

Get it right.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I heard the capitol hill rioters were blm too

Whats your stake in this anyway, do you identify as fascist?

 

[medusala]

Look, all people are saying is that there have to be different ways to go about this.

Yeah the Portland experiment was just marvellous. Why not repeat in nationwide. Brilliant stuff.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Violence associated with any right wing protest seems to generate a huge reaction compared to violence associated with a left wing protest.

Right now there is vandalism going on across multiple cities and it is barely a blip on the radar because nobody expects any better from violent leftists and this type of thing is so damn common from them.

The moment any violence occurs at a right wing protest the reaction from people not sympathetic to their politics is huge. Hence why before the capitol breach many left leaning poster on here had to keep referring to Charlottesville due to a single scumbag with their car.

It's an obvious false equivalence when you have a president encouraging or defending one of these. If BLM protesters beat a cop to death while storming the Capitol and Biden said "we love you, you're very special", that would be equivalent. But that never happened.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I heard the capitol hill rioters were blm too

So why was Trump initially supportive of them?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Violence associated with any right wing protest seems to generate a huge reaction compared to violence associated with a left wing protest.

Right now there is vandalism going on across multiple cities and it is barely a blip on the radar because nobody expects any better from violent leftists and this type of thing is so damn common from them.

The moment any violence occurs at a right wing protest the reaction from people not sympathetic to their politics is huge. Hence why before the capitol breach many left leaning poster on here had to keep referring to Charlottesville due to a single scumbag with their car.

They can refer to these events easily because they are so few and far between in combination with the huge coverage that you can remember them easily.

Violent left wing related protests happen so often that you would not even know where to start when citing examples and if they created a list they would look like this.

It also seems most incidents of violence I see at right wing protests involve "counter protesters" showing up to start a fight.

If a protest is right wing only without agitators showing up to fight there is less chance of violence compared to many left with protests where the presence of counter protesters is not needed to kick off violence and damage. The presence of another persons property is enough to kick things off.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Violence associated with any right wing protest seems to generate a huge reaction compared to violence associated with a left wing protest...

Just on this, I believe the answer lies in motivation. What motivates the far right crowd? Exclusion. Exclusion based on race, based on ethnicity, based on religious belief. What motivates the far left crowd? Usually its the fight for inclusion regardless of difference - black lives matter (the unspoken part "as much as everybody else" should not be ignored).

Victims. Who are the victims of each crowd? You tend to get a LOT of property damage at far left actions and protests. Don't get me wrong, a burned-out place of business affects a multitude of lives. The owner/s. The employees. The customers. Burning business property is (I think) the absolute wrong way to go because its effects ARE far reaching and end up hurting the community more than protest organisers realise. But at the end of the day its bricks and mortar. Physical things.

At far right actions and protests its PEOPLE who are the target. People hurt. People killed. Property damage is usually secondary to acts levelled against people for being the incorrect skin colour or religious outlook. When people are the target - when human lives are torn apart - these aren't as easily replaced as property damage is.

Two sides. Two outlooks.

 

[Lethality]

So why was Trump initially supportive of them?

I was being sarcastic.

 

[Slartibartfast]

 

[Slartibartfast]

 

[Ben The Donkey]

Just on this, I believe the answer lies in motivation. What motivates the far right crowd? Exclusion. Exclusion based on race, based on ethnicity, based on religious belief. What motivates the far left crowd? Usually its the fight for inclusion regardless of difference - black lives matter (the unspoken part "as much as everybody else" should not be ignored).

Victims. Who are the victims of each crowd? You tend to get a LOT of property damage at far left actions and protests. Don't get me wrong, a burned-out place of business affects a multitude of lives. The owner/s. The employees. The customers. Burning business property is (I think) the absolute wrong way to go because its effects ARE far reaching and end up hurting the community more than protest organisers realise. But at the end of the day its bricks and mortar. Physical things.

At far right actions and protests its PEOPLE who are the target. People hurt. People killed. Property damage is usually secondary to acts levelled against people for being the incorrect skin colour or religious outlook. When people are the target - when human lives are torn apart - these aren't as easily replaced as property damage is.

Two sides. Two outlooks.

Alright. Against my better judgement, I'm going to buy in to this.
I'm going to ignore the subjective assessment on motivation you've made. I'm going to ignore your "unspoken part".

I'd like to focus upon one thing only, at this point: "...when human lives are torn apart - these aren't as easily replaced as property damage is."
I'm going to ask you to explain your thinking and justify that.

 

[Pessimistic]

Violence associated with any right wing protest seems to generate a huge reaction compared to violence associated with a left wing protest.

Right now there is vandalism going on across multiple cities and it is barely a blip on the radar because nobody expects any better from violent leftists and this type of thing is so damn common from them.

The moment any violence occurs at a right wing protest the reaction from people not sympathetic to their politics is huge. Hence why before the capitol breach many left leaning poster on here had to keep referring to Charlottesville due to a single scumbag with their car.

They can refer to these events easily because they are so few and far between in combination with the huge coverage that you can remember them easily.

Violent left wing related protests happen so often that you would not even know where to start when citing examples and if they created a list they would look like this.

It also seems most incidents of violence I see at right wing protests involve "counter protesters" showing up to start a fight.

If a protest is right wing only without agitators showing up to fight there is less chance of violence compared to many left with protests where the presence of counter protesters is not needed to kick off violence and damage. The presence of another persons property is enough to kick things off.

You could swap left and fight in your post and the same number of people would agree with it

 

[Crankyhawk]

Fighting fascists is pretty heroic.

They aren’t fascists
(Otherwise we will cop some pedantic bs...)

 

[Ghost Patrol]

They aren’t fascists

Not anymore!

 

[Pessimistic]

Lots of parallels with hitlers fascism, but the key ingredient there was people who stood in his way found themselves executed and the executioners got free passage in the legal system. So Putin is the closer comparison, though nominally communist.

Although there was a plan, people weren’t so scared they didn’t stand up to Trump when the chips were down

Capitol rioters could get off without charge

Agents and prosecutors in the US Justice Department are reportedly debating whether to let some of the Capitol rioters off without charge, amid fears the huge number of cases would swamp the courts.

www.news.com.au

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Alright. Against my better judgement, I'm going to buy in to this.
I'm going to ignore the subjective assessment on motivation you've made. I'm going to ignore your "unspoken part".

I'd like to focus upon one thing only, at this point: "...when human lives are torn apart - these aren't as easily replaced as property damage is."
I'm going to ask you to explain your thinking and justify that.

Fair enough, I'll be as objective as I can. Meet Person A. An adult of unknown age, unknown gender, unknown ethnicity and unknown occupation. Person A's financial status is also unknown but lets say that Person A owns a house and some property up the bush. A random lightning strike causes a bushfire and Person A's home is destroyed. Person A is alive but the house is gone.

Meanwhile down the road Person B, with the same surrounding unknowns about their status, isn't so lucky. Fire catches them at the top of the paddock and then changes direction with the wind. Person B is dead but their home is intact.

Person A had a lot of good memories in that home, but it can be rebuilt. A home admittedly is harder to replace than a house (emotional attachment, you see? A house becomes a home through the lives lived within it) but it can be done. Emotional detachment can be reapplied anew.

Person B is dead. The home they had around them is dead too. The structure becomes a house once more and the possessions within become mere objects of various uses. It is a shelter, but nothing more than bricks and mortar without someone to assign emotional value to it.

Stripped of all subjective inflection what is truly worth more, the human life or the physical property?

 

[Carringbush2010]

This guy explains 12 points of fascism as a good thing?

 

[Slartibartfast]

This guy explains 12 points of fascism as a good thing?

No, he is highlighting the points which Trump qualified by doing.
Did you just scan the clip??
He is fervent left Winger.

The 14 points were from “the characteristics of a fascist “ which I posted, he posted that in the comments of that clip.

 

[Carringbush2010]

No, he is highlighting the points which Trump qualified by doing.
Did you just scan the clip??
He is fervent left Winger.

The 14 points were from “the characteristics of a fascist “ which I posted, he posted that in the comments of that clip.

Yeah I get that, I watched the video and skimmed over the 14 points you posted.

Regardless, this guy noted 12 'good' things trump done which are also 12 points of fascism - in his words.

Those characteristics you've pasted are not solely exclusive to 'fascism'

For example, all those 14 points bar 5 and 9 you could tie to communism also.

Further, I understand this is 'sarcasm' (for want of a better word) from this fella, I get that.

Want for national security and 'America first' (patriotism) is not necessarily a bad thing, it's how it's obtained that is important. Just one example in there.

To put it mildly the way trump went about those 'points' were certainly not mild.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Yeah I get that, I watched the video and skimmed over the 14 points you posted.

Regardless, this guy noted 12 'good' things trump done which are also 12 points of fascism - in his words.

Those characteristics you've pasted are not solely exclusive to 'fascism'

For example, all those 14 points bar 5 and 9 you could tie to communism also.

Further, I understand this is 'sarcasm' (for want of a better word) from this fella, I get that.

Want for national security and 'America first' (patriotism) is not necessarily a bad thing, it's how it's obtained that is important. Just one example in there.

To put it mildly the way trump went about those 'points' were certainly not mild.

He is just highlighting or acknowledging what Trump did and how that corresponds with fascism.
No trait is exclusive to any one kind of person or political bent.

 

[Carringbush2010]

He is just highlighting or acknowledging what Trump did and how that corresponds with fascism.
No trait is exclusive to any one kind of person or political bent.

Not disagreeing with what this guy highlighted, he did not highlight the how trump went about things.

If he's trying to serve an epiphany to trump supporters, they'll just look at this video all confused. For example as soon as he said 'control the media' immediately just about every trump supporter is gonna go 'yep this guy's right, that is a good thing'. In fact at least some of those supporters won't be able to 'read between the lines' if you will. So it's almost pointless.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Not disagreeing with what this guy highlighted, he did not highlight the how trump went about things.

If he's trying to serve an epiphany to trump supporters, they'll just look at this video all confused. For example as soon as he said 'control the media' immediately just about every trump supporter is gonna go 'yep this guy's right, that is a good thing'. In fact at least some of those supporters won't be able to 'read between the lines' if you will. So it's almost pointless.

Trump supporters do not tune in to him. They doing want to learn.
His base is left wing, he puts out a video on a daily basis. Has quite a big following.
I find his perspective refreshing from the usual you tube stuff. Not afraid of highlighting the weakness of the left While being Not fearful of what The right will say about his thoughts.