Anti-fascist action is self-defense.
Comment on I'm surprised it hasn't been taken down yet ...well maybe not that surprised
GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks agoTelling other people to commit premeditate murder is.
todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
The Proud Boys and other militias believe the exact same thing, just swap anti-fascist for anti-traitors who want to destroy America. You’re advocating for violence just like they are, and both extremist sides are POSITIVE they’re doing the right thing.
Shapillon@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Fascists: I want systemic violence against anyone that isn’t a white cis het man.
Leftists: I want violence against people who advocate for systemic violence against marginalised groups.
Absolutely undistinguishable :p
GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Yeah, there are differences. It’s not like I support people like Fuentes. I’ve posted several times about him being a reprehensible bastard. But in many ways that matter there are serious similarities or even exact mirrors. Both:
I magically know who should die so I’m right. I’m righteously saving my country, so I don’t need checks and balances or the mandate of the population.
I don’t care if it escalates national violence, even starts a war and gets others killed - I have the right to make the choice that forces consequences on others.
Good people are going to cheer, bad people are going to live in fear and give up their wicked ways, and I’m going to be a hero.
Abandon peaceful, legal options. It doesn’t matter if multiple challenges to Trump are happening at all levels of government, my way is better and we don’t even need to wait.
I’m powerful enough/my side is that the bad guys will die and we’ll win. I’m so scary and capable, you don’t even know.
I’m going to talk as if I’m a big scary monster of a combatant, and actually sit on my ass posting “fuck them” and telling other people to kill. <The doxing thread was hilarious before it got taken down. People were all “they’re not near me” and “I hope someone else does it”. Buddy, they’re the guy who talks shit at the bar and stalls until the bouncer arrives then tells everyone they’re lucky. If I was wrong they’d be doing something (and ruining/ending a lot of lives in the process), not talking BS on Lemmy. I’m not telling people to actually act, I’m saying I don’t need to worry about 99.999% of the big tough internet men doing so. The murder fetishists in this thread are all hoping if the message reaches thousands, one mentally unstable murderer will assassinate Fuentes for them so they can cheer from the bleachers without consequences.>
crmsnbleyd@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
Not on the side of killing people here but one side wants to kill minorities and other groups while the other wants to kill people who want to kill minorities.
Would you say painting WWII Nazis as evil and fighting a war against them is the same as them invading Poland to subjugate the natives?
GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Would you say painting WWII Nazis as evil and fighting a war against them is the same as them invading Poland to subjugate the natives?
I wouldn’t say that, but I understand why you’d ask. The Nazis weren’t opposed by sending any civilian angry enough into Germany to shoot people they thought were fascists. When Germany invaded Poland, other countries declared war (although they several months before they actually engaged in combat.) In another comment I wrote why I think formal war with rules of war is different than vigilante killing. In a 2nd, I said that if it comes down to army vs. army civil war I’d say fight hard. In yet another, I told someone they were trying to be the WW2 Allies without the army or mandate.
GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
one side wants to kill minorities and other groups while the other wants to kill people who want to kill minorities.
Both sides want to kill millions, without trial, on the basis of perceived danger. There’s no moral high ground. No rules of war, no official oversight, just civilians murdering their countrymen in large numbers. Even the people pushing violence are pushing the idea that “if they want to kill then we’ll kill them first”.
TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 5 weeks ago
[deleted]GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Combatant is different. If this was a civil war or something similar (and thus ruled by laws of war) and someone was a combatant you’d be absolutely correct. But the people here are talking about killing a civilian, as civilians, while not at war, and without trial which is definitely murder.
BluesF@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Who gets to decide it’s a civil war?
GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Historically it’s leaders like Presidents, governors, and generals. Not forum posts.
Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I didn’t tell anybody to commit murder. I’m just watching hopefully.
GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Ok, I have those thoughts sometimes too. I usually cut them off right away because I don’t think I have the right to kill people outside of the context of a war etc. But regardless of moral implications, there’s nothing illegal about thinking.
Image
A lot of folks are calling for actual violence though. It’s all over the thread.
OrnateLuna@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 weeks ago
I am genuinely curious why do you think that you have a right to kill someone in war but not outside of it. Like what are the main differences there (unless you are using law as a basis for this)
GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
No worries. War is unavoidable at times - dictators exist, people get desperate, and so on. There are legalities involved, but they aren’t my main concern. Morally, there’s a difference to me between killing someone because I hate them and killing someone because I’m protecting my homeland. There are strict rules to war that help keep things somewhat ethical - war is never going to be “clean”. Policies like rules of engagement, being able to surrender, treatment of POWs, genuinely avoiding targetting civilians (the world could use more of that right now) and stopping when your country tells you to all matter to me.
Soldiers are not asked to make decisions about who they’ll kill, thus the individuals are not being relied upon for justice. That is a big difference from vigilantism, where a person or mob of people decides who lives and dies. Ideally the leaders of the military and country are making sure a war is necessary last resort, and if that isn’t happening then other nations should be condemning and opposing them. It’s like how I think nations need prisons, but I don’t think I should be allowed to take someone hostage because I’m pretty sure they deserve it.