Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Violence begets violence

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Violence begets violence

    I know this is a strange place for a rant since while I do post here from time I don't do it a lot. Well I was on facebook and I see that C20 is now available for pre-order and since I didn't get in the Kickstarter I want to pre-order a copy. Now while doing my little dance of joy another WoD friend of mine has been called a Nazi just for saying what the subject says. Now people are calling him bad names and talking how we need to stomp all Nazi in the street. Do people like this not understand that acting like that is no different than what you are fighting against? Heck if you really want to stop engage them in debate especially the most radical idea, because those are the ones that will crumble like a house of cards. Why don't people understand part of the reason we have Free Speech is so that the idiots are exposed to the light of day instead of letting them fester with whispers in back rooms where they can go.

    Oh and the worst part of the story is I still haven't pre-ordered my copy of C20 since I can't decided between the PDF or the Deluxe copy. Decisions can be so hard.

  • #2
    I am sorry that your friend has been unfairly (I assume) called a nazi. But honestly, I can't agree with you that nonviolence is the foolproof solution you make it out to be in this post. The so-called "alt-right" are incredibly skilled at twisting an argument in knots to make themselves appear more reasonable than they are. And at the end of the day, even if you debate circles around a neo-nazi, you've still accomplished nothing to actually put a stop to their spread of hate and misinformation. Ultimately they're still a hateful person who is going to continue propagating violence against others and brainwashing the naive into their way of thinking when you're not there to make them look foolish. Where in World War 2 history were the nazis ever thwarted by civil discourse and logical reasoning? Conversely, direct, physical action gets immediate results. I think I'm safe in assuming this is about Richard Spenser? Cause he has since expressed hesitance to appear in public, which is a 100% positive thing if you ask me.
    Last edited by Charlaquin; 01-26-2017, 06:12 PM.


    Onyx Path Forum Moderator

    My mod voice is red. I use it so you know when I'm speaking in an official capacity, not as an indication of tone.

    Comment


    • #3
      If you advocate for genocide, you're gonna get pushback.


      Just call me Lex.

      Female pronouns for me, please.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Charlaquin View Post
        I am sorry that your friend has been infairly (I assume) called a nazi. But honestly, I can't agree that need nonviolence is the foolproof solution you make it out to be in this post. The so-called "alt-right" are incredibly skilled at twisting an argument in knots to make themselves appear more reasonable than they are. And at the end of the day, even if you debate circles around a neo-nazi, you've still accomplished nothing to actually put a stop to their spread of hate and misinformation. Ultimately they're still a hateful person who is going to continue propagating violence against others and brainwashing the naive into their way of thinking when you're not there to make them look foolish. Where in World War 2 history were the nazis ever thwarted by civil discourse and logical reasoning? Conversely, direct, physical action gets immediate results. I think I'm safe in assuming this is about Richard Spenser? Cause he has since expressed hesitance to appear in public, which is a 100% positive thing if you ask me.
        If I am debating a radical I don't see them as my audience, I see the rational people who have not made a decision as my audience. I don't think you can change any radicals mind but you can stop others from going down that path. I have to disagree with you on that one. I like to have the bad people right out front for all to see that way you can keep track of them and know what they are doing. When they hide that is when they are dangerous, that is when they can spread their hate when nobody is listening.

        You are right about how civil discourse did not stop the Nazi's rising to power, but they also used violence to silence those who opposed them. Hence part of the reason I don't like the idea of using violence to silence those we disagree with. It was a tactic both in Germany and Italy and we know how that ended. I guess it's part I don't like the idea that just because that guy did something I can do, if that other guy is scum be better than that.

        I didn't ask if it was about Richard Spenser but you are most likely right, as for Jason (my friend) he is fine and more of a WTF moment instead actually taking offense.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Charlaquin View Post
          I am sorry that your friend has been infairly (I assume) called a nazi. But honestly, I can't agree that need nonviolence is the foolproof solution you make it out to be in this post. The so-called "alt-right" are incredibly skilled at twisting an argument in knots to make themselves appear more reasonable than they are. And at the end of the day, even if you debate circles around a neo-nazi, you've still accomplished nothing to actually put a stop to their spread of hate and misinformation.
          On the other hand, if you beat them down or kill them outright, they get to play the "victim" card and further reinforce their message by making you look like the unreasonable one. Which, if you just used violence to resolve an argument, you might well be.

          If peaceful engagement is truly impossible (and you should never assume it isn't before you've tried), the next-best thing is to do an endrun around the crazies and speak to the more reasonable people around them. Hate may be impossible to stamp out completely, but with effort it can be marginalized to the extent that it has a minimal impact on politics or culture.
          Last edited by semicasual; 01-26-2017, 06:11 PM. Reason: Ninja'd!


          On the frontier of the Wild South, there's only one woman with the grit to take on its most dangerous outlaws and bring them Back Alive, or Maybe Dead.

          Avatar by K.S. Brenowitz

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JBRocky View Post
            If I am debating a radical I don't see them as my audience, I see the rational people who have not made a decision as my audience. I don't think you can change any radicals mind but you can stop others from going down that path. I have to disagree with you on that one. I like to have the bad people right out front for all to see that way you can keep track of them and know what they are doing. When they hide that is when they are dangerous, that is when they can spread their hate when nobody is listening.

            You are right about how civil discourse did not stop the Nazi's rising to power, but they also used violence to silence those who opposed them. Hence part of the reason I don't like the idea of using violence to silence those we disagree with. It was a tactic both in Germany and Italy and we know how that ended. I guess it's part I don't like the idea that just because that guy did something I can do, if that other guy is scum be better than that.

            I didn't ask if it was about Richard Spenser but you are most likely right, as for Jason (my friend) he is fine and more of a WTF moment instead actually taking offense.
            I gotcha. I'm certainly not going to condemn anyone for not engaging in violence against nazis. I'd be a hypocrite if I did, as I can't ever see myself punching another person in the face, even scum of the earth like Sean Spenser. By the same token though, I'm not going to condemn the person who did. A good punch in the face is the least thing a man who literally advocates genocide without a shred of irony deserves.


            Onyx Path Forum Moderator

            My mod voice is red. I use it so you know when I'm speaking in an official capacity, not as an indication of tone.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by semicasual View Post
              On the other hand, if you beat them down or kill them outright, they get to play the "victim" card and further reinforce their message by making you look like the unreasonable one. Which, if you just used violence to resolve an argument, you might well be.

              If peaceful engagement is truly impossible (and you should never assume it isn't before you've tried), the next-best thing is to do an endrun around the crazies and speak to the more reasonable people around them. Hate may be impossible to stamp out completely, but with effort it can be marginalized to the extent that it has a minimal impact on politics or culture.
              The whole "ignore them because you're above that level of nonsense" got one of them into the White House.


              Just call me Lex.

              Female pronouns for me, please.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by atamajakki View Post
                The whole "ignore them because you're above that level of nonsense" got one of them into the White House.
                I didn't say anything about ignoring them. And I don't think anybody ignored Ol' Donny Boy. But not enough effort was made to try to turn away his more reluctant supporters, either. Remember - he still lost the popular vote. If the Democratic campaign's had been a little stronger and appealed more to voters in swing states, I believe things would be different now.

                Oddly, being in power makes Donny more vulnerable in some ways. Now we can point to his failings as they happen, instead of issuing warnings that were ignored because Trump's supporters rationalized his rhetoric as a temporary thing.


                On the frontier of the Wild South, there's only one woman with the grit to take on its most dangerous outlaws and bring them Back Alive, or Maybe Dead.

                Avatar by K.S. Brenowitz

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JBRocky View Post
                  I know this is a strange place for a rant since while I do post here from time I don't do it a lot. Well I was on facebook and I see that C20 is now available for pre-order and since I didn't get in the Kickstarter I want to pre-order a copy. Now while doing my little dance of joy another WoD friend of mine has been called a Nazi just for saying what the subject says. Now people are calling him bad names and talking how we need to stomp all Nazi in the street. Do people like this not understand that acting like that is no different than what you are fighting against? Heck if you really want to stop engage them in debate especially the most radical idea, because those are the ones that will crumble like a house of cards. Why don't people understand part of the reason we have Free Speech is so that the idiots are exposed to the light of day instead of letting them fester with whispers in back rooms where they can go.

                  Oh and the worst part of the story is I still haven't pre-ordered my copy of C20 since I can't decided between the PDF or the Deluxe copy. Decisions can be so hard.
                  All I know is that the more peaceful and reasonable methods have been tried for decades now and the stupid has just grown. Sometimes, the sledgehammer approach is needed to get the point across. The days when people respected intelligence and a well crafted argument are long gone. Dead and buried beneath such things as reality TV, calling someone an "Einstein" being an insult, and the loudest voice being considered the correct one.
                  Last edited by Papa Bear; 01-26-2017, 07:55 PM.


                  - If you must be ridiculous, I must ridicule you.
                  - Those that can give up essential liberties in exchange for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by atamajakki View Post
                    If you advocate for genocide, you're gonna get pushback.

                    Pretty much.

                    No other way around it in my eyes.


                    PENTEX SUCKS.

                    I'm a gamer. I'm conservative. We exist.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It's kind of funny how life is so often a circle.

                      Back during the Civil Rights era, white supremacists would often attack liberal marchers and protesters and then defend themselves by saying something like, "Freedom of speech? Sure you have that, but you don't have freedom from consequences. If you say things that piss people off, someone's gonna come over and punch you in the face. That's just how it is, and that's the price you might have to pay for saying something that makes me mad. Open your mouth and speak up at your own risk."

                      Now we have liberals advocating punching white supremacists in the face and basically using that same argument. I can't help but chuckle at the irony of that.

                      But yeah, I mean realistically, that's just how it is.

                      Simply because you can legally say (almost) anything you want doesn't mean there won't be consequences for what you say, and sometimes those consequences could be in the form of fists or even bullets. Obviously anybody using violence on someone because of what they said is committing a crime, and I suppose you can take comfort in the fact that the law will be on your side - you can have the attacker arrested. But that's still a small comfort to anyone who is intimidated into keeping their mouth shut through the threat of physical violence.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by AnubisXy View Post
                        It's kind of funny how life is so often a circle.

                        Back during the Civil Rights era, white supremacists would often attack liberal marchers and protesters and then defend themselves by saying something like, "Freedom of speech? Sure you have that, but you don't have freedom from consequences. If you say things that piss people off, someone's gonna come over and punch you in the face. That's just how it is, and that's the price you might have to pay for saying something that makes me mad. Open your mouth and speak up at your own risk."

                        Now we have liberals advocating punching white supremacists in the face and basically using that same argument. I can't help but chuckle at the irony of that.
                        The difference is, only one of these groups is made up of people who actively advocate for genocide.


                        Onyx Path Forum Moderator

                        My mod voice is red. I use it so you know when I'm speaking in an official capacity, not as an indication of tone.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Charlaquin View Post
                          The difference is, only one of these groups is made up of people who actively advocate for genocide.
                          You're welcome to justify it however you like, but at the end of the day, it comes down to defending the use of violence against someone for saying things you don't care for. And that is a very dangerous road to go down, wherein people begin trying to legitimize violence as a way to stifle speech.

                          Fortunately, at least in the US, physically attacking people who advocate for genocide (or gay rights or any other position) is a crime, and hopefully anyone who does use violence or the threat of violence to try and stifle someone else's free speech, no matter whether how deplorable it may be, is arrested and punished in a court of law.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by AnubisXy View Post

                            You're welcome to justify it however you like, but at the end of the day, it comes down to defending the use of violence against someone for saying things you don't care for. And that is a very dangerous road to go down, wherein people begin trying to legitimize violence as a way to stifle speech.

                            Fortunately, at least in the US, physically attacking people who advocate for genocide (or gay rights or any other position) is a crime, and hopefully anyone who does use violence or the threat of violence to try and stifle someone else's free speech, no matter whether how deplorable it may be, is arrested and punished in a court of law.
                            Pretty much this IMO.

                            Speech is free in the US, the government shouldn't have the ability to clamp down on it, nor through inaction against criminal activity allow it to be suppressed.

                            That means I don't support him getting punched for what he says. Now, if he does something illegal, I fully support the idea of tossing his ass in jail for as long as reasonably possible.

                            I *really* don't like the argument "He promotes Nazi beliefs with bad logic and reasoning, therefore he's part of the Nazis from 60 years ago therefore I get to punch him." The Nazis of WWII are dead (well apart from a handful that are probably still alive). They were violent and were countered with violence... AFTER they started the violence. It's the time gap and order of action/reaction.

                            Or to put it another way attacking him because he spews vile filth, because the country/world is better off without him can be rephrased to "We must purge this filth from our streets to have a good, right, just and strong society." Which pretty much IS the kind of thing the Nazis would state.


                            All that having been said, I *also* fully support and encourage businesses and individuals to exercise their right to refuse to serve people in his case.





                            Odd_Canuck is not a topical medication or food product and is not to be taken internally or seriously.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Inciting genocide is against the law as well. Spencer goes around it by advocating for a 'white only' nation without really suggesting a way to get there while also going on and on about how horrible 'certain people' are.

                              For what it's worth I don't believe he should have been punched. It's against the law to begin with, but I think, especially with one as tapped into the internet as Spencer, it would only create more followers for him. People who might not have fallen for his rhetoric might think what he says deserves a second chance.

                              That said we don't know who the puncher is and he's made, through proxies, threats against specific individuals, it could be one of them getting revenge.
                              Last edited by nofather; 01-26-2017, 09:55 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X