Comment by afiori | Hacker News Reader

Comment by afiori | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I don't think there is any respect in this reply.

> They're so nonviolent in comparison that the alt right has to create false information about their tactics (for example the "fast drying concrete in the milkshakes" lie that was completely false).

Literally it was a police officer who saw and reported "what looked like" quick drying concrete.

> lie that was completely false

There were people associated with antifa publicizing this.

> I sincerely doubt he would have made a both sides argument here with a weak resistance movement that hasn't even killed a single person yet.

There is no "both side" there is violent extremists, whether they agree or not between themselves is irrelevant.

> hasn't even killed a single person yet.

Is this seriously the threshold for political violence and abandoning political rationality? (And anyway after Tacoma it is not for a lack of trying).

Right now what I see is one side being allowed with mainstream opinion of defending political violence. Antifa is performing political violence. Throwing a milkshake is not self-defense, it is political violence. Alt-right extremism is also political violence. I only see despicable people in both groups. I see no reasons why one side faults should excuse the other.

By equating "milkshake throwing" with the violence of the alt-right (using guns to murder tens/hundreds of innocent civilians) you portray both sides as equal when one side has clearly done something that is much more morally reprehensible.

This form of "enlightened centrism" is insidious because while it claims to be "neutral" and "unbiased", in reality, it artificially gives a moral advantage to one side (in this case the alt-right). It also ignores that sometimes sacrifices are necessary for the greater good.

Do you disagree with either of the following two points?

1. Even if milkshake throwing is bad, it is objectively less bad than shooting innocent civilians.

2. The "political violence" committed by the left is much smaller compared to the political violence committed by the right.

Are you unaware that of the two mass shootings that occurred in the US yesterday, one of them was perpetrated by a self-described 'leftist, anime fan, and metalhead' that supported Antifa?

I literally see no reason to compare them. Not one.

To answer: 1. true 2. agree.

So What?

The only thing you are doing is painting a romantic ideal of antifa as freedom fighters, robin hoods of the people. Stop. They answer violence with violence.

For me, the crux of the matter is that people use Antifa to claim that both the left and the right engage in equal amounts of violence or that both are equally morally bad/good.

I was pointing out that this isn't the case since Antifa uses several orders of magnitude less violence than its right-wing counterparts. Thus, antifa cannot be used to justify the statement that "the left and right are morally equivalent".

I never painted antifa in a romantic light, my point about sacrifices being made for the greater good was in reference to policies that help minorities at the cost of harming the majority.

> For me, the crux of the matter is that people use Antifa to claim that both the left and the right engage in equal amounts of violence or that both are equally morally bad/good.

For me that's simply irrelevant, because how "bad" your enemy is doesn't give you any additional leeway. You can use violence to directly prevent greater violence, for example in self-defense. Throwing milk-shakes at someone achieves nothing. Even when a murderer is arrested, the cops don't get to spit at them while they wait for trial. It doesn't matter in the least how bad a person is. It's a red herring from the word go, due process and same rights for all is a very clear standard, and normalizing violating it because "others are worse", leaves us with nothing.

How conveniently you forget how Steve Scalise was shot, how Bike Lock Man cracked open an old man's skull(and got away with probation), and many other things. The neonazis have done shootings, but the far left attempted to assassinate a senator. Both are pretty bad.

Sooner or later I would seriously need a list of trustworthy citations for the plethora of cases of antifa violence.

> The neonazis have done shootings, but the far left attempted to assassinate a senator.

Gabby Giffords would like a word with you about assassination attempts from right wingers. Or is she only a representative?

I am saying both are violent, not that one's violence excuses the other or that they are perfect moral equivalents.

There is also the danger that if you keep equating Antifa with the right wing extremists shooting people you create a space on the ultra left for people who would do those things and I’m sure in any large movement those people are there.

It’s not like left wing groups haven’t done horrible things in decades past.

That said at the moment in the US it’s pretty clear that the body count (literal) is piling up on the right wing side.

Honestly if people could just stop shooting people for stupid reasons it would be awesome.

As an external observer it seems like the US is slowly sliding towards a worse state of affairs, the government seems unable to get it in hand, dangerous times.

Not much better over in the UK either, we have the ever present threat of the islamists, the border question in Northern Ireland hanging over everyone’s heads (I’m just old enough to to remember the IRA blowing up town centres on the mainland) and a group of people who are seriously pissed off brexit hasn’t happened yet, We already had a lovely MP shot to death by a right wing nut bag and there is a really ugly mood, people are really pissed off with the present state of affairs and another recession caused by economic fallout of brexit could light the touch paper.

I think there is a significant (though small) chance we’ll see troops on the streets peacekeeping over the next two years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com