CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
I don't care if they label them fascist or not. Whatever you want to call them, they are evil and use force and violence to shut down anyone who opposes their godless religion. What we do know is that they use the Communist symbol to represent themselves, and Communism is even worse than Nazism. Nazism targets a group that it sees as a minority. Communism targets all of its own people.
Some of them are, absolutely. It also consists of anarchists, liberals, socialists, social democrats, ect. Antifa is just an agreement across these groups to oppose fascism. It's nothing more than a flag to rally under, and is not related to any one ideology.
So what would you call a group composed of libertarians, tea partiers, Neo Nazis, and the KKK, that uses violence to shut down liberals from speaking.... Anti Communists or a bunch of mindless un-American thugs?
I agree. Being intolerant enough to want to deport or (at the extreme end) kill your 'opponents' is pretty fascist. What a good thing we have people willing to stand up for our side against these tyrants, huh?
I like how you talk about a dislike for fascism while posting arguments and comics calling for or condoning violence against peaceful democratic opposition. Forcible suppression of democratic opposition is one of the defining features of fascism.
The anti-fascist fascist are, indeed fascist. They use brown shirt tactics to silence and censor those who disagree with them; they disrupt peaceful gatherings; try to deprive people of their rights of freedom of speech/expression; assault and battery those who disagree with them; engage in vandalism and arson. Yup, they are fascists.
The anti-fascists fascists are fascists. Their name is classic Orwellian double-speak. They use brown shirt tactics to silence those whose opinions they disagree with.
Just what is it with the right wing? You invoke the name of an anti-fascist socialist to support your idea that anti-fascists are secretly fascists? And then you accuse the LEFT OF DOUBLE SPEAK? That is simply UNBELIEVABLE.
They use brown shirt tactics
Listen to me carefully, young man. Fascism is not a set of "tactics". Fascism is a political ideology.
I need to repeat again what I said earlier. You are UNBELIEVABLE. Apparently we are to believe that you are actually stupid enough to listen to and believe fascists when they accuse their opposition of being the fascists. That is so far beyond retarded that the only analogy I have is turning up at Hitler's bunker, and being persuaded by Hitler that your own army are the Nazis.
The argument the opposition gives is that "Their name is Anti-fascist, so that means they're against fascism" to that I say, guess what Nazism is called? National Socialism, going by the name, Nazism is also Socialism... right?
Or if that doesn't work how about DPRK democratic people's republic of Korea (North Korea) has "democratic" in it's name. If you're against Kim Jong Un, you're against Democracy. Names don't mean anything. As for Fascism? It's more of a tactic than an actual Ideology. Fascism is the forceful subjugation of your people, the violent eradication of any form of opposition and pure authoritarian and totalitarian control over your nation. there were left-wing fascists such as Stalin and Mao, and there were right wing fascists such as Hitler and Mussolini... Antifa perfectly fits the first two part of the definition.
Attacking their opposition, physically harming them, forcing them into their own beliefs. The only thing missing is institutional influence and pure authoritarian power, otherwise Antifa is quite close to being Fascist.
Actual quote from an Antifa member (spoken at one of their college "Demonstrations:"): "You're a fucking fascist, and if you don't shut your fucking mouth, we will find your house and fucking burn it to the ground, you piece of shit."
In my experience with Antifa members, if you say ANYTHING that conflicts with their beliefs, you immediately get labelled as one of these many fun terms: Racist, Homophone, Xenophobe, Sexist, Bigot, Transphobe, or a White Supremacist.
OR, they straight up punch you in the face and threaten to set fire to your home.
In a social debate and expression of ideas, using those terms isn't a way to combat another person's argument. It is a way to shut them down so that they can't continue to retort to you. It is an attempt to remove their credibility and make it so that you look like the hero of society, and they just get reduced to a racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobe who hates the poor.
Antifa doesn't want to listen to ideas. They don't want to be adults. They used to want to just hold their hands over their ears so they didn't have to hear what you were saying. Now, they hold those hands over your mouth, so that you simply can't get those ideas out.
They are a group of fascists. A mere group of children who subscribe to a socialist ideology and are pissed off that the government won't take money away from every middle-class white person and give it to them so that they can pursue their dreams of become a Gender Studies or History of Racial Inequality professor.
They don't know anything about how the world works, nor do they understand what a civilized society looks like, NOR do they understand what it means to contribute to society, and then get back what you put into it.
Hahaha...Listen dear, you can give me references and links to articles and I STILL won't understand what logical path you took to conclude that ANTIFA are Communists.
I am going to read your articles and I will use critical thinking. And, I will very surely come to a different conclusion. I will take the time to explain to you my logic in hope that you will give me your's but instead I will get a one line statement. In the end, I will still NOT understand your position because you would have just refused to explain it to me, or you will use the "she is a liberal" card to excuse yourself from taking the time to extensively explain your ideas.
SO, if you are going to throw statements like beads out of a window during Mardi fucking Gras, I ask to stop my wasting my fucking time.
The links are them wearing attire with the communist symbol on them and holding up flags and signs with the Communist symbol on them. This isn't exactly rocket science.
Olala...I'm not trying to be smart. I don't need to. I'm simply asking you to not just give me a sentence and links because I know I'm going to spend time to answer you and you won't.
But thank you for proving me wrong and giving me more than a sentence. I will get back to you with my argument but before I have a question: are communists part of antifa ?
That is why I used the term fascistic to describe the behavior and tactics as resembling those of the Fascisti.
I think that some of this resulted from ANTIFA folks calling neo-Nazis and Republicans "Fascists" as if those groups were actually Fascist. (What is really funny is that while neo-Nazis are not actually fascists, most are not even National Socialists. There are actually neo-Nazis who rail against the welfare state!) The liberal arts "education" many of these millennial libtards received did not include basic logic, critical thinking, or an exposure to any history that was not presented to support some theory or other.
Once Fascist became an epithet for anyone ANTIFA folks thought conservative (hence evil and racist), it became popular to call ANTIFA "Fascists", largely to mock them with a sense .
I think the carelessness with which modern Americans use words is problematic when discussing everything, but especially politics. I blame the social science professors and theorists. They just make up words or give old ones new meanings, and then define them in the first two chapters of their books.
That is how we ended up with the Post-modernists, who are distinct from the Futurists, despite the fact that the future is what is after modern times.
I do agree that the issue is lack of basic logic, critical thinking and history. Masses of people are easily manipulated by media that throws words here and there like they have no meaning. Media today has decided to be part of politics so, it makes sense that they push their ideas. Now it is the reader's job to question everything people tell them. This sort of questioning is taught.
Calling people liberals, or Fascist or Communist, or Nazis, conservatives without even knowing what these terms mean is the lowest form of judgment. We do that today to abstain from argument and from trying to understand each other. So yes, it is problematic when discussing because people have become idiots. And I have chosen my words carefully: Complete idiots. We give labels to each other without the slightest idea of what the person really thinks or even what the label means.
So, are ANTIFAs fascistic? Maybe. I say maybe because I don't know exactly how ANTIFAs fight against Fascism.
I don't know what fascistic means because honestly I looked it up and I have definitions that disagree with your's.
Even if your definition was correct, what exactly are fascist tactics and behavior?
My point being, whenever we are going to label people, we should make sure they label themselves that way or we understand very well their ideas and the label before giving it to them. The latter of course requires us to sit down listen to the other person, read about their theory, make our opinion, question our opinions... Instead we kill each other, insult each other, hate each other...
I'm ranting. I apologize. You made great points. +1
People make allusions to historical political philosophies without knowing much about the philosophies at all. This causes confusion.
The original Fascisti (Italian Fascists) were Mussolini's fascist crowd. Fascism's economics were corporatist, where the business owners were in tight cooperation with the worker syndicates and the government. The general political goal was expansion of Italy's territory and power. Think of it as nationalism on steroids, a religion that worships the state. Everything was for the good of the state.
In order to get people to fall in line with that, the Fascisti had to use violence and oppression. People who had alternate political visions were shouted down, silenced, beaten, killed or imprisoned. Some were force-fed caster oil and chained to street corners, where they could voice their opposition to Mussolini while they publically shat themselves to death.
Uneducated masses have wrongly applied the term fascist to the Nazis, who were actually socialists. True the Nazis were also nationalists, but the philosophy is technically different. (People also wrongly think of the Nazis as right wing, when the socialism makes them pretty left wing.) As a result, Fascist and Nazi in the vernacular has come to mean any "right wing" authoritarian.
The problem is that Leftist political philosophies like communism and socialism are far more prone to oppressive and authoritarian behavior, but it would be ridiculous to call them fascist because they are not.
ANTIFA's tactics are very much like the tactics of the Fascisti, and their attitude toward free speech is as intolerant as Mao, Pol Pot. Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini. As a result, I use the term fascistic, meaning that they share some characteristic with Fascists. (Specifically, in attitude and tactics.)
I think many people confuse fascism with something like authoritarianism.
You can have non-fascist authoritarian states like monarchies.
To be a fascist there are two critical components that make it impossible for anti-facsists to be fascist.
First is that fascist regimes place value on or persecute people based on race, ethnicity, gender, and/or nationality. Anti-fascists are specifically fighting against judging people on these characteristics. Even if an anti-fascist is violent or intolerant of whatever it is they are protesting, it doesn't make them a fascist. Its like saying they are racist against short people. You can discriminate against short people, sure. But its not racism. Its the wrong terminology.
Second, fascists need a capitalist system and anti-fascists are, by and large, socialist or some derivative of socialism such as communist. The reason why fascism needs capitalism is because they are deliberately trying to increase inequality to people who aren't the right race, nationality, or ethnicity. If you are poor or lack rights, its because you don't subscribe to our nationalist identity or you are not the right type of person. This is incompatible with socialism or anything like it. Socialism tries to reduce inequality regardless of who you are or what you think, hence cannot be fascistic.
You might hate anti-fascists and think of them as violent bullies. And in some cases I would agree with the latter. But calling them fascist is simply wrong use of the terminology.
Their name stands for "anti-fascism", so take a wild fucking guess. America is just a composite haven of stupidity, where you can stand up and claim 97 percent of climate scientists are lying, the anti-fascists are fascists, and Barack Obama is a Kenyan dictator, all with a completely straight face and while being taken seriously by other complete fucking morons.
So I can make a hate group called "Anti-racist", then proceed to kill all blacks and it won't be racist?
So if something is theoretically possible that therefore makes it true (or even probable), does it? Welcome to the mind of the fascist, where such radical abuses of logic are commonplace.
If you make a group called "Anti-racist" then the people you attract are not likely to want to kill blacks, you sophist buffoon. Similarly, if I start a group to specifically fight fascism, the people I attract are not likely to be fascists. You might as well argue that NASA is staffed with religious mediums, you daft fucking clown.
"So if something is theoretically possible that therefore makes it true (or even probable), does it? Welcome to the mind of the fascist, where such radical abuses of logic are commonplace."
So I'm a fascist now? Your argument was that because a group is called X it must be X, I took this argument apart.
"If you make a group called "Anti-racist" then the people you attract are not likely to want to kill blacks, you sophist buffoon."
The argument that Antifa stands for "anti-fascist" and therefore cannot be fascist because of it's name is sophistry. Arguing that a groups name can differ from it's purpose or actions is not sophistry.
"Similarly, if I start a group to specifically fight fascism, the people I attract are not likely to be fascists. You might as well argue that NASA is staffed with religious mediums, you daft fucking clown."
Well we have a group called ANTIFA that goes around violently attacking people simply over a difference in opinion (usually not even actual racists or fascists). One of the hallmarks of fascism is forcible suppression of democratic opposition.
There is a fundamental flaw in your arguments here. You assume that Antifa is a group with it's own cohesive ideology. It's not, it consists of thousands of disparate individuals working for a common cause. The majority is not responsible for the actions of a few.
You are attempting to represent ANTIFA and as we have already seen you are calling for and excusing violence. The actions and rhetoric of ANTIFA appear almost exclusively violent.
Antifa is a totally decentralised entity. It's nothing more than a flag that people rally under. It's members range from communists, to anarchists, to mainstream liberals. There is no central group, publication, or leader that can claim to represent the true antifa.
The only feature binding antifa members is being under an anti-fascist flag. Antifa is absolutely not fascist, because that is 100% impossible.
Fascism is characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce. While it's hard for a small group of criminals to wield dictatorial power or control over industry, they can be as fascistic as possible by forcibly suppressing opposition. Which is what antifa does regularly, even without a central command.
Antifa may not be nationalists, but how can one care for their different ends when they share the same evil means?
The difference is who the two groups choose to suppress. Fascists suppress everybody (or at least their chosen minority group). Anti-fascists try to prevent that from happening by stopping the oppressors from organising.
Antifa have no dispute with groups that don't try to restrict the rights of others. They don't oppress others, they work to prevent others from being oppressed.
Bullshit. To Antifa, all Republicans and many Libertarians are Fascists that Antifa must shut down. They regularly shut down, by force and threat of violence, any and all opposition. Regular college speeches are "hate speech" to them. To antifa, you are either a Marxist/Socialist ally, or you are a Fascist that they will punch. Antifa acts like fascists. The same means to different authoritarian ends. Fuck Antifa.
Notice how the biggest Antifa gatherings are against Nazi and White Nationalist gatherings? There are definitely some people who are against Republicans and Libertarians, but they are against those groups because that is their views, not the views of Antifa. Antifa doesn't have views, except a collective dislike of fascists.
The views you are describing do sound like authoritarian anti-capitalist views. Surprise, that's because they likely are. They don't represent the views of the pro-capitalist members, nor the anarchists. (Most anarchists don't give a fuck, you do your thing, they do theirs, as long as you're not a fascist trying to infringe upon their rights.)
You cannot criticise Antifa as an organization, because it's not an organization, it's a collective of people with only one common characteristic: Intolerance of the intolerant. You can criticise any one of their members, you can criticise any one of the left-wing ideologies that those individuals choose to be in. You can even criticise their collective goal, to stop fascists from organizing. But you can't criticise anything that is outside the scope of the goals of the group. Those are an individual's personal prejudices, views, and values.
I'm pretty sure the alt-right are white-nationalists (though it's true they can be distinct from supremacists) but most of these people that are being protested aren't alt-right and many aren't even on the right.
This is like arguing that you cannot criticize white supremacists because they don't have a central organization.
What Antifa historically has in common is there affinity for violence against whatever they oppose, which until most recently was anyone right if Bernie Sanders. The Neo-Nazi march was a stroke of good luck for Antifa. Before that they had to riot in their own home campuses like Berkeley.
Antifa is nothing more than an agreement across ideological lines to oppose fascists. White supremacists have a goal of installing a fascist state. Antifa is literally nothing more than an alliance of people who oppose that.
Take Trump supporters. There are absolutely KKK members who support him. There are people who have beaten up leftists. But you can't criticise a movement because of the people who support it, you have to support or criticise their collective goal: In this example, electing Trump.
Even if 90% of people in a political alliance are awful people with despicable views, you have to judge the goals of the alliance on their own merits. Absolutely, criticise the violence. But don't criticise people standing against fascism unless you have a problem with people standing against fascism.
Lots of people are against fascism. Lots of people are against fascists. Lots of people protest. They are not all Antifa. My issue with Antifa is their history of violence in their efforts. Their violence has most often been against people they call fascist, but who are not.
Antifa is not simply everyone who is against fascism. They are a group. They organize.
"The groups' activities have included handing out flyers, organizing demonstrations, direct action, and property destruction".
Regular protestors don't hide their faces, criminals do. Antifa does. Lovers of freedom will stand against fascists and Antifa alike. You need not support one in order to denounce the other. Fuck Antifa.
"The groups' activities have included handing out flyers, organizing demonstrations, direct action, and property destruction".
But because Antifa does not have a central body, these choices come from groups that claim to represent Antifa in their area.
Absolutely, shut down these regional groups of they get out of line. They can be criticized. There's only one shared goal that binds these groups, which is anti fascism. Antifa is nothing more than a shared goal and a flag.
People calling themselves Antifa have a tendency to target non-fascists. They also have a tendency to be violent. The tendency is so pervasive that an organization with more in mind than being simply against fascism begins to emerge. Especially since they are a relatively large organization by comparison to their almost nonexistent enemy.
I'm glad you agree that the violence is wrong, but if you take it away, Antifa goes away too. The snowball turns back into the unmemorable nameless little snowflakes they used to be, with all the public ridicule they used to endure. The pigs go back to walking on all fours.
Tendencies are irrelevant. The number of Antifa members who are pieces of shit is irrelevant. What is relevant is that if you are a leftist who supports direct action against fascists, you join an Antifa march. Most Antifa members are decent, upstanding people.
To refute one of your earlier points, the reason why they wear masks and bandanas is to protect their identity. Not necessarily to commit a crime (though you are right that there are some who go that route), but to not be identified. Have you seen 4Chan's attempt at doxxing individuals who they have pictures of from the marches? The sane choice is not to risk it, and to join the faceless protest.
if you are a leftist who supports direct action against fascists, you join an Antifa march
Direct action is a cute word for initiating violence. You said earlier that Antifa simply stands for being against fascism, now you are saying they are Leftists for direct action against Fascism. Please keep explaining.
Historically they are leftists who are violently against (sorry, "support direct action against") anyone who is right of them, which are most often not fascists.
the reason why they wear masks and bandana's is to protect their identity. Not necessarily to commit a crime
I take your point. Not all members have the courage to take the direct criminal action that they support, but all of them are cowards. A movement composed of criminals and cowards are not likely to produce mostly "decent upstanding people". Without Antifa masks they are what they have always been, cowards that can take neither pride in their beliefs nor responsibility for their actions. Without those masks, they aren't even Antifa anymore.
In your translated words, Antifa are masked(criminal/coward) Leftists(tyrannical) who support direct action(violence) against Fascists (non-leftists).
Antifa are masked(criminal/sensible) Leftists who support direct action(violence/active protests/demonstations) against Fascists (people who wish for governmental discrimination)
Leftists are not, as a whole, tyrannical. That is a debate for another thread.
Cowards often feel they are simply being sensible. But people who act sensibly don't have to worry about who knows it.
direct action(violence/active protests/demonstations)
Active protests? You mean riot. Simply protesting would be the legit route. I love your guys's double speak.
Leftists are not, as a whole, tyrannical
Sure they are, they sure aren't demanding smaller government. They want the force of government to do their bidding (make other people pay for your shit), rather than get government out of the way.
Cowards often feel they are simply being sensible. But people who act sensibly don't have to worry about who knows it.
You can't fight an enemy who has the modern tools to dox you, and potentially ruin your life. Groups like 4Chan won't act in your best interests if they deem you an enemy.
Active protests? You mean riot. Simply protesting would be the legit route.
Active protests as opposed to inactive protests, where you sit at your computer screen and complain. At least they're out there, taking action, defending your rights.
Sure they are, they sure aren't demanding smaller government.
#notallleftists
Seriously though, I don't support everything done by all left-wingers. This is a debate for another thread though.
You can't fight an enemy who has the modern tools to dox you, and potentially ruin your life.
Yeah, like what happens all the time to police, politicians, and professors, news reporters, and all open protesters...oh wait, it doesn't. The Antifa mask protects criminals and cowards, otherwise all sensible protesters (or any controversial person) would wear them. The law abiding and courageous do not need them.
Active protests as opposed to inactive protests, where you sit at your computer screen and complain
To be clear, inactive protests are not protests. Protests are protected by law. We all now know that active protests are just riots. Antifa has repeatedly illustrated this.
At least they're out there, taking action, defending your rights.
No, they are not. The police who protect speakers from Antifa mobs are defending my rights.
Several? Oh, that sounds bad. Several cops have been killed. Several Professors have been assaulted, as have several reporters. Isn't it just sensible for them to wear masks? Our reporters, professors, and cops? If behind a mask is how they lived their principles, they would properly be called cowards.
It's nice that they had a license in Charlottesville. And it's really great for them that they weren't the source of the worst violence for a singular change of pace. But no protest license can legitimize the rioting, err active protesting, that Antifa has come to be known for.
It's members range from communists, to anarchists, to mainstream liberals
Your logic would be the equivalent of saying "group x" consists of Neo Nazis, KKK members, and mainstream conservatives, but that doesn't make it a racist group...the only thing they have in common is that they are anti communism...
