1. mountainbob says

    Too much violence as it is. We need not continue down that road. If you have no coherent set of principles and are unable to express your ideas without resort to force, you should stay home.

  2. tacitus says

    The best video on Antifa, and why violence is sometimes necessary in a democratic society, I’ve seen:
    The Philosophy of Antifa | Philosophy Tube
    Well worth your time.
    I just discovered Oliver Thorn’s channel a few days ago, and I suspect he’ll be right up your alley, if you’re a regular Pharyngulite…

  3. vucodlak says

    @ mountainbob, #2

    It’s like you looked at the very next post, read the quote, and thought “what great wisdom!”

    I’ve a coherent set of principles. Among other things, it says: “Those who would build and fill concentration camps must be stopped by (nearly*) any means necessary.” That includes the use of force. It must include the use of force, or else it would be toothless.

    This notion that returning violence to people hell-bent on the extermination of everyone who isn’t just like them will make the Nazis more violent is just bizarre. They’re already torturing and killing children, and they already have the apathy of the majority in their favor. They’re champing at the bit to get on with extermination. How, exactly, are they going to escalate? Are they going to give us dirty looks while they murder us?

    *Torture and rape are lines never, under any circumstances, to be crossed.

  4. lochaber says


    maybe you should be worrying about the groups that actually commit acts of violence, like, say, driving a car into a crowd of peaceful protesters?

    Antifa is almost entirely reactive – if there aren’t nazis to protest, then Antifa doesn’t really have anything to do, and is likely to just go home and play board games or watch tv or whatever.
    On the other hand, the nazis won’t stop until everybody is dead.
    One of these things is not like the other…


  5. voidhawk says


    Not using violence is a fine principle when violence isn’t being employed by the other side, but when white nationalists have committed violence up to and including multiple homicides, a measured violent response is just self-defence.

    Just how brazen and violent to neo-fascists have to get before we are allowed to do more than write them a sternly-worded letter?

  6. gijoel says

    Is there like a fascist bat-signal that fires off the moment anyone so much as thinks of criticizing the far right?

  7. John Morales says

    mountainbob@2, not to pile up (and obs I have no reason to believe you’re anything like a nazi), but:

    If you have no coherent set of principles and are unable to express your ideas without resort to force, you should stay home.

    You seem confused. They are not merely expressing an opinion, they are taking direct action.

    Basically, they are not passive advocates, they’re activists.

    (Also obs, I am not an activist — but I know them when I see them)

  8. John Morales says

    I do like the term, too. Just as without theism there could be no atheism, without fascism there could be no antifascism.

  9. dma8751482 says

    I think I’ve mentioned this before, and I also asked a friend with more direct links to antifa- is there some kind of workable long-term equivalent of antifa? Reactivity just isn’t enough at this point, there has to be something more proactive that can be done as well so Nazi-punching doesn’t need to be repeated every so often just to keep things from growing worse.

    For what it’s worth, the friend I mentioned told me he didn’t know of any such thing but could understand why such a thing would be valuable. Still, there has to be something that not only defends against fascist influence but denies it any foothold for it to spread in the first place.