https://truthout.org/articles/massiv...s-in-portland/

Sounds like a fun milkshake party, minus the authoritarians and their surrogates.

Obviously violence against media members is wrong and should be condemned. This applies to conservative media members as well as liberal ones.

Ok. I found the hyperlink. My apologies.

Is identifying the victim of an assault that happened in the real world doxxing? That seems a bizarre interpretation of what doxxing is.

Maybe it is doxxing as his intentions in identifying her don’t seem to be positive??

I'm seriously shocked at how bent out of shape people get that the hugely violent far right is experiencing any kind of violent backlash. I'm not saying antifa is right, but the outrage is super silly.

Nazi's go to move for over a hundred years now has been violence. Live by the sword die by the sword?

As for people experiencing personal consequences for their free speech... yeah it's free speech. The police won't lock you up for saying that you think Hitler got it right. What absolutely everyone else does in response is fair play.

If I found out a friend/family member of mine was a Nazi we'd literally never speak again. That's my right. Them seeing the light later wouldn't really matter either. Some stuff is enough to get cut out with absolutely zero ****s given and no opportunity for redemption. That being in your range is more than enough to call the whole thing off. That doesn't impede their free speech, it's the consequences of that free speech. There is no 'right' to being part of society. Some stuff isn't socially acceptable and that's a good thing.

Also it isn't lost on me that the same people complaining about antifa want being an ISIS sympathizer to be something that gets you thrown into prison for life. I struggle to see the difference between Nazi's and ISIS. Both of them want my Jewish half dead. If I was going to limit free speech the outer edge of far right speech is exactly where I'd start.

He seems justified to reveal her name in the second instance. Break the law and destroy property, should be fair game for reporting.

Edit: I removed that part of my quote because I couldn’t click on the link and actually identify he was telling the truth about the sabotage. I am so skeptical of obvious partisan media I find it prudent to never give them the benefit of the doubt they are telling the truth without fact checking.

Anyways,

I think generally we should all be very careful taking anything at face value that comes from Vox, Huff Post, Breitbardt, Fox News etc.

These partisan reporting outlets are so consistently dishonest it is amazing.

Andy Ngo is not a Nazi.

You’re just begging for this post to become another meme.

Not really *that* sure. I've just seen screenshots of a tweet which I assume has been deleted:



If my position were that this justified him being attacked then my lack of certainty would bother me, but since I don't think it was right to attack him I'm not sure I really care that much. I only included it because it's the only specific justification for the attack I've actually seen.

Antifa obviously has some bad apples. I agree he doesn't seem like he 'deserved' to be flagged for PVP the way some dude carrying at tiki torch does. At the same time I basically only hear about when antifa hits the wrong target, rather than the high hundreds to low thousands of violent incidents per year that involve Neo Nazi's attacking people in a wide variety of ways.

I'm sympathetic to Andy in particular. That being said I suspect the vast majority of people who are deeply bothered by antifa are quite sympathetic to people who would gas me given the chance, so I consider them to be a much more serious problem. Andy isn't dead. The Nazi's kill lots of people every year.

How many out of a diverse crowd of hundreds attacked a journalist, allegedly?

It’s so obvious, it’s a wonder it’s been said. Almost like an association with anti-fascism and attacking journalists is a tunnel running narrative. Why else in an antifa thread would that have been to be said, it’s so obvious? Combat is dangerous. Who would have thunk?

It doesn't appear to be obvious to everyone, judging by some of what I've read.

Jesus Christ, Vox is nothing like breitbart and Fox. Fox isrepublican party propaganda and breitbart is a racial grievance grift machine.

Wow, what a monster. Someone put on a mask and assault this man before he edits another article!

Antifa are so clearly dumb ass kids who see an excuse to act out anonymously.

Yes, these stories get amplified by a narrative that right wing people like to emphasize about the left. But the best way to combat that narrative is not to make excuses, minimize, tu quoque, or otherwise when events congruent with the narrative happen, but rather to state your position against violence clearly and condemn people who are being violent. They want you to defend/minimize - that drives day 2 of coverage about why do Democrats refuse to condemn violence.

In threads like this it's always best to let them run a couple hundred or so posts before I dive into my usual positions--but...you got the latter two right but what exactly do you think Vox is? Some paragon of truth and objectivity?

Well the big difference is that Vox at least try to present actual facts, albeit with a fairly strong, deliberate left slant. Fox and Breitbart don't reach the level of caring about facts, they just jump straight to right-wing propaganda (Breitbart obviously take it to more extreme lengths).

That wasn’t my point. Kelhus and JV we’re trying to argue NGO is not on the right.

Your Jacobin friends are not going to be happy when they see you stated the truth out loud.

It's obvious that Antifa doesn't see what they are doing as peaceful protests, or even a Heckler's Veto. They think they are waging war, and are eager for the violence to escalate.

Yeah, Vox is honest about their perspective, actually try to accurately describe events and the right’s arguments. Like, they even go so far as to frame the right’s arguments way more charitably than anyone on even the right could.

I am? Can you quote the post where I make such an argument?

That was the post I was thinking about, but I misinterpreted it. Apologies.

If you go to Yglesias' twitter you'll see that he proudly declares himself to be "chief neoliberal shill" so you aren't lying.