Remix.run Logo
pixl97 2 hours ago

Ah yes, I too conflate bills written by organized lobbyists with a loosely affiliated group that says American shouldn't be ran by Nazi's. The Nazi's running America get very mad about that and ensure to flood the airwaves with how cities in the US are mile wide smoking craters due to people who don't like authoritarians.

derektank 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The point GP was making, which holds as a general rule, is that simply adopting a moniker does not necessarily mean that it accurately describes you. Your argument pre-supposed that just because Antifa self-describes as antifascist, it inherently is, and that the CEO was expressing an opposition to the concept of antifascism, rather than simply expressing opposition to the specific group.

If Antifa’s record speaks for itself, then you don’t need to play these kinds of word games. If some CEO spoke unflatteringly of The Red Cross or Habitat For Humanity, that would say more about them than anything, not because they have virtuous sounding names (though they admittedly do) but because they’ve established a specific track record of public service.

RealityVoid 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't even know what antifa _is_ anymore, honestly. I only see it used as a boogie man by the right in discourse online.

But I _do_ know that when someone tags someone as "antifa" they are making a political statement and aligning themselves with a certain group that perceives "antifa" a certain way. "See, I hate those damn' antifa terrorists, I'm in the same camp as you! Please help my company make money!"

derektank 2 hours ago | parent [-]

No disagreement there, and I think it was an inane comment on Langley’s part, to be clear

schmidtleonard 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The point pixl97 was making was that they believed anti-anti-fascist described the Flock CEO.

If Flock's reputation spoke for itself, their CEO wouldn't have to play these kind of legal games.

ToucanLoucan 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> The point GP was making, which holds as a general rule, is that simply adopting a moniker does not necessarily mean that it accurately describes you.

I'm deeply curious why you think someone would identify as an anti-fascist if they were not, in fact, anti-fascist. Do you think they just really like the flag logo or...?

gruez 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>Ah yes, I too conflate bills written by organized lobbyists with a loosely affiliated group that says American shouldn't be ran by Nazi's.

Somebody doesn't understand analogies, so let me spell it out explicitly for you:

Approximately nobody is against "antifa" because they're fighting "fascists". Here's an excerpt from wikipedia:

>Antifa activists' actions have since received support and criticism from various organizations and pundits. Some on the political left and some civil rights organizations criticize antifa's willingness to adopt violent tactics, which they describe as counterproductive and dangerous, arguing that these tactics embolden the political right and their allies.[13] Both Democratic and Republican politicians have condemned violence from antifa.[14][15][16][17] Many right-wing politicians and groups have characterized antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, or use antifa as a catch-all term,[18] which they adopt for any left-leaning or liberal protest actions.[19] According to some scholars, antifa is a legitimate response to the rise of the far right.[20][21] Scholars tend to reject an equivalence between antifa and right-wing extremism.[2][22][23] Some research suggests that most antifa action is nonviolent.[24][25][26]

Those allegations might not have merit, and it's okay to have a productive discussion over the merits of that, but it's wholly unjustified to round everyone who oppose antifa off to "they're against antifa because they're fascists, because why else would you be against a group that's anti-fascist?". Doing so is making the same mistake as the PATRIOT act above. It's fine to be against the patriot act, or even support it. But it's totally poor reasoning to skip all that logic and go with "you oppose the PATRIOT act so you must be not a patriot".

amanaplanacanal 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Being opposed to antifa because some of the people using the label are violent seems to be painting with an overly broad brush.

ToValueFunfetti 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I know we're not supposed to talk about it, but what in the world is happening to this site? Mistaking 'Antifa' for 'the concept of opposing fascism' is not the kind of failure mode I expect here. And this kind of thing has become endemic lately- emotive noise and sarcastic dunks drowning out substance in every thread, especially since the beginning of December. Or am I just imagining this?

GuinansEyebrows 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> Mistaking 'Antifa' for 'the concept of opposing fascism'

that's literally what it means in theory and in practice

ToValueFunfetti 2 hours ago | parent [-]

'The concept of opposing fascism' doesn't mean anything in practice. You have to implement practice around it, you can't just literally do a concept!

GuinansEyebrows an hour ago | parent [-]

you say that as if people are not actively physically opposing fascism in deed in the united states right now!

watwut 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Approximately nobody is against "antifa" because they're fighting "fascists".

So, I will say that far right, comservatives and fascists are against anti-fascism of any kind. Whether it is the boogeyman antifa or anything else. And there are a lot of people like that. Including in goverment.

They do take issue with anyone who openly opposes fascism.