Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Aneristic Illusions => Topic started by: IPunchNazis on August 19, 2017, 03:25:40 am

Title: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 19, 2017, 03:25:40 am
When I first signed up, you all clocked me for what I was: a troll. But a few of you actually understood the joke: that my intention was to hold to you a mirror-image caricature of the seemingly addicted-to-violence mentality that pervades this board.

I became quickly bored (as I'm sure you all were with me from the start) and went back to lurking after realizing that those of you who are keen on aggressive action in the face of conflict with an enemy you equate with evil are at no risk of changing your minds, and I have no intention of making the mistake of arguing with you like so many others have come here to do.

Say what you will about not defining Discordia, but I have always imagined the Discordian as an out-of-the-box thinker, someone too clever for physical confrontation. If anything, the Discordian should be the person who tricks others into getting into fistfights, rather than being directly engaged. When I think of Discordia, I think of conflict resolution through trickery and manipulation (and preferably without bloodshed). Don't tell the enemy they can't have what they want; fool them into thinking they want something they can have. To me, a Discordian is a master at social engineering.

So unless these calls to arms and violence are themselves an elaborate and clever cover designed to trick others into thinking that Discordians are bloodthirsty mouth-breathers while real actions are taken covertly, I have to ask in earnestness if anyone else here has a commitment to non-violence in their personal politics.

Over the past few days, in reading up on the Charlottesville incident, I've found my views shifting somewhat. At first, I was appalled that opponents to the alt-right's rally would purposely engage in a way meant to escalate the conflict into violent chaos. I assumed that the Nazis were a clever distraction meant to prevent the progressives from reexamining their own failures in the 2016 election and that everyone was taking the bait.

For instance, this reaction to a (very entertaining but violently passionate) rant by Doug Harmon sums up my initial views quite well:

Quote
Strongly disagree with this very simplistic viewpoint. So quick to shun all discussion, label it a black-and-white moral "no-brainer", and lump anyone who doesn't agree with him in with the most extreme factions of the opposition. Fact of the matter is that there are very real socioeconomic and psychological forces at play driving people to the far right and until we start listening to and working towards solutions to these issues, the tensions will only escalate. Nonviolence is the only way forward if we hope to deescalate the situation and resume any semblance of a reasonable national conversation.

People wanting to "stab Nazis" as Dan seems to advocate here are a big part of the problem.

The small group of people who were in Charlottesville violently anti-protesting have given Trump the ammunition for his "on all sides" rhetoric. Had Antifa not been there, the left would have the clear moral high ground. Instead, they showed up looking to pick fights with Nazis and they got one... except one of the nonviolent protesters was the one to pay the price for it. This whole "it's okay to assault Nazis" thing needs to end. Violence is not okay. It makes us no better than them.

You know how Rosa Parks wasn't the first person to refuse to give up her seat, but she was specifically chosen to be the first civil rights case that everyone could get behind because she had no record, no dirt, no skeletons in the closet? Civil rights leaders of the time knew that this must be the case going into the fray, because the other side is absolutely going to attempt to sling any mud that they can to discredit the movement...

Well, the tactics of Antifa are our skeleton in the closet this week. Because of their use of violence, there is no clear provocateur of the conflict. Police say so themselves... No one forced the kid to run through a crowd with his car... but let's not pretend that the preceding "mutually engaged combat" had nothing to do with it... his attack was a reaction to escalating conflict, likely compounded by mental illness. I'm not saying that makes it right, I'm just saying that had Antifa not been there looking for violence, the right would have no one to point the finger at, as they are known to do.

Antifa ruined the spirit of counter-protest by practicing eye for an eye. In their absence, the car attack may not have happened; if it did still happen then we would have had a nation unified against political violence. Instead, we've become enthralled by the prospect of more of it because "Nazis"... I fear for the coming months.

If we want the Right to distance themselves from their extremist factions, we MUST be willing to do the same on the Left. Anyone throwing punches or using weapons at rallies should be shunned by their respective groups and arrested, even utilizing citizen's arrest by their own in-group if necessary. I don't give a shit if they're punching Nazis or Communists or Progressives or Regressives or Black Lives Matter or White Lives Matter or whatever. It's not up to individual citizens to decide when violence is justified, except in cases of self-defense. That's a matter for our top lawyers and judges and lawmakers who spend their lives studying these topics to decide, and it's a rule that only the state is capable of being objective over and enforcing.

I do NOT want to see mob rule in America. There's a reason ACLU defended the white nationalist's right to protest. There's a reason that you've got black cops out there defending the KKK's right to speak... The reason is that discourse, even hateful discourse, is the bedrock of our democracy. If we're going to go to war with Nazis because they represent a clear and present danger, we need to decide that as a country and act in unison. Easier said than done, I will admit. But the wheels of justice turn slowly for a reason.

However, I found a counterargument that made me begrudgingly entertain the alternative:

Quote
The battle for civil rights was a two-pronged attack. One prong was staunchly nonviolent (MLK, Rosa Parks, etc) and the other prong was more militant and had no such commitment to nonviolence.

Would the nonviolent civil rights crusaders have been nearly as successful without the militant wing of the movement?

There's no definitive way to answer that question, obviously. The best we can do is speculate.

But I think it's highly likely that the mere presence of the militant wing on the national landscape helped the nonviolent civil rights pioneers to an immense degree.

Think about it. Imagine a 1960s where there's no Black Panthers, no Huey P. Newton, no Malcolm X. To whites, MLK would have seemed like a dangerous radical, somebody on the fringe, wanting to smash the status quo.

But that's not how it played out in reality. Because there were other, "scarier" African-Americans out there, many white Americans saw the nonviolent side of the movement as a voice of reason and peace in the middle. This made the nonviolent message of MLK and Rosa Parks that much more palatable to white Americans. Instead of being on the fringe, they seemed like the reasonable centrists.

Bottom line? Well, I sure like the idea of nonviolence, but I'm also not convinced that it can always solve things on its own. Nonviolent appeasement of Hitler sure didn't work.

So I now must admit that I have to consider that the aggressive and confrontational element is a necessary evil, so to speak, and that the problem cannot be resolved (I.E. the alt-right's agenda defeated) without it. Perhaps the far-right has indeed become a very real threat with another civil war on the horizon.

I am still, however, surprised to see so many Discordians hungry to participate in the violence. Are there any of you, like me, who aren't? Who would, if anything, attempt subvert it instead of willfully helping to immanentize it?
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 19, 2017, 06:42:31 am
Violence is a tool, like any other overt behavior.  And like any tool it is useful for some jobs but not for others.

It is the only useful tool for dealing with Nazis.  You can't convince a Nazi of anything, but you can pound on them until all the white supremacy leaks out.  Function over form.  If you're a pacifist, you are deliberately depriving yourself of one of the tools with which primates excel.  You are limiting your options...for what?  So you can feel smug and superior while Jethro and Hans haul your next door neighbor away1?  I am sure your neighbor will appreciate your moral virtues.

You seem to have mistaken us for Moonies.  Eris started a massive war that led to the "bronze dark age" because she wasn't invited to a party. Just IMAGINE what she'd do to a cunt like Richard Spencer just for that shitty haircut.

And there is no rule that says you can't be clever and violent, or both at the same time.  One day you maul a Nazi with a sock full of pennies, the next day you out a Nazi to his boss.  Both are effective. Both are appropriate, which you choose only depends on the circumstances.  If you are tiny or old or just not good at whupping on people, choose the latter.

Lastly, violence against Nazis is good for everyone, including the Nazis.  Because if you don't punch them today, you have to hang them tomorrow.



1  This isn't hyperbole.  The original Nazis started out just like the new ones have.  They even had violent opposition.  It just wasn't violent enough.

Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 19, 2017, 08:59:40 am
As stated, I have no desire to waste time or energy attempting to dissuade those of you who condone violence from your desire for it, but wish only to connect with other Discordians who have commitments against it.

That being said...

Violence [...] is the only useful tool for dealing with Nazis.  You can't convince a Nazi of anything, but you can pound on them until all the white supremacy leaks out.

I would like to point out that this is both objectively false and itself a form of prejudice.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-life-after-hate-white-supremacist-met-20170818-story.html

You can find many such stories if only you look.

https://www.google.com/search?q=former+nazi
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: LuciferX on August 19, 2017, 09:15:45 am
Real prejudice is not identical with the prejudice of itself.
As stated, I have no desire to waste time or energy attempting to dissuade those of you who condone violence from your desire for it, but wish only to connect with other Discordians who have commitments against it.

That being said...

Violence [...] is the only useful tool for dealing with Nazis.  You can't convince a Nazi of anything, but you can pound on them until all the white supremacy leaks out.

I would like to point out that this is both objectively false and itself a form of prejudice.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-life-after-hate-white-supremacist-met-20170818-story.html

You can find many such stories if only you look.

https://www.google.com/search?q=former+nazi
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 19, 2017, 05:07:26 pm
I can't make grand statements about what motivates people, other than myself. I am not particularly fond of the idea of engaging in violence. But for all the reasons you can find in any argument about this, which everyone has seen repeated over and over again everywhere, I would count myself closer to Antifa than to MLK-style nonviolence. Where some people see more reactionary, "that person disagrees with me and I want to hurt them" politics, I see only a need for an abrupt, forceful negation of violence -- both actual and implied -- represented by the emergence of proud Nazis in the mainstream of American political discourse.

Everyone can be nonviolent, but few of them will ever be MLK. I think part of the reason I'm drawn to the militant side is that it seems borderline useless to be just one more frowning face in a nonviolent crowd. It isn't morally wrong to be that, and more often than not that is the only option open to me, but it doesn't feel like enough. Being a monkey, this frustrates me. Being a frustrated monkey, I want to hit things. That will feel like more.

But that isn't even half of it. The larger part of the drive comes from knowing exactly what Nazis, the Klan, and neo-Confederates represent. Not some vague ideology of nebulous hate, but the very real, historically documented murder of millions and millions of innocent people. When you fly a Nazi flag or don a stupid bedsheet like you're doing the world a favor, you are allying yourself not just with the disgusting ideology behind those murders, but the acts themselves. And worse, really, because unlike Germans in the 1920s and 30s, there is no possibility in today's world of "accidentally" falling in with murderers flying the swastika. We know what they are. There is no excuse for joining them. The act of being a Nazi is a violent act in and of itself, because it is a public proclamation that you refuse to value other human beings and are willing to murder them for no reason at all.

Then again, you know all this and you're just here to hear your keyboard clatter. So, whatever.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 19, 2017, 05:16:43 pm
Then again, you know all this and you're just here to hear your keyboard clatter. So, whatever.

You had me right up until this point. Not to cry about it, but I think it was uncalled for. If I've given that impression, I'd like to know how.

Quote
When fly a Nazi flag or don a stupid bedsheet like you're doing the world a favor, you are allying yourself not just with the disgusting ideology behind those murders, but the acts themselves.

As for this, my only rebuttal that it is easier to hold an enemy to their standards than your own. In other words, understanding (not assuming, but finding agreement on) how your enemy sees themself (and particularly how they see you) can be useful in strategizing against them - in both diplomacy and war.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 19, 2017, 05:44:02 pm
Then again, you know all this and you're just here to hear your keyboard clatter. So, whatever.

You had me right up until this point. Not to cry about it, but I think it was uncalled for. If I've given that impression, I'd like to know how.

If I haven't forgotten what the Nazis did after 70 years, why would I forget you being a troll after a matter of weeks?

Quote
Quote
When fly a Nazi flag or don a stupid bedsheet like you're doing the world a favor, you are allying yourself not just with the disgusting ideology behind those murders, but the acts themselves.

As for this, my only rebuttal that it is easier to hold an enemy to their standards than your own. In other words, understanding (not assuming, but finding agreement on) how your enemy sees themself (and particularly how they see you) can be useful in strategizing against them - in both diplomacy and war.

I understand how they see themselves. As warriors for the preservation of "white culture" or "white genes" or whatever euphemism they think will get their foot in the door of polite conversation. That is, they are militant opponents of multiculturalism and racial and sexual equality. They believe -- at the very least -- that white people exist as a somehow distinct subset of the human species, that our history and genes give us moral, intellectual, or other advantages over non-whites, and that it would be folly to lose those advantages by mingling with "other races". That is as benign as they get. By identifying themselves with symbols of murder, they are saying outright what lengths they are willing to go to in order defend their repugnant beliefs. They use those symbols specifically because of their violent connotations in an attempt to intimidate people and incite violence. I reject every foundation of every belief they have, forcefully. They see themselves as living outside the rules and regulations of our open and inclusive society -- and since "rights" are only meaningful in the context of civilization, by rejecting civilization, they have forfeited whatever rights they may have had.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on August 19, 2017, 07:07:50 pm
I too vehemently oppose the moloch of racial, ethnic, and cultural purity. I dream of a world where nobody has fewer than three different racial backgrounds; where there is no white of black or asian or jewish or arab or whatever, just people who are mixed, really really mixed

I oppose violence except when really necessary. There's often much more that can be done with a handshake and a contagious illness.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Don Coyote on August 19, 2017, 09:28:08 pm
Some people only understand "foot in their ass, fist to their face" and some of those people mean to do more than just beat up some people. You know, little things like genocide.

Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 19, 2017, 10:33:45 pm
So, is the elusive nonviolent Discordian indeed as mythical as Sisyphus?
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Freeky on August 19, 2017, 11:18:45 pm
All right, you assclown. You mentioned in OP that even though discordianism can't be defined you expect everyone to conform to YOUR discordia, and we're all a bunch of hyper-violent mouthbreathers. But here's the deal: I haven't hit anyone in anger since I was six. I haven't tried to hurt people when I'm angry in any capacity since I was in 8th grade. I don't think violence solves most things.

You wanna know what I think about nazis? I want to punch every last fucking one of them. I'm sick of hearing other white folk venting to themselves when they've been inconvenienced, shouting about "niggers" and "queers" and "the fucking bitches," like they're the center of the fucking universe. I'm sick of having to listen to them shout about how they have a right to say and do all this shit and then whine when people go off on them for it, not realizing they've broken a social peace treaty and are no longer entitled to civility. I'm SO FUCKING SICK OF ALL OF THIS BULLSHIT, and I just want everyone of them to shut the fuck up or get fucking wrecked because they're not going to ever be sorry, ever, unless they get hurt while shouting about ethnic cleansing or w/e. If it takes a fucking baseball bat to make them hurt, I'm here for it. If it's sending their bosses photos of them at a white pride demonstration and them getting fired for it, I'm here for that, too.

Stop being a snotty son of a bitch and telling me I'm Discordiaing wrong, you asshole cunt-faced stuck-up cock knocker.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 20, 2017, 12:54:06 am
So much anger.

I'm beginning to suspect that most of you come here to vent by pretending you want to be violent.

Has anyone here ever actually punched a Nazi? Advocacy of violence seems ironic if one's own knuckles aren't regularly bleeding.

But again, this thread is quickly becoming the debate I specifically wished to avoid. I'll step back and wait to see if anyone actually answers my question.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Don Coyote on August 20, 2017, 04:24:48 am
I've rumbled with folks for a lot less than being a Nazi. I've drawn and shed blood, and cracked and bruised tendons, ligaments, and bones. So, fuck you with you weak ass trolling.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 20, 2017, 04:52:47 am
first appearance: is obvious troll
second appearance: 'guys it was just an experiment, i've decided not to be a troll', is still obvious troll.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on August 20, 2017, 05:53:26 am
Again, against violence here except in self-defense... in the understanding that sneezing on people, shaking hands with them after having diarrhea and not washing your hands, and in severe circumstances feeding them food from bulging cans or doing the thing from The Cask of Amontillado are not violence (though I personally would not do the last two due to fear of legal repercussions)
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 20, 2017, 06:23:19 am
So much anger.

I'm beginning to suspect that most of you come here to vent by pretending you want to be violent.

 :lulz:

You're a gaslighting ass-clown, and you're still a troll.  Go fuck around on facebook, you useless cunt.

:lulz:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 20, 2017, 06:24:10 am
first appearance: is obvious troll
second appearance: 'guys it was just an experiment, i've decided not to be a troll', is still obvious troll.

Exactly this.

My money says he's pals with Jonathan Bost.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 20, 2017, 06:35:34 am
There is also a very good chance this is Navcat, who is spouting the EXACT SAME SHIT, word-for-word, on FB.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 20, 2017, 06:38:35 am
IP is a proxy, currently routed through Holland.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 20, 2017, 06:49:46 am
Not to keep being needlessly critical, but something else I've noticed about the most frequent posters here: Anytime someone new comes along and has anything remotely contrary or engaging to offer, you puff up, hold hands, start name-calling, and proceed to muse about it being a sockpuppet for some other (usually oddly specific) individual. Paranoia, insularity, and hyperreaction all rolled into one.

This really is a delightful if elaborate front you manage.

Still, my question stands, and I think my position is clear. If there are any non-chest-beaters that frequent the board, I'd be glad to have you chime in.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 20, 2017, 07:24:55 am
Not to keep being needlessly critical, but something else I've noticed about the most frequent posters here: Anytime someone new comes along and has anything remotely contrary or engaging to offer, you puff up, hold hands, start name-calling, and proceed to muse about it being a sockpuppet for some other (usually oddly specific) individual. Paranoia, insularity, and hyperreaction all rolled into one.

This really is a delightful if elaborate front you manage.

Still, my question stands, and I think my position is clear. If there are any non-chest-beaters that frequent the board, I'd be glad to have you chime in.

You are posting on a proxy, and you are not new here.  So fuck off with your bullshit.  Seriously.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 20, 2017, 08:06:53 am
Not to keep being needlessly critical, but something else I've noticed about the most frequent posters here: Anytime someone new comes along and has anything remotely contrary or engaging to offer, you puff up, hold hands, start name-calling, and proceed to muse about it being a sockpuppet for some other (usually oddly specific) individual. Paranoia, insularity, and hyperreaction all rolled into one.

This really is a delightful if elaborate front you manage.

Still, my question stands, and I think my position is clear. If there are any non-chest-beaters that frequent the board, I'd be glad to have you chime in.

no, lol. actual new people get treated like human beings until they prove themselves not to be such. you, on the other hand, are not new, your "points" are not new, your "questions" are not new, your approach is definitely not new. just tossing in the "maybe i was wrong" thing in your OP doesn't mean anything when you go directly back to the same tired shit within 3 posts.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Cramulus on August 20, 2017, 02:48:22 pm
When I first signed up, you all clocked me for what I was: a troll. But a few of you actually understood the joke: that my intention was to hold to you a mirror-image caricature of the seemingly addicted-to-violence mentality that pervades this board.

oh yeah, I said this:

Alright let me put on my goggles. The "IPunchNazis" character is playing on the recent liberal uptick in antifascist violence. Essentially, satirizing the enthusiastic liberal nazi puncher who is swept up by the chest pumping tribal machismo which antifascism lets him express  dot dot dot, implying antifascist violence is more or less equivalent to fascism, dot dot dot, liberals are cuck hypocrites who only take a moral high ground against certain kinds of violence, etc etc. Okay that's basically the end point, right?

I merit there might be bait here for that argument. I would be curious to hear what the person playing this character thinks the proper use of violence is, like, how do you distinguish between "good" and "bad" violence? I would love to have that talk but I think they need the mask, so all we get is this kinda uninspired caricature troll.

eh what can you do

so I guess you're here for the latter part now? that's cool, I can roll with that.


Quote
Bottom line? Well, I sure like the idea of nonviolence, but I'm also not convinced that it can always solve things on its own. Nonviolent appeasement of Hitler sure didn't work.

So I now must admit that I have to consider that the aggressive and confrontational element is a necessary evil, so to speak, and that the problem cannot be resolved (I.E. the alt-right's agenda defeated) without it. Perhaps the far-right has indeed become a very real threat with another civil war on the horizon.

I am still, however, surprised to see so many Discordians hungry to participate in the violence. Are there any of you, like me, who aren't? Who would, if anything, attempt subvert it instead of willfully helping to immanentize it?

I appreciate the straightforward chat. I hadn't really thought much about antifa in the context of how Malcolm X slid the Overton Window left.

My perspective is - I don't think that violence is an effective long run strategy. What I've observed is that violent action is super effective as a recruitment tool for "the other side". It doesn't change minds. If I got punched in the face for my political beliefs, I wouldn't stop believing those things. In fact, I would probably justify them harder. If I continually feared bodily harm, I'd just go underground and get louder.

Punching nazis is forgivable when they are advocating violence & actively recruiting. Punching the peaceful but angry guy standing near the nazi--mainly counterproductive.

On a more emotional level - One of my pet research hobbies is the history of torture. I keep this close to my heart: For thousands of years, we lined up in public squares to cheer as the "bad guys" were subject to horrific ordeals. That was "justice". That desire - to see the bad guy bloodied and dragged through the streets - is one of the scariest things about humanity. Especially when its expressed by a crowd. We all have these brutal impulses, and live in a society that conditions us not to act on them. But when somebody "deserves it", we are chomping at the bit for the opportunity to unleash hell on them. I try to guard myself against this kind of 'pleasurable' violence, and warn others not to feed it.

((The Crowd at the Ball Game (https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45498/the-crowd-at-the-ball-game)))



That being said

Violence was already playing a role in the larger conversation. Not to focus too hard on the rallies, specifically - but there are a lot of people out there who are in fear of bodily harm on the daily. For example, I have trans friends who live in Texas, and they are regularly subjected to hostile harassment on the street and other public places. Using a public rest room is a scary moment for them right now. They have a public facing job and consequently receive lots of transphobic threats.  Knowing that if a public incident happened, there would be people willing to fight for them - that's a good thing.




On the side - I'm not a fighter, myself. I haven't thrown a real punch since college. I imagine I would get laid out in any fight I was in. This probably plays a role in how much violence I advocate  :p
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on August 20, 2017, 03:19:03 pm
Not to keep being needlessly critical, but something else I've noticed about the most frequent posters here: Anytime someone new comes along and has anything remotely contrary or engaging to offer, you puff up, hold hands, start name-calling, and proceed to muse about it being a sockpuppet for some other (usually oddly specific) individual. Paranoia, insularity, and hyperreaction all rolled into one.

This really is a delightful if elaborate front you manage.

Still, my question stands, and I think my position is clear. If there are any non-chest-beaters that frequent the board, I'd be glad to have you chime in.

I've gotta say I've seen this too
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Junkenstein on August 20, 2017, 07:08:43 pm
There is also a very good chance this is Navcat, who is spouting the EXACT SAME SHIT, word-for-word, on FB.

Dead concepts as of 2017:
Satire
Irony
Subtlety
Innocent bystander
Empathy


Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 20, 2017, 10:35:58 pm
so I guess you're here for the latter part now? that's cool, I can roll with that.

Yours is the one name I recognize - a collegiate among the drop-outs!

Quote
I appreciate the straightforward chat. I hadn't really thought much about antifa in the context of how Malcolm X slid the Overton Window left.

It's an interesting comparison, albeit different circumstances. I'm having a hard time trying to pigeonhole ANTIFA. Do they only exist because the alt-right exists? Or are they some darker element that serves only the undoing of true freedom? I'm weary of making heroes out of anarchists whose primary role seem to be escalation of tensions. Trying to think in the "big picture" as much as possible. I'm not a fan of aggression being used to silence disagreeables under the assumption that it's pre-emptive self-defense.

Quote
My perspective is - I don't think that violence is an effective long run strategy. What I've observed is that violent action is super effective as a recruitment tool for "the other side". It doesn't change minds. If I got punched in the face for my political beliefs, I wouldn't stop believing those things. In fact, I would probably justify them harder. If I continually feared bodily harm, I'd just go underground and get louder.

Punching nazis is forgivable when they are advocating violence & actively recruiting. Punching the peaceful but angry guy standing near the nazi--mainly counterproductive.

On a more emotional level - One of my pet research hobbies is the history of torture. I keep this close to my heart: For thousands of years, we lined up in public squares to cheer as the "bad guys" were subject to horrific ordeals. That was "justice". That desire - to see the bad guy bloodied and dragged through the streets - is one of the scariest things about humanity. Especially when its expressed by a crowd. We all have these brutal impulses, and live in a society that conditions us not to act on them. But when somebody "deserves it", we are chomping at the bit for the opportunity to unleash hell on them. I try to guard myself against this kind of 'pleasurable' violence, and warn others not to feed it.

((The Crowd at the Ball Game (https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45498/the-crowd-at-the-ball-game)))

Wholeheartedly agree. Although I love the word "schadenfreude", I have an aversion to what it describes. Not that I'm immune to it; I have experienced it, and that experience terrifies me. Its avoidance is conscious and active, rather than natural.

Quote
Violence was already playing a role in the larger conversation. Not to focus too hard on the rallies, specifically - but there are a lot of people out there who are in fear of bodily harm on the daily. For example, I have trans friends who live in Texas, and they are regularly subjected to hostile harassment on the street and other public places. Using a public rest room is a scary moment for them right now. They have a public facing job and consequently receive lots of transphobic threats.  Knowing that if a public incident happened, there would be people willing to fight for them - that's a good thing.

Agreed. I've heard a few things about people who chose to attend the Charlottesville rally not to antagonize, but to stand guard with local entities, churches, etc., in case the rally-goers themselves turned riotous. That is something I strongly admire.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Freeky on August 20, 2017, 10:39:26 pm
Quote
I'm having a hard time trying to pigeonhole ANTIFA.

That's probably your problem.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 20, 2017, 10:45:53 pm
You are posting on a proxy, and you are not new here.

Didn't claim that I was new (although arguably I am, since this is the first time I've posted anything genuine) (as far as you know), but merely that I've noticed the same behavior directed at new people who don't purr and kitten their way around your ankles. Tribalistic mentality is my best guess. No greasing the wheels for me, thank you. I'd rather call it like I see it. Still, just because someone refuses to sugar-coat doesn't mean they want to rustle jimmies. Personally, I'm apathetic.

As for using a proxy, I'm surprised the rest of you don't. Still, there is a difference between paranoia... and precaution.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 20, 2017, 10:46:51 pm
Quote
I'm having a hard time trying to pigeonhole ANTIFA.

That's probably your problem.

I would say that it's the country's problem.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 20, 2017, 10:56:18 pm
I too vehemently oppose the moloch of racial, ethnic, and cultural purity. I dream of a world where nobody has fewer than three different racial backgrounds; where there is no white of black or asian or jewish or arab or whatever, just people who are mixed, really really mixed

With no desire to sidetrack the conversation into one of eugenics, I see this as inevitable. I'm not sure it will ever boil down to such a low number, but probably that the lines will blur so much that there is no longer any hard place where the divisions lie. I look forward to a day where humanity treats the color of skin like the color of hair. Especially if it means being able to buy the one you like in the beauty section of CVS.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 21, 2017, 12:43:20 am
To recap:  You came to troll, you trolled, you're under a proxy, but now people are expected to believe that you're not trolling; as if anything you are saying is intended to be taken seriously or should be taken seriously.

 :lulz:

Have fun with that.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 21, 2017, 04:13:57 am
I don't expect anyone to believe anything. I didn't come back to change minds.

Reasonable people should be able to at least hazard a guess at the difference between trolling for a reaction and discussing for debate. I have so far observed that "reasonable people" make up a superminority of the most active users on this board.

But so be it. Sometimes you have to sift through shit to find what's left of the opium suppositories.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 21, 2017, 04:29:12 am
Again, against violence here except in self-defense... in the understanding that sneezing on people, shaking hands with them after having diarrhea and not washing your hands, and in severe circumstances feeding them food from bulging cans or doing the thing from The Cask of Amontillado are not violence (though I personally would not do the last two due to fear of legal repercussions)

Heh. I think I would argue that this qualifies as chemical warfare. Still, it's football fields more clever than sticks and stones.

Say... would you like a chocolate-covered pretzel?

(http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/reviews/1/1184883252_1.jpg)
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 21, 2017, 04:47:07 am
I don't expect anyone to believe anything. I didn't come back to change minds.

Reasonable people should be able to at least hazard a guess at the difference between trolling for a reaction and discussing for debate. I have so far observed that "reasonable people" make up a superminority of the most active users on this board.

But so be it. Sometimes you have to sift through shit to find what's left of the opium suppositories.

So fuck off to some place where there are reasonable people.  Sorted.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 21, 2017, 05:32:57 am
So fuck off to some place where there are reasonable people.

I really shouldn't have to clarify: reasonable Discordians. Fucking off to someplace else would not satisfy my inquiry.

Now that a few have managed to peek into this thread, I'm certain that with rational discourse afoot, you and the other droolers will begin your ritual of grunting and howling, doing your worst to prevent any semblance of adult conversation between those more measured and creative than yourselves.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Wizard Joseph on August 21, 2017, 07:39:13 am
Calls folks "droolers", dreams of having an "adult" conversation...  :lulz: :lulz:

I'd be pretty sure this is Poptart, but it's too puerile and boring to actually be that particular entity. No just one more role-troll thinking they're sharp, but they're slow-mo.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 21, 2017, 09:44:39 am
Right on cue.

Three or four more and no-one will remember why this thread was started.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Half-Eaten Waffle on August 21, 2017, 10:12:04 am
Has anyone here ever actually punched a Nazi?

Yes.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Wizard Joseph on August 21, 2017, 11:53:50 am
Right on cue.

Three or four more and no-one will remember why this thread was started.

Whatever Dookie Lips Leaky Nips Flappy Bottom. Nobody cared what you had to say since you reg'd.
 :tldr:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Hoopla on August 21, 2017, 02:24:01 pm
So fuck off to some place where there are reasonable people.

I really shouldn't have to clarify: reasonable Discordians. Fucking off to someplace else would not satisfy my inquiry.

Now that a few have managed to peek into this thread, I'm certain that with rational discourse afoot, you and the other droolers will begin your ritual of grunting and howling, doing your worst to prevent any semblance of adult conversation between those more measured and creative than yourselves.

Have you tried asking a discordian named Loveshade? I bet he would be willing to chat with you.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: PretentiousMovieDirector on August 21, 2017, 02:51:35 pm
Right on cue.

Three or four more and no-one will remember why this thread was started.

CUT!

Get this man some more butthurt. Go ahead and dim the front light and focus it on his eyes. This time, as he states his prediction, fade the light and cut to black.

ROGER, TIGHTEN MICHAEL BAY'S BALL GAG, I CAN HEAR HIS SCREAMS OVER THE BRAND X MUSIC!

Look, we're gonna need you step up the energy. I'm getting a lot of "DISCRODIA IS NOT NICE" but not enough "BEES BEES BEES."

Do you get what I'm saying?

I WANT JIM CARREY MEETS JOHN WAYNE GACY. I WANT FRENCH FRY MEETS WENDY'S CHOCOLATE FROSTY. I WANT SHARKNADO MEETS THE MUNSTERS.

Make me proud.


Alright, from the top of Scene 5.

ACTION!
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 21, 2017, 05:30:06 pm
(http://www.recycledsurfboards.com/what-is-love-gif-jim-carrey-19.gif)
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m1lv031k6P1rsd3y6o5_400.gif)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/Yzk0KZhgcPdbW/giphy.gif)
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/5-02-2016/wgdiaD.gif)
(https://s.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/20654b65a6f7b2c0c65818a9c01fcc8d/200502226/raining-sharks.gif)
(https://yadadarcyyada.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/1halloween38.gif?w=840)
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: PretentiousMovieDirector on August 21, 2017, 05:57:44 pm
:herewego:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: PoFP on August 21, 2017, 06:08:51 pm
Why was this thread started again?  :lulz:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Ziegejunge on August 21, 2017, 06:32:17 pm
Might as well chime in, despite my lack of composed thoughts on the topic at hand:

I am not a pacifist, but my grandparents were. They were Peace Corps members. Grandpa was born in India to missionaries but largely exchanged evangelism for more secular overseas approaches.

My grandparents on the other side of the family allegedly met on the way to their first KKK meeting. According to family lore, they ditched the meeting in favor of a romantic date and ended up devoting their time to each other rather than the organization. I like to believe that's true, but then again I have a right to suspect some bias from the storytellers, my parents.

We contain multitudes. I like to acknowledge the disparity in my own family tree because it reminds me, symbolically, of the chaos we each have in our own hearts and lives -- that is, the breathing, balancing push-and-pull of order and disorder, creative and destructive impulses.

I do not identify as a pacifist, per se, but at the same time I do want to be clear that I value non-violence to the extent that non-violence is a viable solution.

That said, I absolutely believe in the necessity of (violent) self-defense. However, my philosophy of self-defense is that it is ideally 99% preparation, 1% application. Be strong enough that nobody wants to fuck with you; be ready enough so that if they do, you're able to protect yourself and the people and values you care for.

I want to be clear that I don't mean to conflate non-violence with a lack of application of values; I am not endorsing fence-sitting or endgame neutrality.

On the other hand, I prefer to explore non-violent solutions before resorting to self-defense and/or violent retaliation when possible and appropriate. A personal example:

I was a big kid in school; I hit my growth spurts early. When I was about 13 years old, during a school lunch break, I saw a group of five or so bullies my size physically harassing a smaller, younger kid. I stood up to the bullies and told them to lay off the kid. They reacted as you'd probably expect, by turning their attention onto me.

I had achieved my desired result: the bullied kid got his respite and was able to sneak away. Having no further plan of action, I simply turned and walked away (back toward the schoolhouse, of course.) I walked slowly, it was not a retreat. I was followed by the bullies and their heckling, and a crowd of spectators was beginning to form.

Then came the sucker-punches to the back of the head and torso. They were firm, but not hard punches. Exploratory punches. Provocative punches. The punches were questions: What is this nerd doing? Why isn't he fighting back? Would we be able to take him down if he did?

After the first few strikes I turned, made eye contact, and told them firmly to stop. The reply was laughs, jeers, and a few more halfhearted jabs, but by then the wind was out of their sails. The assault wasn't fun anymore. Absorbing their assault and shrugging it off denied it of its intended purpose: to dominate and demonstrate power.

By no means do I intend to imply that calling out violence and walking away is the ideal solution. This is merely a personal anecdote with its own contained context to illustrate the point that non-violent action can have a positive effect and can even help reach satisfactory resolutions.

A few caveats: these positive effects do not always scale well. Standing up to a specific group of bullies is waging a very different type of ideological warfare in contrast to standing up to the idea of Nazism in general. Also, had the blows I received been less exploratory and more earnest, then yes, I suspect I would have done more to defend myself violently. I wasn't there to change minds; I was there to keep a kid from getting bodied and bloodied, and in that context I was successful.

I guess to wit I would say, in the larger context of the potential for living in the shadow of fascist violence: have your (metaphorical?) sock of pennies ready, know how to use it, know when to use it, and do your best to keep yourself, your loved ones, and your ideals healthy and intact.

And if one is comfortable enough on the fence to watch fascists take one's neighbors away, I would venture that one's ideals aren't as healthy as they could be to begin with, and that perhaps one should reexamine and nurture those ideals as a component of their self-defense development.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 21, 2017, 11:08:44 pm
Calls folks "droolers", dreams of having an "adult" conversation...  :lulz: :lulz:

I'd be pretty sure this is Poptart, but it's too puerile and boring to actually be that particular entity. No just one more role-troll thinking they're sharp, but they're slow-mo.

No, this smells like Good old Ron Paul/Weed.

I mean, it's obvious.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 21, 2017, 11:09:54 pm
Right on cue.

Three or four more and no-one will remember why this thread was started.

CUT!

Get this man some more butthurt. Go ahead and dim the front light and focus it on his eyes. This time, as he states his prediction, fade the light and cut to black.

ROGER, TIGHTEN MICHAEL BAY'S BALL GAG, I CAN HEAR HIS SCREAMS OVER THE BRAND X MUSIC!

Look, we're gonna need you step up the energy. I'm getting a lot of "DISCRODIA IS NOT NICE" but not enough "BEES BEES BEES."

Do you get what I'm saying?

I WANT JIM CARREY MEETS JOHN WAYNE GACY. I WANT FRENCH FRY MEETS WENDY'S CHOCOLATE FROSTY. I WANT SHARKNADO MEETS THE MUNSTERS.

Make me proud.


Alright, from the top of Scene 5.

ACTION!

:mittens:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Hoopla on August 21, 2017, 11:32:53 pm
Calls folks "droolers", dreams of having an "adult" conversation...  :lulz: :lulz:

I'd be pretty sure this is Poptart, but it's too puerile and boring to actually be that particular entity. No just one more role-troll thinking they're sharp, but they're slow-mo.

No, this smells like Good old Ron Paul/Weed.

I mean, it's obvious.

Yup.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 22, 2017, 12:06:24 am
Calls folks "droolers", dreams of having an "adult" conversation...  :lulz: :lulz:

I'd be pretty sure this is Poptart, but it's too puerile and boring to actually be that particular entity. No just one more role-troll thinking they're sharp, but they're slow-mo.

No, this smells like Good old Ron Paul/Weed.

I mean, it's obvious.

Yup.

Yeah, I was thinking at first that it was Navcat, who was saying the exact same shit, but after his last posts, it's obvious.  I was merely confused by the ancap odor.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Hoopla on August 22, 2017, 12:13:50 am
Calls folks "droolers", dreams of having an "adult" conversation...  :lulz: :lulz:

I'd be pretty sure this is Poptart, but it's too puerile and boring to actually be that particular entity. No just one more role-troll thinking they're sharp, but they're slow-mo.

No, this smells like Good old Ron Paul/Weed.

I mean, it's obvious.

Yup.

Yeah, I was thinking at first that it was Navcat, who was saying the exact same shit, but after his last posts, it's obvious.  I was merely confused by the ancap odor.

Navcat would be less focused.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 22, 2017, 12:26:55 am
Calls folks "droolers", dreams of having an "adult" conversation...  :lulz: :lulz:

I'd be pretty sure this is Poptart, but it's too puerile and boring to actually be that particular entity. No just one more role-troll thinking they're sharp, but they're slow-mo.

No, this smells like Good old Ron Paul/Weed.

I mean, it's obvious.

Yup.

Yeah, I was thinking at first that it was Navcat, who was saying the exact same shit, but after his last posts, it's obvious.  I was merely confused by the ancap odor.

Navcat would be less focused.

Absolutely.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Wizard Joseph on August 22, 2017, 12:46:06 am
Calls folks "droolers", dreams of having an "adult" conversation...  :lulz: :lulz:

I'd be pretty sure this is Poptart, but it's too puerile and boring to actually be that particular entity. No just one more role-troll thinking they're sharp, but they're slow-mo.

No, this smells like Good old Ron Paul/Weed.

I mean, it's obvious.

Yeah, RP on Xanax or a mood stabilizer. IIRC punchie here showed up just after RP got banned. Totally makes sense.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: IPunchNazis on August 22, 2017, 05:32:00 am
Would someone with administrative powers be kind enough to split off this entire page? Then this thread can get back to what I started it for and the children can fruitlessly speculate about my identity elsewhere. (As if it even matters...)
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 22, 2017, 06:14:12 am
Cain might, if you ask him nicely.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Hoopla on August 22, 2017, 12:39:43 pm
I doubt it's going to matter much...
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Cain on August 22, 2017, 04:27:45 pm
Yeah, I briefly considered answering this seriously, until I realised who it was.

I mean, even without that, it was pretty clear that this was stage 2 of the trolling, after no-one took the super-obvious bait the first time around.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Hoopla on August 22, 2017, 05:31:38 pm
The point of this OP was supposedly "now I'm rethinking my position", yet they immediately reneg on that and then revert back to starting position.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Cain on August 22, 2017, 05:38:59 pm
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/715/810/0ec.jpg)
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: PoFP on August 22, 2017, 05:47:19 pm
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/715/810/0ec.jpg)

 :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: I actually got that one.

EDIT: >Am weeb
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Mr. Gone on August 22, 2017, 06:38:45 pm
Oh, hey, that's my favorite blackgaze band.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Hoopla on August 22, 2017, 10:19:20 pm
When I first signed up, you all clocked me for what I was: a troll. But a few of you actually understood the joke: that my intention was to hold to you a mirror-image caricature of the seemingly addicted-to-violence mentality that pervades this board.

I became quickly bored (as I'm sure you all were with me from the start) and went back to lurking after realizing that those of you who are keen on aggressive action in the face of conflict with an enemy you equate with evil are at no risk of changing your minds, and I have no intention of making the mistake of arguing with you like so many others have come here to do.

Look, I think you are a troll, but I'm willing to bite for the moment. I bolded a part above that I see as the issue here. You say "an enemy you equate with evil", as if nazis being evil is up for debate. It isn't. If a tenet of your organization is genocide, guess what? It's not good.

Not all violence is equal.

If you are promote genocide, you definitely deserve (at the very bare minimum) a punch in the face.

The fact that you equate nazis with the possibility that us equating them with evil is in our heads is... worrisome.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 22, 2017, 11:45:51 pm
He has been banned.  It's Ron Paul, evading his original ban, with 3/4 admins concurring and the 4th not present.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on August 23, 2017, 12:30:25 am
Didn't you idiots spend at least several weeks being absolutely certain that I was Ron Paul? I Punch Nazis is right; you do this to everyone.

I have a lot of thoughts on this thread that I'm sure no-one wants to hear, and if you've just banned the person who was asking, I'm not sure actually they actually matter now. But fuck it.

As others have said, violence is a last resort, so you can tell a lot about the nature of the character of people who choose to use it as a first; either they're hot-headed fools or they're people who feel helpless. A lot of people feel helpless from the start; and thinking your enemy is the worst evil imaginable can make it that way. (Personally, I choose not to see the Nazis in the right-wing as evil, because evil is a pure construct and an ideal. It's something that the universe cannot be without - light, dark, good, evil, yin and yang. Thinking of an opponent as evil can make you feel justified, but it also contributes to that feeling of helplessness. After all, even irrational human beings know deep down that evil as a force can never be totally defeated. I don't think of the alt-right jackasses pretending to be Nazis as evil, I think of them as misguided and potentially dangerous.)

I left the other thread, tired of arguing and ready to take another break (which I maybe haven't - do I even have any friends here? Why do I keep coming back?) with a link to Accidental Courtesy (which I also have some conflicting thoughts on), and then decided to edit it out of the comment because fuck you guys. I'm sick of arguing about it all and I figure nobody would watch it and anyone who did would just say that it doesn't matter. Unfortunately, I didn't manage to get it out before Pretentious Movie Director quoted it, and well, there it is. Sometimes I try to stop being an asshole and just say, "Look, here's what I'm saying," but nobody wants that either. I'm in a lose-lose situation on this board at this point and I should just be glad that I haven't been banned, too.

I'm a left-leaning person but I'm more centrist in my arguments. Much like Daryl Davis when he fucks up his interview with BLM, I wind up getting more pissed off at people I actually side with than those to whom I'm opposed. When people on my team are fucking up, I feel the need to try to fix the problem. Maybe I just have zero tact, but 9 times out of 10 it just winds up with them accusing me of being a spy for the other team.

Right now, the strategy of the hard-left in America feels like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hooKVstzbz0

I wish everyone would stop and say, "Look, calm the fuck down. We're all being trolled into losing our cool, and if we keep doing what they expect, we're going to keep losing." Violence is the physical manifestation of absolute frustration, not just with an opponent, but also with one's self.

Or maybe that's the Old Camp talking. This stuff is delicious. And it's only $1.99 for 100ml.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Junkenstein on August 23, 2017, 12:45:51 am
TL:DR.

I'm sure someone will be kind enough to point out if there's anything particularly funny or stupid. I'm just assuming it's all stupid.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 23, 2017, 01:06:36 am
Didn't you idiots spend at least several weeks being absolutely certain that I was Ron Paul? I Punch Nazis is right; you do this to everyone.

Life is tough, wear a hat.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 23, 2017, 01:07:28 am
TL:DR.

I'm sure someone will be kind enough to point out if there's anything particularly funny or stupid. I'm just assuming it's all stupid.

It's the "I'm leftist but want to hear what Nazis have to say" thing.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on August 23, 2017, 01:46:53 am
Didn't you idiots spend at least several weeks being absolutely certain that I was Ron Paul? I Punch Nazis is right; you do this to everyone.

Life is tough, wear a hat.

-- Joseph McCarthy
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: PretentiousMovieDirector on August 23, 2017, 01:54:53 am
Unfortunately, I didn't manage to get it out before Pretentious Movie Director quoted it, and well, there it is.

IS THAT A FOURTH-WALL BREAK? WHAT THE FUCK? THIS ISN'T HOUSE OF CARDS, AND I'M NOT WOODY ALLEN. YOU ARE SO FIRED.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 23, 2017, 01:57:05 am
Didn't you idiots spend at least several weeks being absolutely certain that I was Ron Paul? I Punch Nazis is right; you do this to everyone.

Life is tough, wear a hat.

-- Joseph McCarthy

 :lulz:

Go fuck yourself, twat.

 :lulz:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on August 23, 2017, 02:09:29 am
Didn't you idiots spend at least several weeks being absolutely certain that I was Ron Paul? I Punch Nazis is right; you do this to everyone.

Life is tough, wear a hat.

-- Joseph McCarthy

 :lulz:

Go fuck yourself, twat.

 :lulz:

Gosh, you really outwitted me with that one. The nuance is astounding. The thought you must have put into that post... I just... I just concede. I concede the entire argument. You win.

Edit: Oh, wait, the silly-face-hat-man meant you were joking. I think? You used it twice so it's a little hard to figure out. Then again, I'm new here. No, wait, having been here for 8 months means I'm not new. Fuck, I'm so confused. Oh, wait, that's the point! Being confused is Zen!
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 23, 2017, 03:12:22 am
Didn't you idiots spend at least several weeks being absolutely certain that I was Ron Paul? I Punch Nazis is right; you do this to everyone.

Life is tough, wear a hat.

-- Joseph McCarthy

 :lulz:

Go fuck yourself, twat.

 :lulz:

Gosh, you really outwitted me with that one. The nuance is astounding. The thought you must have put into that post... I just... I just concede. I concede the entire argument. You win.

Edit: Oh, wait, the silly-face-hat-man meant you were joking. I think? You used it twice so it's a little hard to figure out. Then again, I'm new here. No, wait, having been here for 8 months means I'm not new. Fuck, I'm so confused. Oh, wait, that's the point! Being confused is Zen!

Just what on Earth did you think you rated?

And yes.  I am totally laughing with you.  Like this --->   :lulz:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on August 23, 2017, 03:16:37 am
It's like you guys live in a world where posting the hat-guy-happy-face makes your point instantly valid.

Well, then.

 :lulz:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 23, 2017, 05:14:50 am
It's like you guys live in a world where posting the hat-guy-happy-face makes your point instantly valid.

Well, then.

 :lulz:

You're autistic or something, right?  Not saying that's awful or anything, just honestly curious.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: PoFP on August 23, 2017, 05:48:29 am
Ahh, I remember my first heel-digging screech-fest. I had a ton of them, in-fact.

I still look back on them occasionally to remind myself not to be a complete fucking retard. Maybe one day you'll do that, when you're standing on two legs.

I hope you do, anyways. It seems like you have potential. Your brain's just stuck in a cesspool of pseudo-intellectual bullshit because you haven't experienced or witnessed the true extent of human indecency, nor do you seem to understand the superficiality of the lies that bigots tell themselves and others, or how such superficiality is capable of transitioning into the kind of compartmentalization that propagates hate crimes.

As Roger said before, the violence is honestly more dignified and beneficial to the Nazis themselves. If we beat the pulp out of them now, we don't have to gut them, shoot them, or hang them later. You see, it's all in avoidance of a replay of the Nuremberg Trials, but also doubles as a way of defending innocent people.

Furthermore, defense of the innocent has never been something that requires moral high-ground to be effective. Also, not everyone should sacrifice their morality or innocence for the good of others. But there are those who have that drive, and Will to do so without being asked.

Resorting to violence might make me a bad person. But if it keeps the nice Middle-eastern lady that lives next door to me from being a victim of a hate crime, then I don't give a shit about what kind of person I am.

We aren't advocating that every single person should be pacing the streets with bats in search of Neo-Nazis. But we are saying that if we see a Nazi giving some singled-out, defenseless colored person hell, and we happen to have a bat... well...

(https://68.media.tumblr.com/6c515bedd28d171d9b4b5683345e2c65/tumblr_inline_o6w6v8NwQy1swuv5r_500.gif)

And we don't think there's a reason to feel bad about it afterwards. But if you wanna work on things from the angle of "Let's hold hands and talk it out," since that's what your privileged environment has allowed for, that's cool. Go ahead. While you still can. You might even turn some heads. But when fists start flying, and you aren't ready to let them fly back, then stay the fuck out of our way.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on August 23, 2017, 07:00:17 am
It's like you guys live in a world where posting the hat-guy-happy-face makes your point instantly valid.

Well, then.

 :lulz:

You're autistic or something, right?  Not saying that's awful or anything, just honestly curious.

That's funny, because I assume something similar about you. Although I don't give you the benefit of one of the "cool" handicaps like autism, so I appreciate the compliment.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on August 23, 2017, 11:20:28 pm
You're autistic or something, right?

Ugh. Actually, I was asshole-drunk. Again. I think my doctor is about to order me to quit, though, since my liver enzymes are apparently through the roof.

Don't Jim Beam and Internet, kids.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 24, 2017, 12:15:26 am
It's like you guys live in a world where posting the hat-guy-happy-face makes your point instantly valid.

Well, then.

 :lulz:

You're autistic or something, right?  Not saying that's awful or anything, just honestly curious.

That's funny, because I assume something similar about you. Although I don't give you the benefit of one of the "cool" handicaps like autism, so I appreciate the compliment.

Okay.

Don't anyone say I didn't try to be at least mildly pleasant about this.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 24, 2017, 12:27:12 am
You're autistic or something, right?

Ugh. Actually, I was asshole-drunk. Again. I think my doctor is about to order me to quit, though, since my liver enzymes are apparently through the roof.

Don't Jim Beam and Internet, kids.

Yeah, we have a guy here called Rong who likes to get shitfaced and dump on people.

Had another person like that, come to think of it.  Smart, funny, best friend you ever had.  Until a bunch of booze comes along, then fucking Godzilla and nothing you ever did comes even close to being good enough, or even "simian".  That went on from 2009-2015.

Being an asshole "because you're drunk", for the most part, is just saying "Here's what I really think of you." 

I could be wrong. I will assume I am, this time.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on August 24, 2017, 02:39:15 am
Being an asshole "because you're drunk", for the most part, is just saying "Here's what I really think of you."

I think that only applies to friends and family. On the Internet it just means being a poor sport in an intellectual game of "Yo Mama".
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: rong on August 24, 2017, 03:25:21 am
You're autistic or something, right?

Ugh. Actually, I was asshole-drunk. Again. I think my doctor is about to order me to quit, though, since my liver enzymes are apparently through the roof.

Don't Jim Beam and Internet, kids.

Yeah, we have a guy here called Rong who likes to get shitfaced and dump on people.

Had another person like that, come to think of it.  Smart, funny, best friend you ever had.  Until a bunch of booze comes along, then fucking Godzilla and nothing you ever did comes even close to being good enough, or even "simian".  That went on from 2009-2015.

Being an asshole "because you're drunk", for the most part, is just saying "Here's what I really think of you." 

I could be rong. I will assume I am, this time.

fixt that for you
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 24, 2017, 04:05:52 am
You're autistic or something, right?

Ugh. Actually, I was asshole-drunk. Again. I think my doctor is about to order me to quit, though, since my liver enzymes are apparently through the roof.

Don't Jim Beam and Internet, kids.

Yeah, we have a guy here called Rong who likes to get shitfaced and dump on people.

Had another person like that, come to think of it.  Smart, funny, best friend you ever had.  Until a bunch of booze comes along, then fucking Godzilla and nothing you ever did comes even close to being good enough, or even "simian".  That went on from 2009-2015.

Being an asshole "because you're drunk", for the most part, is just saying "Here's what I really think of you." 

I could be rong. I will assume I am, this time.

fixt that for you

 :bacon:
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on August 24, 2017, 04:39:21 pm
When I first signed up, you all clocked me for what I was: a troll. But a few of you actually understood the joke: that my intention was to hold to you a mirror-image caricature of the seemingly addicted-to-violence mentality that pervades this board.

oh yeah, I said this:

Alright let me put on my goggles. The "IPunchNazis" character is playing on the recent liberal uptick in antifascist violence. Essentially, satirizing the enthusiastic liberal nazi puncher who is swept up by the chest pumping tribal machismo which antifascism lets him express  dot dot dot, implying antifascist violence is more or less equivalent to fascism, dot dot dot, liberals are cuck hypocrites who only take a moral high ground against certain kinds of violence, etc etc. Okay that's basically the end point, right?

I merit there might be bait here for that argument. I would be curious to hear what the person playing this character thinks the proper use of violence is, like, how do you distinguish between "good" and "bad" violence? I would love to have that talk but I think they need the mask, so all we get is this kinda uninspired caricature troll.

eh what can you do

so I guess you're here for the latter part now? that's cool, I can roll with that.


Quote
Bottom line? Well, I sure like the idea of nonviolence, but I'm also not convinced that it can always solve things on its own. Nonviolent appeasement of Hitler sure didn't work.

So I now must admit that I have to consider that the aggressive and confrontational element is a necessary evil, so to speak, and that the problem cannot be resolved (I.E. the alt-right's agenda defeated) without it. Perhaps the far-right has indeed become a very real threat with another civil war on the horizon.

I am still, however, surprised to see so many Discordians hungry to participate in the violence. Are there any of you, like me, who aren't? Who would, if anything, attempt subvert it instead of willfully helping to immanentize it?

I appreciate the straightforward chat. I hadn't really thought much about antifa in the context of how Malcolm X slid the Overton Window left.

My perspective is - I don't think that violence is an effective long run strategy. What I've observed is that violent action is super effective as a recruitment tool for "the other side". It doesn't change minds. If I got punched in the face for my political beliefs, I wouldn't stop believing those things. In fact, I would probably justify them harder. If I continually feared bodily harm, I'd just go underground and get louder.

Punching nazis is forgivable when they are advocating violence & actively recruiting. Punching the peaceful but angry guy standing near the nazi--mainly counterproductive.

Exactly, you need to temper your aggression with passivity,

Violence will turn people away from you, as will, to a lesser extent, shouting and hard-sell propaganda. To give a personal example of the latter (inefficacy of hard-sell propaganda) I remember it was Jack Chick's pro Christian religious tracts that finally pushed me over the edge into not believing in Christianity anymore.

The more you tighten your grip the more people will slip through your fingers.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Chucklemaster on August 28, 2017, 03:21:56 am
Hi, I'm gonna say some stuff.
I'm a discordian, and I'm a pacifist. I said this already, but
I'm a pacifist.
That term is loaded with far too much shit, so let me unpack what that means to me. Here, I've re-packaged it into a set of easily digestible bullet points:
I don't like violence.
I'm not going to begrudge anyone for using violence in self-defense or in defense of someone in danger, ESPECIALLY not if the person you hurt is a nazi.
I do not believe in an inherently moral universe.
I do believe that part of why I can tell a nazi to go fuck theirself instead of punching them and get away with it is because of the privilege this unjust society gives me, and understand that that is not necessarily an ability afforded to everyone.
If you punch a nazi, I'm not going to tell you you're a bad person.
When I see nazism being advocated for, I most certainly tell the nazi in question to fuck off. I will continue to do so until the time that they fuck off.
I will fuck with, drown out, and insult nazis all day long.
I am not advocating for everything to be done my way. Like I said, it can't always be done my way.
I endorse all non-violent driving away of nazis, and, like I said, am not going to bitch and moan if some nazis get punched in the process of getting them the fuck out.
That still stands, and, to add, I'm not going to diss anyone else's discordia for any reason. Especially not if your discordia coexists with being violent in order to stop nazis from hurting people. I won't do it, I won't even endorse your actions, though I'm not going to stop you, either.
Many paths up the mountain, right? The thing I don't like is when assholes go around pushing other people off the mountain because they're "doing it wrong".
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: MithridatesXXIII on October 12, 2017, 07:53:11 am
https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,38211.0.html

So you're telling me feelings about violence have changed around here?
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Faust on October 12, 2017, 08:04:29 am
Are you asking is if we have a consensus on what our beliefs are?

I am of the belief that physical violence of any kind is theft and is unacceptable, but as a discordian I would not expect others to hold this belief.

To balance that though I believe certain idiologies have no right to exist because they are founded on philosophies that cause harm. This limp resurfacing of xenophobia married to faux nationalism though a dimestore knockoff brand is to be eradicated.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: The Wizard Joseph on October 12, 2017, 09:45:11 am
Depends on what is meant by voilence. I'd just as soon see no aggressive deeds, but sometimes that preference is moot or inappropriate.

Pacifism is asceticism
Asceticism is for monks
A monk I am not, really
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on October 12, 2017, 09:56:47 am
No ideology deserves to exist. Ideology in itself is idiotic. Even the good ones are fucking retarded when it boils right down to it. Plus, on a long enough timeline, they pretty much all devolve into final-solution fuckery. Is why the moderate, reasonable voices of the left suddenly sound like a chorus of screeching retards when met with a competing one that their - can't we all just get along - worldview doesn't have an effective method of dealing with.

The universe looks on dispassionately. "Thou shalt not kill" is not a law of physics, it's an opinion shared by some people and most of them include caveats.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Faust on October 12, 2017, 11:14:43 am
Exactly, this relic of a failed ideology even moreso because Europe still bears the scars of just how damaging it could be, the only reason it's resurfacing now out now is because there's less and less people around who remember what happened in world war two and people are scared and fragile so they cling to the easy answers: close borders, pick on the different.
The world is strange, and any attempts to make it less so will fail, as it should, all hail discordia.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Frontside Back on October 23, 2017, 05:22:18 pm
Abstaining from violence is actually quite hard. You can say you don't want to hurt anybody and try to navigate into realities where you don't need to but violence still exist within you. As long as there's even a chance you could be manipulated into bloodthirsty mongrel, saying you are pacifist is essentially lying. Truly being pacifist requires you to acquire quadriplegia and still you can be running people over with your out of control wheelchair.

I'd rather say "I don't want to hurt you" to people than "I don't want to hurt anybody". It's a bit more personal so they might drop me some leftovers.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on October 29, 2017, 06:41:43 am
Abstaining from violence is actually quite hard. You can say you don't want to hurt anybody and try to navigate into realities where you don't need to but violence still exist within you. As long as there's even a chance you could be manipulated into bloodthirsty mongrel, saying you are pacifist is essentially lying. Truly being pacifist requires you to acquire quadriplegia and still you can be running people over with your out of control wheelchair.

I'd rather say "I don't want to hurt you" to people than "I don't want to hurt anybody". It's a bit more personal so they might drop me some leftovers.

you all have too much initiative
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Hoopla on November 06, 2017, 02:54:41 pm
My only genuine trepidation that if I start punching I may never stop.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Doktor Howl on November 06, 2017, 08:22:46 pm
My only genuine trepidation that if I start punching I may never stop.

But would you want to?
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Junkenstein on November 07, 2017, 12:33:59 am
My only genuine trepidation that if I start punching I may never stop.

But would you want to?

It's less a question of want than say, need.

For example, If I ever got hold of Adam Sandler I would never want to stop punching him in the face, but after my fists are a bloody pulp I will need to. To start kicking.

I have more graphic examples but they involve ben stiller and I suspect that they could be used against me as evidence at some point in the future. Let's just say it involves secretary birds, snakes and Frank Zappa.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Doktor Howl on November 08, 2017, 11:47:13 pm
My only genuine trepidation that if I start punching I may never stop.

But would you want to?

It's less a question of want than say, need.

For example, If I ever got hold of Adam Sandler I would never want to stop punching him in the face, but after my fists are a bloody pulp I will need to. To start kicking.

I have more graphic examples but they involve ben stiller and I suspect that they could be used against me as evidence at some point in the future. Let's just say it involves secretary birds, snakes and Frank Zappa.

It's almost like You People have forgotten about the simple club.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Junkenstein on November 09, 2017, 08:53:21 pm
On the contrary, simple things will work for most, but some people need creative examples made out of them.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Doktor Howl on November 09, 2017, 10:38:06 pm
On the contrary, simple things will work for most, but some people need creative examples made out of them.

With clubs.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Doktor Howl on November 09, 2017, 10:39:51 pm
The club is proven technology.  It does exactly what it says on the box, and it has no moving parts or other failure points.  You apply the club until the problem is solved, and you leave the mess for the janitor.;

I don't see why people have to get all creative over basic technical problems.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Don Coyote on November 09, 2017, 10:59:06 pm
Club, it's an elegant weapon from a less civilized age.

Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Junkenstein on November 09, 2017, 11:16:55 pm
I find this line of reasoning distasteful and tedious.

Let's be frank, we both know the technical and logistical benefits of the club. And Cosh. Or even the humble blackjack. That isn't the point with these kinds of cases. Hell, the romans didn't crucify every uppity jew, did they?. But sometimes, examples need to be made. Creative examples. Examples that let the rest of them know where the land lies and how shit is going to be. The club accomplishes this, yes, but it is literally a blunt tool. Special cases require special attention and methods.

And in these kinds of cases, where the holy name of comedy has been defiled beyond any kind of reasonable measure and sanity, I ask you: Is it not just that they should be staked upon the sands, covered in snakes that have been injected with meth and then introducing a flock of equally drugged secretary birds into the situation? Is there ever going to be a surer sign of the end of the worship of the redundant stupid times and full embrace on a societal level of the strange times?


 
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Doktor Howl on November 09, 2017, 11:52:14 pm
I find this line of reasoning distasteful and tedious.

Let's be frank, we both know the technical and logistical benefits of the club. And Cosh. Or even the humble blackjack. That isn't the point with these kinds of cases. Hell, the romans didn't crucify every uppity jew, did they?. But sometimes, examples need to be made. Creative examples. Examples that let the rest of them know where the land lies and how shit is going to be. The club accomplishes this, yes, but it is literally a blunt tool. Special cases require special attention and methods.

And in these kinds of cases, where the holy name of comedy has been defiled beyond any kind of reasonable measure and sanity, I ask you: Is it not just that they should be staked upon the sands, covered in snakes that have been injected with meth and then introducing a flock of equally drugged secretary birds into the situation? Is there ever going to be a surer sign of the end of the worship of the redundant stupid times and full embrace on a societal level of the strange times?

The club is a social tool.  A community tool.  It helps us remain human in an increasingly technological world.  Had we stuck with the club as a means of behavior modification, this would be a far more pleasant world for you and I.

But that last paragraph, yeah, I can totally see that.
Title: Re: Is anyone here an advocate for non-violence?
Post by: Doktor Howl on November 09, 2017, 11:52:52 pm
Club, it's an elegant weapon from a less civilized age.

It is man's oldest tool for a reason.