by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .1,2711,2721,2731,274

Post by The people of the night suppressed by Antifascist pandas.

The people of the night

Ehhh why even try I am not even interested on this place just was in for a friend so I am just gonna bail. Well once the event ends anyways I already got some invitation lined up for me to join.

Hello all from the depths of the ocean's best retirement home ever. Glad to see TRF lead the way in this!

"Bread on every table, dignity for every person, and a bullet in every fascist."

Nenagh and Antifascist pandas

Crownguard wrote:and a bullet in every fascist."

Bit violent, no?

Unplannedland wrote:Bit violent, no?

Depends on your definition. I wouldn't call someone that if they were just of a political view; you can express how you might feel that's your right.

If they were in political action actively seeking to curtail the freedoms of myself or others however, why wouldn't they be my enemy? So I guess my definition is reflective of the latter of the categories, and to which I stand behind.

Nenagh

Crownguard wrote:Depends on your definition. I wouldn't call someone that if they were just of a political view; you can express how you might feel that's your right.
If they were in political action actively seeking to curtail the freedoms of myself or others however, why wouldn't they be my enemy? So I guess my definition is reflective of the latter of the categories, and to which I stand behind.

What I mean is, isn't it a bit violent to want to put bullets in people, i.e. shoot people, i.e. kill people? The way it comes across is that you want to kill people who hold a certain view.

Unplannedland wrote:What I mean is, isn't it a bit violent to want to put bullets in people, i.e. shoot people, i.e. kill people? The way it comes across is that you want to kill people who hold a certain view.

I am sure when people think you deserve to die or to enslave others your well intentioned pacifism will persuade them otherwise. If you don't believe you are willing to defend yourself or the rights of others, what makes you think someone else will do so for you?

Nenagh

Crownguard wrote:I am sure when people think you deserve to die or to enslave others your well intentioned pacifism will persuade them otherwise.

I don't identify as a pacifist. Just trying to understand your reasoning.

Crownguard wrote:If you don't believe you are willing to defend yourself or the rights of others, what makes you think someone else will do so for you?

I am willing to defend myself, just not willing to murder people. Defending yourself does not equate to murdering people.

Unplannedland wrote:Bit violent, no?

Both sides will clash in the streets.

I don't advocate murdering anyone. Being willing to kill and murder are not the same thing. I assure you, being an evil leftist etc, that history has borne out fascists would seek to kill people like me. Among many others, just pick whatever scapegoat you want. I have no issue in someone talking and reasoning things out. I would prefer that. Convincing someone they are wrong is the start, and better an ally than an enemy .

If they seek to have power to oppress others however, then yes, I have no issue with protecting the rights of others with force. No problem at all. And those who would do that, well, I figure it's better to die in your feet than live on your knees.

Would you prefer "fascist with power"? Tyrant? Oppressor? What is the correct word that makes it palatable? When they paint swastikas on buildings and threaten folks with weapons? Is it ok then?

Nenagh

"Live free or die. Death is not the greatest of evils."

Post by Nenagh suppressed by Antifascist pandas.

Crownguard wrote:I don't advocate murdering anyone. Being willing to kill and murder are not the same thing. I assure you, being an evil leftist etc, that history has borne out fascists would seek to kill people like me. Among many others, just pick whatever scapegoat you want. I have no issue in someone talking and reasoning things out. I would prefer that. Convincing someone they are wrong is the start, and better an ally than an enemy .
If they seek to have power to oppress others however, then yes, I have no issue with protecting the rights of others with force. No problem at all. And those who would do that, well, I figure it's better to die in your feet than live on your knees.
Would you prefer "fascist with power"? Tyrant? Oppressor? What is the correct word that makes it palatable? When they paint swastikas on buildings and threaten folks with weapons? Is it ok then?

What if the people you want to 'protect' don't mind being 'oppressed'?

Post self-deleted by Crownguard.

Then there are other people who would rather have help, and I would rather spend energy helping. You can only help people who want it, otherwise, you will be resented for shaking the status quo. I recall a book called "Escape From Freedom" that seemed to be a good outline of that idea.

Nenagh

Post by Nenagh suppressed by Antifascist pandas.

Crownguard wrote:Then there are other people who would rather have help, and I would rather spend energy helping. You can only help people who want it, otherwise, you will be resented for shaking the status quo. I recall a book called "Escape From Freedom" that seemed to be a good outline of that idea.

A large problem with you guys is that you think everyone wants to be liberated and put under your ru;e

Funny how you say I think that when I literally just said I didn't. I don't know who 'you guys' are so you might want to clarify.

Nenagh

Post by Nenagh suppressed by Antifascist pandas.

Crownguard wrote:Funny how you say I think that when I literally just said I didn't. I don't know who 'you guys' are so you might want to clarify.

I didn't mean you, you are probably the first educated member of the ns left i have met.
I mean Communists and The Red Fleet in general, always talking about liberating nations from oppressor and fascist governments.

Perhaps we should have on the RMB a discussion on combating the far right. I'll start:

A big difference between the far right and the far left is that presented with a new situation the far left has a tendency to retreat into theoretical analysis of a situation, thus meaning that we never get anything done. This sounds like a bad thing, but better that that the alternative.

The far right, being as their politics is a little more... intuitive... rely on "common sense" and gut feeling, thus precluding analysis. This is exemplified in their rejection of academia and other scholarship. They can act a lot faster because they make no attempt to be conscientious in their action. It's the politics of "I don't care", of simple solutions to complex problems. Junk food politics. No-one ever thought outside the box on the far-right, they just make the box bigger, and scarier, and in the worst cases, genocidal.

What do fellow Red Fleet comrades think? How do we fight this? Must we become populist and junk-food-y ourselves?

Antifascist pandas

All troops, whether incoming or already in the region, please make sure that you have endorsed ALL of the RO's in addition to the WA Delegate :)

Nenagh and Ossendorf

Post by Weavu suppressed by Antifascist pandas.

Antifascist pandas wrote:All troops, whether incoming or already in the region, please make sure that you have endorsed ALL of the RO's in addition to the WA Delegate :)

Well I would, but you know... I got expelled from The Red Fleet due to Misley not liking my former host region, which I still have ties to...

Post by Weavu suppressed by Antifascist pandas.

Antifascist pandas, That wasn't very kind, comrade..

All you fascists bound to lose

Weavu wrote:Well I would, but you know... I got expelled from The Red Fleet due to Misley not liking my former host region, which I still have ties to...

that's not actually why you were expelled from the Fleet, but you know that! :)

Ossendorf wrote:A big difference between the far right and the far left is that presented with a new situation the far left has a tendency to retreat into theoretical analysis of a situation, thus meaning that we never get anything done. This sounds like a bad thing, but better that that the alternative.

The bigger problem in my opinion is the complete fracturing and factionalization of the left.

Ossendorf wrote:The far right, being as their politics is a little more... intuitive... rely on "common sense" and gut feeling, thus precluding analysis. This is exemplified in their rejection of academia and other scholarship. They can act a lot faster because they make no attempt to be conscientious in their action. It's the politics of "I don't care", of simple solutions to complex problems. Junk food politics. No-one ever thought outside the box on the far-right, they just make the box bigger, and scarier, and in the worst cases, genocidal.
What do fellow Red Fleet comrades think? How do we fight this? Must we become populist and junk-food-y ourselves?

We need to make our arguments understandable to modern workers. Most modern workers don't have the time to read and digest and understand Capital, and if they do, that doesn't mean they understand how it applies to their life in the twenty-first century.

I think the rise of new, easy-to-read and easy-to-share professional-looking media like Jacobin is a positive development for the left.

Usscf armed forces, Antifascist pandas, and Ossendorf

Post self-deleted by Unplannedland sailors.

I was a GDP fighter long ago, here to assist. Long live The MT Army and TRF.

All you fascists bound to lose

Thanks to everyone who made this operation possible. The Red Fleet is declaring victory and moving on to warmer waters. :)

good night alt right

Diljan and Antifascist pandas

Antifascist pandas

Another hellhole taken down for good!

Diljan and All you fascists bound to lose

«12. . .1,2711,2721,2731,274

Advertisement