Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What is the "hard left"? [View all]Not Ruth
(3,613 posts)151. Rose City Antifa FAQ
http://rosecityantifa.org/faq/
Doesnt stopping fascists from speaking make you just as bad as them?
Failing to stop fascists from speaking - that is, giving them the opportunity to organize to impose their agenda on the rest of us - makes you as bad as them. If you care about freedom, dont stand idly by while people mobilize to take it away
Free speech means protecting everyones right to speak, including people you dont agree with. How would you like it if you had an unpopular opinion and other people were trying to silence you? Isn't that censorship?
The First Amendment and related free speech laws protect citizens from state interference, not from criticism by the public. We point this out not because we care to validate a law-and-order analysis, but because it is a popular argument based on erroneous assumptions. Clearly, we do not have a powerful state apparatus at our disposal (we cannot imprison or fine our opponents for example) therefore the concepts of "censorship" and "free speech rights" are not in any reasonable way applicable. Moreover, our organization has always been clear that we do not call for any sort of government intervention regarding hateful speech. We aim to address issues of racist and extreme-Right organizing within communities, not to trust or engage the courts, or to ask for government action. We oppose calls to fight fascist movements through increases of state power, as this firstly treats the state as an allegedly neutral tool and conceals institutional racism. Furthermore, increases in state investigative and prosecutorial power against alleged extremism can facilitate crackdowns on protest and social change movements in general, which we oppose.
Venues, groups, and individuals make decisions about who they are going to give a platform to, who they are willing to organize with, and what ideas they are going to promote. Obviously, free speech does not mean venues have no choice but to book fascist bands, that every radical space is required to host white supremacist speakers, or that every group is obligated to allow bigoted members to join. If an organization or individual opts to align with fascism, they should be held accountable for that decision. Those that knowingly provide a platform or organizing space for fascists are not simply neutral conduits, hapless victims, or innocent bystanders. They have agency.
This is not a thought experiment or abstract debate. Actions follow ideas. We oppose fascists because of what they do, not what they say. Were not opposed to free speech; were opposed to enacting an agenda of hate and terror. We target individuals and groups that are organizing along fascist lines. Their public events dont exist to benignly express ideas, but to build the power they need to enforce their vicious world view.
The government and police have never protected everyones free speech equally, and never will; they systematically repress views and actions that challenge existing power inequalities. They spend hundreds of thousands of public dollars on riot police and helicopters to defend a KKK rally, but for a radical demonstration the same police will be there to stop it, not to protect it; just look at the evictions of the Occupy encampments, attacks on Earth First! actions, or countless other examples. Of course anarchists dont like being silenced by the state, but we dont want the state to define and manage our freedom, either. The First Amendment covers what laws Congress shall or shall not enact; its up to us to determine what we need to do to defend ourselves. Unlike the ACLU, whose supposed defense of freedom leads them to support the KKK and neo-Nazis, we support self-defense and self-determination above all. Whats the purpose of free speech, if not to foster a world free from oppression? Fascists oppose this vision; thus we oppose fascism by any means necessary.
Doesnt stopping fascists from speaking make you just as bad as them?
Failing to stop fascists from speaking - that is, giving them the opportunity to organize to impose their agenda on the rest of us - makes you as bad as them. If you care about freedom, dont stand idly by while people mobilize to take it away
Free speech means protecting everyones right to speak, including people you dont agree with. How would you like it if you had an unpopular opinion and other people were trying to silence you? Isn't that censorship?
The First Amendment and related free speech laws protect citizens from state interference, not from criticism by the public. We point this out not because we care to validate a law-and-order analysis, but because it is a popular argument based on erroneous assumptions. Clearly, we do not have a powerful state apparatus at our disposal (we cannot imprison or fine our opponents for example) therefore the concepts of "censorship" and "free speech rights" are not in any reasonable way applicable. Moreover, our organization has always been clear that we do not call for any sort of government intervention regarding hateful speech. We aim to address issues of racist and extreme-Right organizing within communities, not to trust or engage the courts, or to ask for government action. We oppose calls to fight fascist movements through increases of state power, as this firstly treats the state as an allegedly neutral tool and conceals institutional racism. Furthermore, increases in state investigative and prosecutorial power against alleged extremism can facilitate crackdowns on protest and social change movements in general, which we oppose.
Venues, groups, and individuals make decisions about who they are going to give a platform to, who they are willing to organize with, and what ideas they are going to promote. Obviously, free speech does not mean venues have no choice but to book fascist bands, that every radical space is required to host white supremacist speakers, or that every group is obligated to allow bigoted members to join. If an organization or individual opts to align with fascism, they should be held accountable for that decision. Those that knowingly provide a platform or organizing space for fascists are not simply neutral conduits, hapless victims, or innocent bystanders. They have agency.
This is not a thought experiment or abstract debate. Actions follow ideas. We oppose fascists because of what they do, not what they say. Were not opposed to free speech; were opposed to enacting an agenda of hate and terror. We target individuals and groups that are organizing along fascist lines. Their public events dont exist to benignly express ideas, but to build the power they need to enforce their vicious world view.
The government and police have never protected everyones free speech equally, and never will; they systematically repress views and actions that challenge existing power inequalities. They spend hundreds of thousands of public dollars on riot police and helicopters to defend a KKK rally, but for a radical demonstration the same police will be there to stop it, not to protect it; just look at the evictions of the Occupy encampments, attacks on Earth First! actions, or countless other examples. Of course anarchists dont like being silenced by the state, but we dont want the state to define and manage our freedom, either. The First Amendment covers what laws Congress shall or shall not enact; its up to us to determine what we need to do to defend ourselves. Unlike the ACLU, whose supposed defense of freedom leads them to support the KKK and neo-Nazis, we support self-defense and self-determination above all. Whats the purpose of free speech, if not to foster a world free from oppression? Fascists oppose this vision; thus we oppose fascism by any means necessary.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
194 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
the civil rights laws WERE only PASSED because of the GOP leadership under Evertt Dirksen
beachbum bob
Sep 2017
#112
A real Democrat would not elect a Republican (especially Trump) by saying the parties are the
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#106
Yup, proud to have stood for marital gay rights before it was "cool"... same with single-payer.
InAbLuEsTaTe
Sep 2017
#96
Indeed. Furthermore, there was a hard left at the time that opposed the literal new deal. n/t
BzaDem
Sep 2017
#14
It was partially that and partially because Republicans had finally been completely disgraced
Warpy
Sep 2017
#16
Pretty much sums it up... why we need to put up a true progressive in 2020...
InAbLuEsTaTe
Sep 2017
#97
But the time for U.S. military intervention is over-especially in the Arab/Muslim world.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#89
We could have had a non-brutal war with North Korea, or no war at all, back in the 50s...
Expecting Rain
Sep 2017
#171
Yetsin's embrace of Putin make my point that Yeltzin was not to be trusted...
Expecting Rain
Sep 2017
#173
Yeltsin chose Putin after the U.S. spent most of his term disrespecting him.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#174
I'd suggest you are making a argument that conflates correlation with causation...
Expecting Rain
Sep 2017
#175
It is fine to say "we have to do this," but unless one can make it happen...
Expecting Rain
Sep 2017
#189
I was referring to Democrats blocking bills introduced by a Democratic president.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#190
Nobody who calls for a new New Deal supports the return of 1930s racial values.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#160
Not at all, women and POC have been undervalued and used for free labor for centuries....
bettyellen
Sep 2017
#34
All of women's jobs were serverly underpaid, not sure why you thinks that's by sexist...
bettyellen
Sep 2017
#37
Because were conspicuously omitted from this OP- treated as lesser yet again.
bettyellen
Sep 2017
#113
Now we're demographics, LOL. No, it's about civil rights and equal treatment under the law!
bettyellen
Sep 2017
#149
"Nobody else was mentioned" - who did you expect to be mentioned? Ask "no other causes"? What are
bettyellen
Sep 2017
#169
No, I didn't expect to. And I didn't expect any other issues other than civil rights
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#183
I see 'Our Revolution' and Turner as traitors to our cause... I will support no candidate that comes
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#107
Once upon a time it meant the CPUSA and other marxist-leninist parties and anarchist
Voltaire2
Sep 2017
#20
You are making my points for me. That other counties have a variety of government...
Expecting Rain
Sep 2017
#142
Employer health insurance is a stranglehold that the corporations use to retain you
Not Ruth
Sep 2017
#127
The message of the primaries was simply that Bernie as a candidate was rejected.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#159
I would think any group that wants to eventually replace capitalism with some other system.
Willie Pep
Sep 2017
#87