President Trump Signs Executive Order Protecting Free Speech On College Campuses | TIME

[DarthMetalliCube]

SpokenTruth said:

DarthMetalliCube said:

Is this serious? 

The name means absolutely nothing. A name is a name..

I can call myself Emperor of the Universe. But I'm just a dude from Chicago who writes about video games.

What matters to me is their actions. Their actions are extremely fascist. They're litterally attempting to dictate what can or cannot be spoken through force. It doesn't get any more Fascist than that.

Even if you want to argue the laughable claim that the people these guys target are "Fascist" and therefore they're the anthesis of that.. Well, the vast majority of the people these lunatics claim to "fight" against are not really Fascist. From what I've seen, most of them simply don't tow the modern day "Progressive" line. Some are even center-left, Classical Liberals and Libertarians. And sure, some might be right wingers, maybe even Authoritarian right wingers.. but Authoritarian right wingers = Fascisim is about as sensible as Authoritarian left wingers = Communism. 

The name bit is a joke.  My first question was serious though.  And given that your only inference to fascism so far is the use of violence against something, then that suggests you really aren't all that familiar with the concept of fascism aside from that one factor. You just see AntiFa's predilection for violence as equivocal to fascism because fascists were also violent....but for very different reasons.

You ignore the fact AntiFa's violence is a reaction.  Fascist violence is a not.  It's a core tenet of growing their party/nation.  Further, fascism is built around a single, authoritarian leader with staunch protectionism, isolationist and military expansionist polices.  Fascists absolutely oppose liberal or western democracies.  Every bit of that is antithetical to AntiFa.

A reaction to what exactly? Speech? New ideas? There is absolutely no justification to "react" to speech in the way they do, just because you don't agree with it. Ideas are largely subjective in terms of their positive or negative impact on people/society. Violence is not. 

Maybe they aren't "Fascist" in the traditional sense or on a government level - but they certainly use Fascist-like tactics because as they're using force to basically shape discourse and thus society for the benefit of "the collective". Sure the collective might not be for the "state" in this case, but it's still a top-down sort of operation.

At the very least, they should be considered terrorists performing terrorist acts. I've also heard the term Anarcho-Fascist to describe them.

And there is such a thing as left-wing Fascism, so it does make sense.