The United States has arrested thousands of people suspected of being socialists:

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1669.html

I said that violence is a reaction to desperation: nobody cares about their pleas and cries for help when they try to be peaceful, and it seems like fighting back is the only way that anyone will listen to them.

It's like the "what if they no-platformed Hitler?!" people forget that Weimar Germany had hate speech laws and it only played into the Nazis' hands when they were prosecuted for violating them.

You see, I'm not a liberal, so the way I view the constitution is going to be different from most, but considering that property is essential to labour I'd say that they cannot be trated separately. I'm saying that unfair compensation is basically a theft of the person's labour: they do the work but someone else reaps the rewards.

I'm all for fighting back against people with legitimate dangerous beliefs, like if someone is actually a nazi or a racist and is trying to spread or cause violence and hate, but the issue with using literal violence as the method to combat back against it is that it could easily lead to a slippery slope where if all it took was for someone to claim someone is something for them to get shutdown or even attacked then that would get abused to all hell and more than likely affect more innocent people who have done nothing wrong than the people who actually are those things. Especially during a time where things were as heated as they were then and some of the more extreme people on both "sides" would literally call each other things that they themselves knew weren't true but did so anyway to make the others look like the devil.

It was a situation where I felt it was more important to look at the bigger picture here as otherwise it was something that effected everyone, even the things you support.

Edit: I'm editing this comment to rewrite it as to accurately portray what I intended to say, as my original post was poorly written.

For interfering with the draft under sedition laws that were repealed almost 100 years ago and would be considered unconstitutional today.

These overwhelmingly white, overwhelmingly college educated masked shithead anarchists aren't desperate or suffering. They're just shitheads.

"The Socialist Party`s strength was further sapped by 1920, because of government suppression and public disapproval during World War I. Such anti-socialist hysteria as the Red Scare, and internal factionalism aggravated by the presence of Communists, took their toll. Fears associated with the Bolsheviks` seizure of power in Russia, bombings in the United States, along with a series of labor strikes, led to the Red Scare in 1919. Suspected socialists and Communists were arrested and thrown into jail. In the end, of the 5,000 people who were given arrest warrants"

1920 was after WWI, so no it was not because of the draft.

Also, it's not like college-educated white cannot have problems. Many have problems finding employment after graduation and cannot pay off their student loans, sinking further and further into debt. The genius of the right is that they can take people's misfortunes and turn it from a class issue into a race issue so that they believe that it's immigrants that are screwing them instead of the rich.

I see, that's fine. Now I don't agree with the terminology here because I would say that theft would be slavery, since you are taking something away without consent and compensation. While undercompensation (or unfair) is different because you still receive something and you have to consent to a job. Theft is always criminal I don't think that undercompensation is necessarily criminal but instead the circumstances are a lot more complex.

StarOcean said: Unlike what I've been accused of, I am not part of the "left". But rather anti-Trump. And as the days go by more and more will join the cause against him -and I hope it continues to ramp up. And I'll be anti-Trump until he either a. resigns, b. gets assassinated, or c. gets impeached. Also, Trump is 100% a facist, not the other way around. Especially telling with him wanting to "destroy" the Johnson amendment among other things. His people will support him but nothing they or their "alternative facts" *cough*bullshitfakenewstheyuse*cough* say will change my mind

I would look up the definition of facist before you go on with that hyperbole.

The West is far too eager to label everything they dislike some sort of extreme pejorative term.

Thank you. I hope that I don't come across as rude, it's just that I'm really passionate about it and I get really upset when I see so many people on here that seem to support beliefs that I find very dangerous and harmful.

IIRC, 1920 was the year that the Sedition Act was repealed, but even this doesn't claim that they were arrested simply for being socialist. And regardless, you're talking about things that happened a century ago when the US had markedly less free speech... seemingly as an argument against permitting free speech today.

Sure, college educated whites can have problems, but these are not people living in squalor or desperation. They're posting on Twitter all day, playing revolutionary and bragging about what they're going to do next.

If that's the genius of the right, I guess the genius of the modern, oligarchical left is getting would-be class warriors to waste their energy shutting down a flamboyantly homosexual gadfly instead of stringing them up.