Hiku said:
Slimebeast said:
No, it's actually the other way around. Had this, let's call him terrorist, attended many alt-right meetings in the past, obviously it would be much easier to make the case that it's a consequence of hateful rhetoric. It's common logic.
But instead I believe, based on my experience of how various people connected to these movements work psychologically, that the 20 year old terrorist is more "the lonesome guy with empathy and anger management issues who has nurtured anger and frustration for a long while, got triggered and exploded into rage" than it was a planned, deliberate act commited by a person incited by other supremacists.
|
Incited by other supremacists is what I'm getting at.
Who seems to be contributing more to the hateful atmosphere in the image? The kids protesting by the statue? Or the white supremacists surrounding them with torches like it's 1917? The demeanor of Nazi/KKK is inherently and commonly imposing and threatening. You won't find members of Miljöpartiet surrounding kids with torches like this.
When Nazi ideals and chants associated with racism and genocide fuels hateful mob mentality, it's not surprising if it leads to violence. Especially if it involves someone with mental issues.
If news media and police weren't present in the picture above, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the torch bearers got caught up in the hostile atmosphere and burned the kids.
|
This disturbed person was incited by the hateful and tense atmosphere in Charlotsville caused by both sides of protestors, yes.
Caused by ideologically based incitement to commit violence and terror, absolutely no.
|
All instances of physical violence contribute to a hateful atmosphere. But there's no excuse for driving a car into what witnesses described as a group of peaceful protesters. That some people were fighting in other locations does not make this an equal exchange.
| Your accusations toward Richard Spencer are plain ridiculous, partly because you base them on assumptions rather than actually having studied his rethorics. |
His public rhetoric is one thing. But when he says "Seig Heil" he's associating his rethoric with Nazi ideals. The assumption is that the participants are aware of Nazi ideals. And that's a pretty safe assumption. He doesn't have to say anything more. You understand what he stands for when he says those words, and he avoids becoming legaly liable for hate speech in the process. Especially since he uses the English version of the term.
| I claim that I know far better than you how a young Jimmie Åkesson works psychologically at a very young age and what caused him to sing along a white supremacist and racist song at a party. There was humour involved, but also a kind of rebellious caught-in-the-moment attitude against what is politically correct at the time. I don't know the details of what the song was to be honest, so I can't comment on your reference to the death of white supremacists or such details. |
I'm sure you do. Though this occured in 2009, so it wasn't "when he was young", so to speak. There were a number of other songs from white power bands with nazi or racist messages, such as the Swedish nazi fight song "Friheten leve".
But this shouldn't surprise you. You know that your party was founded by white supremacists and nazis. There's one reason and one reason only as to why they continued on in that party rather than starting a new one. And apparently you yourself wrote "Heil Trump. Heil Hitler" when Trump won and got banned for it, so I don't imagine this bothers you one bit.
| No, it's not fair to describe the protestors on the left side in Charlotsville as simply "a perfectly normal political party". If you do that, you admit that you have a very big problem denouncing hatred and violence commited by the Antifa.
And where did the crowd chant "Sieg Heil"? I'm not aware that that happened. Source?
|
I wasn't refering to the protesters. You said "but when it comes to people their side committing violence", so I took that to mean in a general sense.
That a person part of *insert party* might be violent and throw a punch. But that doesn't mean we should normalize parties like the Nazi or KKK who actually promote violence. If we're talking about Anfita for example, then yes, they're not one of the "normal parties" I described as they too promote violence.
As for the crowd in Richard Spencer's alt right meeting that was filmed, they're responding to their leader chanting "Heil Victory" which is the English translation of Sieg Heil, with a nazi salute of their own. It's hard to make out exactly what they are hailing back to him, but it doesn't really matter.
When someone chants "Sieg Heil/Heil Voctory" at you, if you're a deccent human being imo, you don't reciprocate with a nazi salute of your own.
|
I don't see anything wrong with that image. I can't determine who started to fight. And I haven't heard that they shouted anything illegal. They had a permit to hold that protest in front of that statue of some Civil War era political figure.
You said:"But there's no excuse for driving a car into what witnesses described as a group of peaceful protesters." I agree, there aren't and I didn't excuse this subhuman's behaviour in any way.
You claim that Richard Spencer "says Sieg Heil". I have never heard him do that. Aren't you just making it up now? Source please.
No, I do not know what sort of songs Jimmie sang in 2009. If it was by Ultima Thule then I don't have a problem with it.
I don't care who founded Sverigedemokraterna because they've been radically reformed since the beginning. I've supported them in elections since 2002.
I never said neither Heil Trump or Heil Hitler on these forums, I said "Heil, mein Führer" as a joke.
Okay, some confusion about parties there, but okay. So we both have a problem with right groups like nazis and the KKK promoting violence and also when some extreme leftists like Antifa promote violence. Very good.
About "Hail victory", it's not regarded as the same thing as "Sieg Heil", but a few guys in the crowd reacted to Richard Spencer saying it by making the Roman salute at one infamous meating. To me it wasn't the end of the world. But media made a laughably big deal out of it.
So those five to seven people who "reciprocated with a nazi salute" are not decent human beings. Big deal. I don't judge a whole movement based on a silly act commited by less than ten fringe individuals.
