I cited this above, but apparently neither you nor anyone else here actually went to the link. Given your apparent desire to do so, I will cite it again.
https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/who-are-antifa
It’s important to note that there is no organization called Antifa. It’s a bit like saying the anti-war movement during Vietnam was an organization. It wasn’t. There were a number of organizations whose philosophies included anti-war sentiments, but no organization (that I’m aware of) named anti-war.
Same with Antifa. That name is literally a contraction of anti-fascist. There are many organizations, including, hopefully, the Republican and Democratic parties that at least rhetorically anti-fascist.
And, of course, as in the anti-war movement there are people and organizations who claim they are anti-fascist for nefarious purposes. like blaming the real anti-fascists for acts of violence. If you are seeing groups committing acts of violence in the name of antifa, they may well be right wing groups lying to you for propaganda purposes.
From Wiki:
ADL has been criticized both from the right[10] and left of the U.S. political spectrum, including within the American Jewish community.[11] Some of the criticism from the left is based on ADL's support for Israel as a Jewish homeland and the organization's vocal opposition to attempts to equate Zionism, the national movement for a state for the Jewish people, with racism. This stance has led some on the farther reaches of the American left (including some Jewish groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace) to claim that so long as ADL continues to support Israel as a Jewish homeland, it cannot credibly call itself a civil rights organization, regardless of any other civil rights positions it takes domestically or internationally.[12][13] Other ADL positions and actions, past and present, that have generated criticism from the left include domestic spying allegations, its former stance on the Armenian Genocide,[14] since repudiated and apologized for,[14] and what frequently is alleged by the left to be ADL's conflation of opposition to Israel with antisemitism.[15][16] On the other hand, right-wing groups and pundits, including very conservative Jewish groups, have attacked ADL, labeling it an arm of the Democratic Party (presumably in part because its CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, was in the Obama administration)[17][18] and decrying its civil rights agenda, which supports immigrants and refugees, trans rights and other LGBTQ rights, and advocates against establishment of religion as well as against Islamaphobia.
“Perhaps PP readers were turned off by your source…”
What does that say about those who were “turned off?” ADL has a long history of support for civil rights in this country. I’ll admit to believing that support for civil rights is a good thing. Their positions relative to Israel are a different story.
But regardless, read the article before you criticize it.
Right, people who question the ADL must be racist anti-semitic bigots.
It’s not that simple… any organization can become captured. How about this;
https://thefederalist.com/2017/07/28/anti-defamation-leagues-sad-slide-just-another-left-wing-pressure-group/ This past April, my husband, New York Post Op-Ed Editor Seth Mandel, started receiving a number of identical hostile tweets (right down to the same typo). He noticed many were officials at various branches of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). Seth had been criticizing the organization’s national director and CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, a former Obama administration staffer, for increasingly heavy-handed bias. Greenblatt was essentially turning the vaunted nonpartisan anti-hate organization into a left-wing pressure group and vehicle for partisan score-settling.The most ironic thing about all this was that less than a year earlier, I had been named to an ADL task force seeking to combat coordinated anti-Semitic online harassment. And here was the ADL itself coordinating such a campaign against my husband....He realized what was happening: The ADL had launched a coordinated rapid-response attack on him — a Jewish journalist. The ADL denied it, but the next month, Tablet Magazine turned up the proof: ADL staffers were sent two sample tweets with which to attack Seth.
You are citing an article from The Federalist, a right wing publication that routinely repeats unfounded conspiracy theories and right wing dogma. Some recent examples of editorial irresponsibility including excusing Roy Moore for his dalliances with under age girls as good for producing large families, claiming that FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe leaked a story to CNN without any evidence, accusing the Democratic Party of overhyping the coronavirus pandemic to destroy the economy, and, well you get the idea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_(website)
So, do you want to get into a pissing match about which organization is least credible?
There are definitely organizations called ANTIFA, to take the most well know, Rose City ANTIFA in Portland. Saying you are anti facist is a broad statement, to say you are ANTIFA implies that you are in agreement with/and using the tactics and beliefs/philosophy of ANTIFA. Otherwise, yes, some groups are not connected, some loosly connected, some co-ordinated with each other.
You do understand that most people who say they are against facism do not agree with violently shutting down speakers who are not facist on college campuses. Most people who are against facism have a more typical, possibly dictionary definition of facism, whereas the ANTIFA philosophy uses that label very broadly , and I am not going to cite all the examples already done on the thread by others. Just pointing out that the philosophy and tactics adherred to by people under the term ANTIFA is not the same as general population who do not want actual facism.
I heard an explanation, yesterday, for our bull market. I was told to imagine the giant machine of America as a race car sitting behind a redlight with the light about to change to green. It’s all revved up and ready to blastoff.
It just seems to me there must have been a time when the stock market was fueled by the economy … by productivity … by corporate profit and growth … as opposed to liquidity from the federal reserve. The stock market doesn’t seem to be linked to the economy any longer. Looks like I’ve missed my second big opportunity to participate in a bull market and am left, sitting on the sideline, with complete loss of reputation.
Hi Dave
I don’t do drive by comments. In other words I posted my viewpoint and asked a specific question. You did not answer said question. Instead you changed the subject entirely. In your current response you still did not answer the question. Thatchmo was kind enough to indicate what he believed “bones” to be, I have no idea if that is the same as yours
As was said in Cool Hand Luke " what we have here is a failure to communicate which has been the case between you and I since the get go. I am not here to debate anything. I am sharing my perspective in a thread called “As the World Burns”. I take that as an indication we are looking at current events and looking at root causes and coping mechanisms. I also take it that we are looking at how the aristocrats are screwing the average man and how that is probably systemic.
I am a citizen of the universe, I owe no allegiance to any state (mafia). What they get from me is purely through coercion. I have experienced and seen first hand what the empire is capable of.
I don’t expect you or anyone here who is white, middle class and has a portfolio to think any differently than you. I don’t expect deep introspection into why "As the World Burns. I do wonder about whether people here really understand what this site has been talking about. The collapse is coming and there is no amount of flesh that can be mustered to put on the broken bones that will stop it.
I hope people’s preps are well advanced and include a bug out country because that is what the elites are doing. Oh and that includes you too Dave. It’s going to get worse.
All the best
Om Shanti
Here is a list of organizations that were opposed to the Vietnam War. Some of them use “against the war” and some “anti war”
National Black Anti War Anti Draft Union
John Kerry was a member of the Vietnam Veterans against the War
Of course, anti-war is a generalized term, just as antifa is. Anyone can stick them into a name and create a real organization. Sort of like saxophone quartet. No one can adopt that As a name of a specific quartet. But, there is an Amherst Saxophone Quartet.
Anyone can stick antifa in the name of their organization, no matter what their beliefs or activities. But, until someone proves me wrong I continue to believe that there is no group named Antifa. The best you can do is come up with a generalized notion of what such a hypothetical group would stand for. And, judging by this thread, they could be all over the place with no core beliefs.
JimH, thank you for your thoughtful response. You said,
"Sparky wants this place to be all things to all people...." "Sparky wants this to be a safe space for people under the spell of the mainstream media.."JimH, I am impressed by your powers of clairvoyance to discern--incorrectly--what I "want" without me ever having made any of the above statements or arguments. As evidence, please provide links to any such statements I've made that support your straw man arguments above. This is an obvious attempt to galvanize support by using phrases (that I've never used/advocated) that trigger predictable negative reactions, such as PP being "all things to all people" (triggered reaction: impossible, unreasonable demand); "safe space" (triggered association: fragile "snowflakes" of the liberal/leftist persuasion); and "people under the spell of the mainstream media" (triggered reaction: "un-woke", brainwashed). Again, please provide evidence that I ever made such statements. Otherwise, I see no point in debating the above distortions of my position.
"I am certainly not here to be understanding with those who would argue that office fires melt steel,..."I thought the whole point was to present evidence, debate the facts and reach conclusions/understanding regarding what is/in not "true". (For the record, I don't believe that office fires melt steel.)
"...with those who would present apologetics for Antifa."I think dtrammel was pretty clear that he wasn't giving Antifa a "pass", but that he was advocating for a balanced discussion,
"There's doubting the established mainstream media story and there is pushing ill informed, biased and false stories in a post here. I hope every one of us would be willing to listen to opposing ideas about things we hold true."Jim, you state that "truth is not relative"--but whose version of "truth"? Without a balanced assessment and consideration of the evidence, facts and different perspectives, perhaps your absolute version of "truth" is subjective after all. Dtrammel advocated for a "fair assessment of both sides" (Source ) and you responded with an attack on his credibility, accusing him of "virtue-signaling". (Source) IMO, this was a cheap shot and seriously diminished any arguments you were trying (but failed) to make. How ironic that after you made reference to the "racist history of the democratic party", and blamed MSM for polarizing left vs. right in their reporting; you then post a link to a media report entitled, "The far-left has perfected the art of rioting". Hello! That sure seems like you and media casting issues along the left vs. right paradigm. This was immediately followed-up with a post from another commenter with the subject of "ANTIFA/Left-wing danger" (Source) I didn't see you or the other commenter receive this pointed message from Chris, nor were you banished you to FB or X22:
"LOL Thank you for your attempt to label this place on the left-right axis. It's always fun to see someone try. However, your technique needs refinement. 1/10 on the effectiveness scale. This place relies heavily on facts and persuasion. Best of luck elsewhere."I have no argument in support of/against Antifa. My point is that Karen was castigated for framing her views (and PP) along a left vs. right "axis"; dtrammel was dissed for advocating for a balanced assessment of Antifa. Yet you and other PP members frame issues in the left vs. right axis and receive no push-back from the "tribe" or Admin. So...how can one not conclude that the informal and formal rules of engagement here on PP are sometimes applied unevenly, possibly to reinforce a prevailing bias among very vocal members of the PP tribe? How does that promote the pursuit of "truth" and "truth-telling"? Jim, all your other "arguments" (e.g., HCQ, Tulsi Gabbard (oops, politics! Is this against the PP rules and guidelines?), Epstein, MSM and how you feel you/others like you are portrayed) are red herrings designed to distract the discussion from the larger issue of PP's culture of growing intolerance of different perspectives. Some or all of the red herring issues you put forth may or may not be true, in whole or in part, and are debatable--but not if those with alternative views or who are not "like-minded" enough are discouraged from participating in the debate. Consider that maybe you feel threatened by these other "minority" perspectives, and are in need of PP to serve as your "safe space" echo chamber to validate existing biases and increase your sense of belonging to a "tribe" of "like-minded" individuals. Lastly, you mentioned in a subsequent comment you said
"Sparky, the whole reconstructing of who did what, who said what is starting to creep me out. It's your right to do it, and my right to criticize you for it."Sorry if you're creeped out by my presenting evidence of the facts. It is not at all my intention to creep you out. As PP is supposed to be a data driven, evidenced/fact-based site, I feel it is important not to just post anecdotes and unsubstantiated opinions, but to provide evidence in support of my assertions. As Chris says, "If you have a problem with the facts, the facts are not the problem." Additionally, I understand the objective of debate it is to critique or argue for/against a particular point of view, not to criticize the individual(s) who are asserting (or trying to assert) a point of view. And yes, it might be productive to have a balanced exploration of Antifa. Maybe we can invite KarenC, and dtrammel into the discussion. Perhaps another time we could discuss less controversial topics such as chickens. Mine have always been too fat to fly away so I've never had to clip their wings. But I have an older one that has foot problems as a result of being overweight, I think. Thanks for an interesting and hopefully productive discussion. Have a nice day.
There are core beliefs and actions they take
“Right, people who question the ADL must be racist anti-semitic bigots.”
I don’t believe I said or implied anything of the sort. Do you have evidence or are you just throwing out ad homs?
Doug said, in response to the following quote from another member;
“Perhaps PP readers were turned off by your source…”
What does that say about those who were "turned off?"Oh, so you didn't mean to cast any aspersions of any sort onto people who would question the motivations of ADL.. OK.. then my bad for misinterpreting your statement above. You were just asking an innocent, rhetorical question which was meant to suggest no judgement of any sort. I was going to let it be, but your comments about the site that published the piece I referenced, regarding the recent lack of non-partisan positioning on the part of ADL, is in fact a form of shooting the messenger and straw man argumentation. You in no way addressed the underlying case being made by the writer, who by all accounts otherwise held a generally favorable view of ADL based on her participation as described. All you said was Federalist Bad. Where have I heard such power argumentation before???? Oh yeah, Orange man bad! BTW, I am thankful that Kavanaugh did not, at the end of the day, get tried and executed by the media the way Ray Moore did. I have no idea whether Moore really did the things he was accused of or not, but you Doug seem to know that he did. The media was so sure about Russian collusion too.
Thank for the link Redneck Engineer. (Post #266). This attorney has a wealth of experience and knowledge about riots and violations of individual rights. Gives a foreshadowing of where we may be headed.
This is a productive use of PP bandwidth. Thanks for posting.
You said,
Consider that maybe you feel threatened by these other "minority" perspectives, and are in need of PP to serve as your "safe space" echo chamber to validate existing biases and increase your sense of belonging to a "tribe" of "like-minded" individuals.This isn't it at all. I feel like I am going to lose the country that I love.. lose it for my kids. I don't give a crap what people think of me.. I am way, way beyond that. I just want people to wake up to the fact that the mass media, and most of the Left in the US, is completely captured by a Globalist deep state that has deceptively stolen their idealism. I want to see the deep state completely eradicated, and then get back to an open and transparent politics in the US, at which point I will revert to my classic liberal positions. I believe that in order for our constitution to survive, we need to eradicate the deep state... that is job 1 for me. The European Union Technocracy is the model for the world. One money system, all tracking, all the time, no freedom. I am on a war footing.
You’re welcome, OOG. I’m glad you found it useful.
This is BS.
This chick has plenty of issues.
In her logic cops should serve as judge. jury and executioner.
Nothing to see here move on.
Just to refresh your memory this is what you posted.
“There were a number of organizations whose philosophies included anti-war sentiments, but no organization (that I’m aware of) named anti-war.”
I posted a number of organizations named “anti war” or “against the war”
So just say “I am now aware of organizations 50 years ago that were named anti war”
It’s pretty simple and easy. I was there I know it for a fact