Shutdown a Nazi Website

hahaha a mi me gusta cuando punkmarr se pone ravioso y empiesa a hablar en espanol. I can't write for shit in spanish but you can sound it out

 

No? And here I thought we were getting along so well.

\m/

Well great, but that's not going to stop Neo nazism.

Why thank you, I do try.

And I repeat I never said I disagreed with it. In fact, even if I did, the discussion (which has now degenerated into you swearing at me in Spanish and mocking me in general) was not this forum. As for this forum not accepting hate speech as freedom of speech, then I suppose that is more indicative of the forum, disallowing rights that even Authoritarian states allow. Not that i'm defending hate speech, or disagreeing with the forum rules.

WELL IF I HAVE TO.

There's quite a difference, but well done for playing the age card so brilliantly. It really adds depth to your points, and doesn't at all make you look like a moron using trivial points such as one's age to win an argument. Though, i'm not sure if you are mocking me, or you're genuinely asking for my assistance in the subject. Well the difference is that the Catalonians and the Chileans were encountering real threats from Fascist regimes and in order to defend their own colonies used self defense(in the case of the former) or were overthrowing an oppressive regime (the latter). You however, are insulting such people by using their actions to justify smashing heads. Unless of course, you're a batman like superhero and you've been saving those of a darker complexion lynched by the almighty kkk, or defending yourself. In which case I bow to your noble deeds. Maybe i'm being ignorant, but I don't recall there being a white supremacist epidemic on the Californian border. If you want to justify actions you may or may not have done using such shady morals, then power to you.

 

Then yeah you're ignorant.

Of course you do.

Well sure because of your vast experience, in direct action, that you have been doing since the age of 10, your knowledge base is purely made up of personal experience and not at all from only reading about these things right? Because you work with Chilean and Russian anarchists all the time right? You know from personal experience that all they do is go around bashing skinheads at football games and blowing up your precious British embassy's full of innocent lambs.

No compita usted no me conoce, si me conociera no le gustaria verme deveras rabioso, este pinche squinkle me da mucha risa nomas

 

To be honest I think you both have a point.

DDOS attacks and hunting them down in the streets isn't going to change anything. The only time action against them is productive is when they are fucking with someone, at a show, or if they are doing a demonstration. They can be racist if they want, but inside their own home, alone, away from people who have more than a couple braincells. But at the same time, if they are getting the shit beat out of them or killed everywhere they turn who really gives a FUCK. Racism is an impediment to human progress and you can't justify toleration of it with the veil of "respect for freedom of speech". No one is saying you can't think what you want, but just get the fuck out if you're going to drag the rest of us down with your stupidity.

You can't really FIGHT racism except changing how people think, and that's something that can't be achieved with force. Racism is in decline, and it's going to die out on it's own. The majority of our country is integrated and people who are racist will eventually be unable to function in our society if they are blatantly racist, so they're going to be shooting themselves in the foot acting like a nazi.

The real problem with racism is that it's mostly looked at as a "white problem" when it couldn't be further from the truth. In reality most racism comes from minorities, which creates feelings of resentment in the white community breeding more racism. It needs to be countered in EVERY environment. Don't go out fighting these phantom KKK menaces, they need to stop encouraging racial guilts and entitlements. Just because you're "ethnic" doesn't make your white jokes more acceptable.

 

te vuelves verde y gigante cuando te pones rabioso?

 

neta que si wey

 

100% Agree, however it takes an equal measure of education and vigilance....not one or the other

 

Really? Well do show me the facts to prove that the US-Mexico border has violent racial clashes that is similar to that in Russia and Eastern Europe.

Yes, it's my fault that is wasn't born in Latin America, and am totally unable to be involved in such areas, right? Reading about these issues isn't perfect, but it is the best that most people can do given their situation. But I do apologise for my over exaggeration of Russian Anarchists.

So what, the people in the British Embassy deserve to die?

.

I think that is a rather better way of putting what I was attempting to convey.

 

I am positive there is plenty you could be doing in England given the general negative attitude shown t'wards immigrants in that country, loads of opportunity for even a staunchly pacifist anarchist such as yourself. You don't have to be in Russia, Chile, Mexico or Malaysia to make a significant difference....also you don't have to run around pissing your fellow anarchists off by thinking you know better and looking down your nose at others that have much stronger convictions than you. In the middle of this argument I had to go rescue one of those Chilean anarchists that you think are barbarians from his stranded car on the freeway. That man is willing to give his own life for the betterment of his people, what makes you think you can judge him?

How do you know that the people at the British embassy aren't engaged in activities that merit being blown up?

 

If only 4Chan/Anonymous would use their powers for good instead of for the lulz

 

Did I even mention whether or not I was doing anything in my country? Your point was that I have not been to Chile therefore my opinion is void, not my inaction toward such causes. I also never said I was a staunch pacifist, I said that murdering Facists isn't going to help. To clarify, I believe that one is fully within their right to beat a Neo Nazi to death if said neo Nazi is threating to murder a whole family of Black people. In a similar Vein, I would consider in acceptable for a White person to defend themselves and other white people from a Black nationalist with a hacksaw.

Your convictions are stronger than mine because I refuse to ice Fascists?

If he's going to run into a crowded mall and blow people up, then I think I'm perfectly in my right to judge him. That's not self defense, or protecting oneself from fascism, that's terrorism! It certainly isn't for the betterment of the people he'd take with him, either.

What, like the receptionist or the guy who gets the coffee, or the cleaner? If a person at the embassy is Murdering thousands of people, then you kill him, you don't just send a bomb in in the hope that it wipes him out, and discard innocents as collateral.

 

problem solved folks

 

Nevermind, you are an idiot.

 

Well that showed me.

 

Oh is that all? So if they are threatening ONE black person it is not ok? A jew? Mexican? A woman? Recruiting others in to their cause of hate?

I guess your form of anarchism is being friends with racists and fascists.

 

Are you being facetious, or just dim? Either way i'm sure my point was clear.

If they 'recruit others into their cause of hate', then obviously non racists have failed at doing their 'job'

Boy, you sure do love twisting points to make some irrelevant point which I never said.

 

strawman much? You're bringing up a point that you already retracted:

No one died, thus there's nothing to justify.

Moreover, whilst the Chilean anarchists have not harmed anyone, the Chilean state has murdered & brutalised numerous Mapuche activists, blinding Mapuche children, charging Mapuche under Pinochet-era anti-terrorism laws, militarising Mapuche communities, imprisoning Mapuche, anarchists and others in overcrowded prisons (see recent prison deaths), etc, etc.

Please, if yr going to get all indignant about violence, target those who actually perpetrate violence, ie the Chilean State, not the anarchists.

Secondly:

Daft argument. I'm sure friends and family of those murdered by neo-nazis in, say, Russia (or Portland for that matter) are relieved that the neo-nazis didn't pose a real threat. Seriously, fascists continue to bruatlise people,the best defence against these attacks is to smash fascist groups' ability to organise and have a street presence, this can be done a number of ways, including physical intervention. The appropriate-ness of violence (so to speak) is to be judged by those involved, dependent on context.

Repeating me self a bit here, but:
true to a degree, but you can't always change what people think. However, to stop organised racist violence, an effective method is to smash their ability to organise.

 

It was hypothetical.

that isn't how you justify an action. You justify it by the intent. For example, you don't use an argument to defend Russia not sending Nuclear warheads to Cuba. They were fully aware of the implications of doing such.

The Chilean government was not subject to the debate.

Well this was already clarified, and yes, Physical intervention can be effective, given the context.

 

you did, but in a manner that, to my reasoning, contradicts yr points inre the difference between Russian/California & Spain.

yes and no, it was a point you raised to discredit the bombings undertaken by Chilean anarchists, and those who supported these actions, hence a strawman.

So, they intended to kill people then? You asked them? You can quote these intentions?
My thought is that blowing up a building without harming anyone would imply it more likely they intended not to harm anyone.

 

Let me retort: Those two situations differ, and cannot be compared, due to the nature of the Fascism.

The point itself had degenerated into a purely hypothetical one, regardless of my original point. But no, I cannot directly address your point, so well done.

Can one blow up a building that they know is inhabited without the intention of harming anyone, or at the least, the knowledge that people could be harmed? I don't think so. Their actions were taken with full knowledge that people were likely to have been injured or killed.