So let's talk about the punch (please thread carefully)

[Misanthrope]

If you are not caught up, Richard Spencer gets sucker punched:

 

Who is Richard Spencer? He's an Alt Right and not just a "Pepe posting #MAGA" alt righter of the harmless variety, but one that well, this recent speech speaks for itself (since it's longer and tangential it's going on spoiler)

Spoiler

 

So Yeah, the stuff he believes is pretty indefensible (though not completely indefensible, I personally think there are very minor merits to a Nationalistic ideology but I say minor cause they're superfluous and short lived) and I think people should absolutely ridicule him and others that hold the line of advocating for a White Ethnostate.

 

But this response however, does bother me:

 

I honestly believe that what I consider (or did at one point) good meaning, decent people get absorbed by this constant misinformation to the point that when there is a legitimate concern they feel so validated in their moral superiority that this becomes acceptable. Honestly I suspect many of you will feel what Cox said is totally fine, but even if tongue in cheek, even if just a tweet, this is basically advocating violence against someone just for their political ideas.

 

In short, this behavior gets passed on to by popular people and celebrities that actually are smart and reasonable but it eventually will reach a bunch of kids that might not comprehend the nuance and subterfuge involved in political discourse and they might do stuff like shoot cops, kidnap and torture special needs white teen, etc.

 

Last point: I made this thread precisely because I wanna hear from you, yes you that disagrees with me specifically. I want to hear all arguments in an environment I believe to be ultimately harmless in the grand scheme of things where things should be openly discussed in a (at least semi) civlized matter.

[Wrb]

Society doesn't more forwards with voilence, punching him will only fuel his beliefs and give him more publicity.

 

I would stop someone punching him.

[Dash Lambda]

If he were punched for saying something worth getting punched for directly preceding getting punched, yes.

Shouldn't just punch someone because they're there, though...

[Shakaza]

*shakes head* I can't support that, and I would absolutely stop it. Although I vehemently disagree with his ideals, he was expressing himself in a cool, collected manner. He was doing nothing wrong, and there is no way that deserves violence, which makes me feel obligated to stop it from happening. I tend to only support violent actions if and only if it is the only option to stop others from performing them. This is just...cruel. A calm expression of ideas deserves a formal debate, or perhaps a peaceful protest, not a random sucker punch to the face from a detractor.

[Dash Lambda]

10 minutes ago, Shakaza said:

*shakes head* I can't support that, and I would absolutely stop it. Although I vehemently disagree with his ideals, he was expressing himself in a cool, collected manner. He was doing nothing wrong, and there is no way that deserves violence, which makes me feel obligated to stop it from happening. I tend to only support violent actions if and only if it is the only option to stop others from performing them. This is just...cruel. A calm expression of ideas deserves a formal debate, or perhaps a peaceful protest, not a random sucker punch to the face from a detractor.

I'm normally against violence, but when I say that I think of guns and extreme force, not some guy getting punched in the face for pissing people off.

No, we shouldn't just run around punching each other in the face if we disagree on something, and no the guy wasn't justified in this context, but sometimes people are just begging to be punched.

[CDHoward]

Absolutely not. Richard is a nice lad, and he's done a lot to make White Nationalism cool again.

 

If you're White, you should defend him. If you're non-White, you'll hate him.

 

The more politically aware amongst you might know that we Whites are a miniscule global minority, and that Whites are now only 55% of America, despite building the entire nation from scratch. We English will also very soon be a tiny minority. You'll also note that White men, women and children are raped/killed/beaten daily by non-Whites.

 

So yeah. Thank you.

 

EDIT: Yes, I would smack the far-Left terrorist/non-White if I was there when one punched him.

[Misanthrope]

28 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

If he were punched for saying something worth getting punched for directly preceding getting punched, yes.

Shouldn't just punch someone because they're there, though...

Nothing you say is "worth getting punched for" unless you are like a very substantial authority figure calling out to harm others i.e. A cop ordering other cops or people to shoot someone. 

 

Sorry but you fight fire with fire you both get burnt. 

[MrDynamicMan]

11 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

Absolutely not. Richard is a nice lad, and he's done a lot to make White Nationalism cool again.

 

If you're White, you should defend him. If you're non-White, you'll hate him.

Youre wrong.

source: am white.

11 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

 

The more politically aware amongst you might know that we Whites are a miniscule global minority, and that Whites are now only 55% of America, despite building the entire nation from scratch. We English will also very soon be a tiny minority. You'll also note that White men, women and children are raped/killed/beaten daily by non-Whites.

Skin color doesnt matter. The amount of pigment in the pilgrims skin 350 years ago has no bearing on my life, and I shouldnt get any special priveleges for it. Isnt your whole thing that non-whites shouldnt get any special privileges? Why should whites get any?

11 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

So yeah. Thank you.

 

EDIT: Yes, I would smack the far-Left terrorist/non-White if I was there when one punched him.

Yay hypocrisy.

[Misanthrope]

6 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

Absolutely not. Richard is a nice lad, and he's done a lot to make White Nationalism cool again.

 

If you're White, you should defend him. If you're non-White, you'll hate him.

 

The more politically aware amongst you might know that we Whites are a miniscule global minority, and that Whites are now only 55% of America, despite building the entire nation from scratch. We English will also very soon be a tiny minority. You'll also note that White men, women and children are raped/killed/beaten daily by non-Whites.

 

So yeah. Thank you.

Other than Geography (which I could kind of understand in your case being British) Can you argue in favor of Tribalism? Like what do you see as benefits from it?

 

Because culture? That's basically a social construct and to me possesses 0 inherit value and Genetics? Well Since has debunked those claims of old so why do you need an Ethnostate?

[CDHoward]

9 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Other than Geography (which I could kind of understand in your case being British) Can you argue in favor of Tribalism? Like what do you see as benefits from it?

 

Because culture? That's basically a social construct and to me possesses 0 inherit value and Genetics? Well Since has debunked those claims of old so why do you need an Ethnostate?

If we had remained White nations, we would be colonising Mars or something by now, and not a single White man, woman or child would be suffering in poverty. You do realise that allowing 100's of millions of Muslim and black hordes into our nations has crippled our economy, pride, safety, identity, NHS, housing and future, right?

 

Name one benefit they have brought. Also, look at every single black and brown politician, media figure and celebrity: they all engage in racial activism for their own kind. The majority of blacks support Black Lives Matter, for one example. And most younger Muslims see Islamic State as heroes.

 

Meanwhile, we Whites are not allowed to work for our own interests. We are supposed to hand our land, women and futures to the hordes.

[MrDynamicMan]

18 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

If we had remained White nations, we would be colonising Mars or something by now, and not a single White man, woman or child would be suffering in poverty. You do realise that allowing 100's of millions of Muslim and black hordes into our nations has crippled our economy, pride, safety, identity, NHS, housing and future, right?

The white nations where weak, thats why theyre not around anymore. Also, white women and children where doing far worse in the hayday of the british empire than they are now. Moreover, what makes the life of a white child more importsnt than the life of an asian or balck child?

18 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

Name one benefit they have brought. Also, look at every single black and brown politician, media figure and celebrity: they all engage in racial activism for their own kind. The majority of blacks support Black Lives Matter, for one example. And most younger Muslims see Islamic State as heroes.

Yes, but I dont see obama saying "we should kick all the white scourge out and establish a black empire." Thats a false equivelancy fallacy.

18 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

 

Meanwhile, we Whites are not allowed to work for our own interests. We are supposed to hand our land, women and futures to the hordes.

What utter bullshit. Exactly how are we "supposed hand our lands women and futures to the hordes?!" Last I remember women have free thought, and I have yet to read a law that says "white people must give all their property to the first black person they meet." If your business fails and you have to sell off assets thats because your business was weak, not because "'bama dont want us whites doing well"

[Misanthrope]

22 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

If we had remained White nations, we would be colonising Mars or something by now, and not a single White man, woman or child would be suffering in poverty. You do realise that allowing 100's of millions of Muslim and black hordes into our nations has crippled our economy, pride, safety, identity, NHS, housing and future, right?

 

Name one benefit they have brought. Also, look at every single black and brown politician, media figure and celebrity: they all engage in racial activism for their own kind. The majority of blacks support Black Lives Matter, for one example. And most younger Muslims see Islamic State as heroes.

 

Meanwhile, we Whites are not allowed to work for our own interests. We are supposed to hand our land, women and futures to the hordes.

You're making fairly large assumptions here: I distinctly remember being taught about the Romans facing the barbarian hordes and thus plunging the world into the dark ages, that was all White on White violence.

 

Sorry but I am just not seeing any traits from whites, good or bad, that can't be found on any of the other races.

[Tech_Dreamer]

not surprised tho , but this does add in bring up more hate into the other side to a point a day they might regret doing shit like this

[Mug]

If how you represented his opinions is true, I don't like them but no-one deserves to be punched for their beliefs at all.

[Dash Lambda]

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

Nothing you say is "worth getting punched for" unless you are like a very substantial authority figure calling out to harm others i.e. A cop ordering other cops or people to shoot someone. 

 

Sorry but you fight fire with fire you both get burnt. 

You do need authority to deserve getting punched, but my requirements are far less severe than yours it seems.

Punching someone for using or ordering the use of lethal force is a bit like flicking an angry bear that's on top of you, you're probably not going to get anywhere. But if a black person punches a politician for saying "black people are meant to be slaves" while standing right next to him, I think that's completely justified.

I guess my point is that punching is less violence and more a very extreme way to make a point, like swearing. When misapplied, it can be rather useless and detrimental, but when used correctly, it sends a very effective message.

 

Oh, and @Misanthrope and @MrDynamicMan, I personally reserve judgement on @CDHoward.

[Mug]

45 minutes ago, CDHoward said:

If we had remained White nations, we would be colonising Mars or something by now, and not a single White man, woman or child would be suffering in poverty. You do realise that allowing 100's of millions of Muslim and black hordes into our nations has crippled our economy, pride, safety, identity, NHS, housing and future, right?

 

Name one benefit they have brought. Also, look at every single black and brown politician, media figure and celebrity: they all engage in racial activism for their own kind. The majority of blacks support Black Lives Matter, for one example. And most younger Muslims see Islamic State as heroes.

 

Meanwhile, we Whites are not allowed to work for our own interests. We are supposed to hand our land, women and futures to the hordes.

Jesus.

 

You do realise that I could call the police now and have you arrested for saying this shit? Like it's racist, extreme and disgusting that there are people that actually believe this. 

 

Yada, yada, yada.

 

You make me sick.

[Misanthrope]

Nope, even if said politician did say that it's still not a justification for violence. If he is getting ready to somehow revoke citizenship and condone slavery again then yes it's time for violence up to and including a military coup or violent revolution. But merely saying crazy shit it's still protected by free speech. 

 

Besides you don't win that argument by punching him, if anything you achieved nothing but the opposite: sympathy towards a perceived victim that legitimizes his stupid points. 

[PlayStation 2]

To me, two wrongs don't make a right. Stooping to someone's level is not how you show that you're the better man.

[Majestic]

I already called him out on twitter, about him being a hypocrite that he's suprised that openly inciting violence on people causes a backlash. And he responded with "not people, nazi's".

 

It's a slippery slope, because then it becomes a question of who gets to define who is a 'literal nazi' (RIP word 'literally' -2016) and who is not. And it becomes an ever shifting line over what is offensive or not. And eventually their own speech becomes offensive and it eats itself. To be honest, this daycare generation of narcistsis and pretentions e-celebs is beyond saving. Totalbiscuit even publicly scolded his wife for excersizing her right to vote, because she didn't vote 'for her'.

 

All we can do is sit back, and laugh at the meltdown. And ofcourse, praise kek.

 

[Dash Lambda]

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

Nope, even if said politician did say that it's still not a justification for violence. If he is getting ready to somehow revoke citizenship and condone slavery again then yes it's time for violence up to and including a military coup or violent revolution. But merely saying crazy shit it's still protected by free speech. 

 

Besides you don't win that argument by punching him, if anything you achieved nothing but the opposite: sympathy towards a perceived victim that legitimizes his stupid points. 

You forgot to quote me XP

 

As I explained, our difference in opinion stems from our differing scales for violence. I consider punching someone (given that it goes no farther) closer to swearing than actual 'violence', while you disagree. I don't think that's a topic that can be effectively debated, since it's almost entirely opinion.

[Majestic]

5 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

You forgot to quote me XP

 

As I explained, our difference in opinion stems from our differing scales for violence. I consider punching someone (given that it goes no farther) closer to swearing than actual 'violence', while you disagree. I don't think that's a topic that can be effectively debated, since it's almost entirely opinion.

How is physically attacking someone not violent. 

[Kobathor]

1 hour ago, Mug said:

You do realise that I could call the police now and have you arrested for saying this shit?

what a sad country you live in. glad i was born in the U S of A

 

No deserving to get punched here. I don't agree with the things that dude says, but unless he's running around hurting people, why hurt him? Idiots punch people that disagree with them, look at those BLM drones yelling "F*** TRUMP" while beating people on the street after the election, that kinda stuff. Idiots punching people because they disagree with them.

[Bananasplit_00]

i dont know, but he is on verry much a different political opinion then me and i dispise his hail trump. thats horrible IMO but everyone should be able to state there opinion too so idk

[Misanthrope]

14 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

You forgot to quote me XP

 

As I explained, our difference in opinion stems from our differing scales for violence. I consider punching someone (given that it goes no farther) closer to swearing than actual 'violence', while you disagree. I don't think that's a topic that can be effectively debated, since it's almost entirely opinion.

Well I can concede that: A punch means very different things under very different circumstances. But as kind of a big dude I am always weary of punching someone or fighting because there's more potential of hurting or getting hurt vs a fight among smaller guys or women. There's also countless exceptions and consequences so I guess growing up in a town infamous for roaming drug lords has taught me a healthy degree of caution too.

[2FA]

I can't defend him nor the people saying white lives matter too much. One extreme results in an equally extreme opposite response which in the end doesn't solve anything.