When is a fascist not a fascist?

**Fragony** · 06-10-2009, 15:53

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Animal rights groups have nothing to do with either of those two, as neither of them gave a rats arse about animals.

Sure they do, so many ideals such a lack of proletariat. And it looks like they won't have a voice of their own for a while.

**Beskar** · 06-10-2009, 16:37

If I remember correctly, isn't there a song lyric that goes "You got egg on your face, you big disgrace!" maybe they were just wanting to recreate that but Nick Griffin declined the invitation to egg and soldiers breakfast at the cafe.

**HoreTore** · 06-10-2009, 16:49

Originally Posted by Fragony

Sure they do, so many ideals such a lack of proletariat. And it looks like they won't have a voice of their own for a while.

Uhm...

No.

**Fragony** · 06-10-2009, 16:56

No of course not, they are animals they can't speak you are so owned.

**JAG** · 06-10-2009, 17:29

It is quite clear that the BNP are made up of Nazi sympathysers, racists and authoritarian members. The rights and freedom of speech which they claim are always abashed are the very same ones which they themselves would gladly get rid of not only to those in this this country who are not white, but to every single person who doesn't agree with them. Furthermore, the disgusting acts by their members over the years coupled with the disgusting things they say, means that not only should they have no platform but should be shown through logic, reason and downright common sense, to be the fascist extremists they are.

I dislike and abhore everything the BNP stand for and quite happily campaign against them, however this new group that has just been set up, 'Unite against facism' is not only counter productive, but plainly, stupid. It has been set up in haste by a random assortment of trade unions and left wing groups, which fail to see the big picture. Making the BNP seem somehow victims, making their supporters - hardened ones or not - feel somehow that this in itself shows exactly why they should vote BNP. You cannot stifle freedom of speech to save freedom of speech, it is complte lunacy of thought. Their continuing stupidity, by stating they will continue to hound the BNP, just goes to show how they need to be condemned by the major parties - just because they are anti BNP does not mean they shouldn't be held up to the light of reasonable behaviour.

There are many, many groups set up to counter the BNP in every area of politics and society, we do not need another one - especially one which does such idiotic things such as this. They mean well and want to 'take the fight' to the BNP, but by arms - eggs or otherwise - and intimidation, can never be the right way. Especially as we are talking about opposing a 'party' which uses these exact tactics. Things like this really get me pissed off and if any of you saw the channel 4 news interview with one of the founding members of the unite group, you could see as plain as day how idiotic his thought process was.

Anyway, things like this get my blood boil, stupid people ruining public perception and the ability of those really doing a good job against the BNP on the ground from being as effective as they can. But just one further point, IA, if you think a demonstration against fascism which uses intimidation and eggs means the people demonstrating are fascists, you not only have one very wrong impression of fascism but moreover a very narrow view when judging people's actions.

**Kralizec** · 06-10-2009, 18:33

Originally Posted by JAG

I dislike and abhore everything the BNP stand for and quite happily campaign against them, however this new group that has just been set up, 'Unite against facism' is not only counter productive, but plainly, stupid. It has been set up in haste by a random assortment of trade unions and left wing groups, which fail to see the big picture. Making the BNP seem somehow victims, making their supporters - hardened ones or not - feel somehow that this in itself shows exactly why they should vote BNP. You cannot stifle freedom of speech to save freedom of speech, it is complte lunacy of thought. Their continuing stupidity, by stating they will continue to hound the BNP, just goes to show how they need to be condemned by the major parties - just because they are anti BNP does not mean they shouldn't be held up to the light of reasonable behaviour.

Originally Posted by JAG

IA, if you think a demonstration against fascism which uses intimidation and eggs means the people demonstrating are fascists, you not only have one very wrong impression of fascism but moreover a very narrow view when judging people's actions.

People who equate these people with fascists don't care a lot about what ideas they claim to have. The Soviet Union was a lot closer than fascist Italy than the paradise it was on paper. While they would deny it, these anti-fascists are untolerant and against freedom of speech

**HoreTore** · 06-10-2009, 18:46

Originally Posted by Kralizec

People who equate these people with fascists don't care a lot about what ideas they claim to have. The Soviet Union was a lot closer than fascist Italy than the paradise it was on paper. While they would deny it, these anti-fascists are untolerant and against freedom of speech

But then again....

If someone could've shot Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pinochet, Franco, Pol Pot, etc, before they got power, should it be done?

It would, after all, be a clear breach of freedom of speech and a number of other human rights.

**Kralizec** · 06-10-2009, 19:11

Originally Posted by HoreTore

But then again....

If someone could've shot Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pinochet, Franco, Pol Pot, etc, before they got power, should it be done?

It would, after all, be a clear breach of freedom of speech and a number of other human rights.

That depends. I have enough faith in democracy to believe that we'd never end up with such people by election results. The notion that these anti-fascists are preventing another holocaust by pelting a bunch of losers with eggs is laughable.

In the case of Hitler, I'd argue that the Weimar republic never became a functional democracy and the "free election in" 1933 was a farce.
Before Stalin became a dictator he was already a powerful politician in a despotic government.
Mao and Franco were fighting civil wars, and the alternative in either case was nothing to be particulary cheerful about either.
And as for Pinochet: if you killed him before the coup, you either had the amazing ability of predicting the future or you were a simple terrorist.

**Fragony** · 06-10-2009, 18:40

Originally Posted by JAG

Iif you think a demonstration against fascism which uses intimidation and eggs means the people demonstrating are fascists, you not only have one very wrong impression of fascism but moreover a very narrow view when judging people's actions.

oh really, do I

**Furunculus** · 06-12-2009, 09:51

Originally Posted by PowerWizard

Aw'some, so the people who revolted in France in 1789 against tyranny were fascists.

Originally Posted by JAG

But just one further point, IA, if you think a demonstration against fascism which uses intimidation and eggs means the people demonstrating are fascists, you not only have one very wrong impression of fascism but moreover a very narrow view when judging people's actions.

i don't know, against my dictionary definition of facism posted earlier it seems pretty apt.

regardless, the problem isn't the BNP itself, it's the fact that 2 million people voted for them.

this means that mainstream politics is no longer representing the plurality.

this is the fault AND the problem of the mainstream.

and i think we can posit that this lack of representation stems from immigration.