Hot takes on the Democratic frontrunners

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

He was just filming them. It's not okay.

Sigh... Here is other footage from Andy Ngo himself, from before the fight started. In the first clip, starting around 2:24, the right wing folks he's hanging out with say they're trying to figure out which way the wind is blowing so that they don't accidentally pepper spray themselves. "Ha ha, that would suck," says Ngo. "I think... it's blowing that way."

In the second clip, starting at 3:41, he asks his compatriots, "And how long until Gibson gets here, and we have, like, some more numbers?" There's some crosstalk, and then another guy says, "Who's the guy with the weapon here? Me!" "That is some rad shit!," replies Ngo.



Fighting is bad. Injuries are bad. Weapons are bad. But Andy Ngo does not believe these things, and he is not on "your" side when it comes to nonviolence.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

None of the propagators of this violence have been charged or ever arrested.

Yes, they have. Three antifa folks were arrested in the Portland clash; Gage Halupowski plead guilty and was sentenced to six years in prison, James Stocks plead guilty and was sentenced to a year probation, and Maria DeHart plead not guilty and her trial is pending.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

If you want violent revolution, seriously, GFYS.

I totally agree.

[Flint]

But we need Andy Ngo to be good, so that Antifa and everything they stand for is bad and we never have to talk about it again.

[Undertoad]

Here is other footage from Andy Ngo himself, from before the fight started. In the first clip, starting around 2:24, the right wing folks he's hanging out with say they're trying to figure out which way the wind is blowing so that they don't accidentally pepper spray themselves. "Ha ha, that would suck," says Ngo. "I think... it's blowing that way."

In the second clip, starting at 3:41, he asks his compatriots, "And how long until Gibson gets here, and we have, like, some more numbers?" There's some crosstalk, and then another guy says, "Who's the guy with the weapon here? Me!" "That is some rad shit!," replies Ngo.

No. The man filming, and saying what you say Andy Ngo said, is not Andy Ngo. Andy Ngo is the guy on his phone at the beginning of the clip.

The guy filming and speaking is an Antifa infiltrator of the right-wing group. He's the source for the Portland Mercury story.

The claim is that Andy Ngo overheard this discussion and didn't report it.

In the longer unedited video, it's pretty clear that Andy Ngo is *near* them a good bit of time. There's nothing in particular that makes it seem that he's *with* them. He's not directly involved in any discussions. You might say it's damning enough that he's near them for a good bit of time. He wasn't near them when he got attacked.

[Luce]

I am puzzled by the implication that antifa is an organization. It's not, at least not more than at a strictly local level. It's a set of beliefs. A motivation, rather than a group.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Treating all opposition as "they" is the far far far bigger problem.

There are people who WANT a free republic and a libertarian social order, and there are those like Adam Schiff (D-CA) and James Comey, who DO NOT. These are people who have altogether forgotten the law. They palpably want us to forget the law too.

One is the enemy. Not labeled. Self-made, self-appointed. Also probably did not do well in high-school civics.

[Luce]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

There are people who WANT a free republic and a libertarian social order, and there are those like Adam Schiff (D-CA) and James Comey, who DO NOT. These are people who have altogether forgotten the law. They palpably want us to forget the law too.

One is the enemy. Not labeled. Self-made, self-appointed. Also probably did not do well in high-school civics.

The idea that this country is based on libertarianism was answered, by many of the same people that wrote the articles of confederation and the subsequent constitution, with the response to Shay's Rebellion.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

You need to brush up on what libertarianism really is -- and consider that pure anything social theories do not sustain in actual societies. They perish of exposure to life and necessity -- apparently I need to remind you that I understand this. Puritans became Congregationalists within three generations, and so forth.

Off the top of my head, there was the Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion, and one of these (which one was it?) generated about three bloody noses total. The other one didn't.

It's a mild affray when *all* the casualties can say, "Ow. Quit it."

[Luce]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

You need to brush up on what libertarianism really is -- and consider that pure anything social theories do not sustain in actual societies. They perish of exposure to life and necessity -- apparently I need to remind you that I understand this. Puritans became Congregationalists within three generations, and so forth.

Off the top of my head, there was the Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion, and one of these (which one was it?) generated about three bloody noses total. The other one didn't.

It's a mild affray when *all* the casualties can say, "Ow. Quit it."

Shay's rebellion had, IIRC, 2 fatalities. But the point was made all the same.

And as for the whiskey rebellion, I think there was a single fatality.

But again, the point was driven home. Within the bounds of the constitution, the government is not libertarian in nature and has never been so.

At the moment, it is nowhere near it. Not even in the same area code. Pretty sure you agree with me, but for entirely different reasons.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Ah, there's your problem, then. You thought I said "government." Not so. I said "society." A distinction between the two is legitimate to make.

[Luce]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Ah, there's your problem, then. You thought I said "government." Not so. I said "society." A distinction between the two is legitimate to make.

If it took a couple of hundred years to get to the point where Black folks can be hired and Gay folks can walk the streets without being killed, then I'd argue that any libertarianism involved has been for one select group. By which I mean straight white males.

For the most part, things are better, but I can obviously not speak for toddlers in cages.

Our society is by nature an oligarchy.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Luce

I am puzzled by the implication that antifa is an organization. It's not, at least not more than at a strictly local level. It's a set of beliefs. A motivation, rather than a group.

That's odd, why isn't there an official group?

[Luce]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

That's odd, why isn't there an official group?

They voted against it at the convention.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Luce

And as for the whiskey rebellion, I think there was a single fatality.

It almost burned down the entire town of Pittsburgh. I believe whiskey was used to smooth those savage beasts.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

That's odd, why isn't there an official group?

I would guess it's set up in cells. Making it the sort of organization the right would immediately assume is Communist influenced so they can automatically punch them in the street. They are the equal and opposite of the fascist groups which can punched without remorse from the left. We, chimp nation, are in trouble if we can't stand peacefully against extremists.

[Luce]

Originally Posted by Griff

I would guess it's set up in cells. M

It's not even that.