The Young Turks Praise/Promote Antifa

[EradiatedHaggis]

I wasn't really trying to argue with you, just putting my own 2 cents on the subject, for whatever it's worth.

Noted especially since he doesnt even understand what the word "both" means...

 

[abiG]

Pretty disgusting propaganda video, if you ask me. I hate the far right and I'm glad that Unite The Right 2: Electric Boogaloo failed hard, but praising political violence like Antifa is highly irresponsible. The ethics of "punch a Nazi" are questionable to begin with. When you factor in what they count as a "Nazi" and that they've also attacked Bernie supporters and left-wing reporters as well as people across the political spectrum who are NOT Nazis, it become apparent how abhorrent they are.

Yet, The Young Turks, which is considered to be a respectable and legitimate organization on the left, is praising these thugs. I think they need to be held to a higher standard. You wouldn't see Ben Shapiro or somebody on the mainstream right praise/promote neo-Nazis, and if they did, people would come for them HARD, so I don't think TYT should be allowed to praise/promote Antifa without backlash from reasonable people on the right, the center and even the left.

The young Turks are abhorrent. The fact they chose that name speaks volumes. Itcannot be that they did not know the connotation.

Anyways, yeah, not sure if it was posted, but the left's agenda with antifa is pretty clear. Check out CNN:

CNN Refers to Antifa, Black Lives Matter as “Anti-Hate” Groups

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Bullshit. He didn't blame the victims. That's just the narrative you were fed, and willingly swallowed. There was violence on both sides during the protest. Should he just ignore the fact that there were "counter-protesters" swinging clubs and attacking random bystanders?

Should he just have ignored the trend of this happening more and more frequently at the time, whenever a deemed right-wing group (or even a misrepresented "right-wing" group), gathered up?

Far-righters are usually reactionaries and they usually raise their head when there are some far-left loons that they can play with. So it was best to call out both, because that's what was leading to the increased tensions. Not just the far-right, but also the far-left.

Which side was responsible for killing an non-violent protester?

Absolutely not. But I would imagine that there are many Americans whose fathers, grandfathers, heck, even their relatives considering America's recent wars, have died fighting for that flag. So to see some pampered up NFL millionaire, living in a luxurious mansion, taking his time of the day to put the spotlight on himself and his menial social justice issues of the day, instead of the show of unity that the flag and the anthem are supposed to represent, that's obviously an intended provocation. And congratulations, you've successfully used the history behind that symbol to accomplish your provocation.

you think police violence is a menial social issue? And its obviously intended to be provocative. That tends to be the point of a non-violent protest. And the men and woman who have fought for this country were not fighting for a song or a flag, they were fighting for what they represent. They don't represent a police state that unfairly targets and punishes minorities. They do represent an individual's freedom to protest non-violently. Civil Rights leaders broke the law as part of their protests.

Too bad it wouldn't have been worth shit, if not for all of those people striving, fighting and working to make those symbols mean something, in the first place. The flag and the anthem only means something because people used to stand up for it. So choose your "provocations" wisely. If nobody stands up for the flag, it will cease to matter.

Wrong. They will cease to matter if our society doesn't live up to the ideals it represents.

201710010018 2017-10-01 United States Las Vegas Anti-Government extremists 59 851 Business,Airports and Aircraft,Private Citizens & Property

How was the Las Vegas attack an anti-government extremist? Have I missed out on something? From what I gather, the dude was just a mass-murdering loon. There's a bunch of other cases too that have a very questionable "political origin".

Sounds to me like a case of exactly what I've been talking about, misreporting. Should they have reported John Wayne Gacy as a "political extremist" back in the day, too? Were all those serial killers just alt-right white supremacist killers on the loose?

I'm sure that today, they would be.

Nice cherry picking.
https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=201710010018

NCIDENT SUMMARY:
"10/01/2017: An assailant opened fire from the Mandalay Bay Hotel on the Route 91 Harvest Festival concert in Las Vegas, Nevada, United States. At least 58 people were killed and 851 people were injured in the attack. The assailant shot and killed himself before police reached him. No group claimed responsibility for the incident; however, authorities identified the assailant as Stephen Paddock, an anti-government extremist. Witnesses overheard Paddock espousing anger over the 1990s standoffs in Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge, Idaho. Paddock also expressed concern over the US government "confiscating guns."
​

They don't have the answers in that case, so they categorized it based on what was reported.

As I said, a lot of "normal" things seem weird to Americans, because of the freak show that they are constantly subjected to.

Trump is not "normal". Well adjusted grown ass men, let alone leaders, don't tweet hateful b.s. against people who have slighted them.

 

[ElKarlo]

I'm not even talking about Antifa. That was about Shailene Woodley and a couple of other actresses (plus Bernie and a first-term Congressional candidate) who talked to TYT, which the TS said means that they're taken seriously by the left. But Antifa is even fringier than TYT. No exaggeration, Hare Krishnas are more numerous than them. It's just bizarre to me that they'd affect anyone's thinking about political issues, much less their vote.

But it's not about numbers, it's about tolerating them. I see it as , oh they're wild and.crazy, but we won't do anything about it. Mayors are tolerating their actions. This means that fringe they may be, they're tolerated and perhaps more popular than you may believe

 

[TheGreatA]

Which side was responsible for killing an non-violent protester?

A person was responsible for killing a non-violent protester. It could have easily been the elderly man hit by a club, had the militia men not intervened. So let's not act like the other side was squeaky clean.

If you think that the protesters deserved more criticism because they ended up causing more damage, that's fine. But what I was originally arguing against, is the notion that Trump somehow encouraged racists by condemning violence on both sides. I just don't see any merit to that argument. Especially when no such "empowerment" seemed to happen. What was it, 20 dudes at the "memorial"? And the Young Turks really think that it's because hardcore Nazis and far-righters are afraid of Antifa clowns?

Let's not be ridiculous. This is because most far-right people are reclusive reactionaries, and it usually takes some sort of a deemed provocation (justified or not) for them to start showing up. Since far-left activities have decreased, so has the far-right's. The two form almost a symbiosis, as has been observed in most countries where the radicals from both sides have gained ground, simultaneously.

you think police violence is a menial social issue? And its obviously intended to be provocative. That tends to be the point of a non-violent protest. And the men and woman who have fought for this country were not fighting for a song or a flag, they were fighting for what they represent. They don't represent a police state that unfairly targets and punishes minorities. They do represent an individual's freedom to protest non-violently. Civil Rights leaders broke the law as part of their protests.

It's not a menial social issue, but police being racist is a much less significant issue. The American police are brutal, and the justice system is brutal, this is known, but when you approach it from a racial angle, you take focus away from what really matters.

I've looked at the statistics and they add up to the police treating everyone quite shitty. While the targeting of black Americans by cops, in situations where the interaction turns violent, is elevated, we cannot afford to ignore the fact that the number of violent crimes committed by black Americans, is also likewise elevated. A lot of that is due to urban gangs that have adopted a "fuck the government" mentality, and respond with hostility to any authorities. That is not to say that there aren't "fuck the government"-mentality white people, but those usually live far away from urban centers and the concentration of institutional activities. And from what I've seen, a lot of those aggressive gun-toting guys tend to get shot on sight by cops, as well.

Still there are many, many cases that I've seen where people of every ethnicity get brutally executed by a lunatic American cop. There's no real reason to approach this issue from the possibly skewed angle of "racism", because again, it divides the ranks and obfuscates the true issue.

That is, again, an example of how effectively the American institutions can "divide & conquer" the people in order to prevent any true change to their processes.

Wrong. They will cease to matter if our society doesn't live up to the ideals it represents.

What I'm speaking about is the act itself. When you're kneeling every evening, you're going past the point of protesting, and crossing the line to where you're just being a prick for the sake of it. At that point, the protest ceases to matter, what people see are merely people making a mockery of something that was once deemed important.

There were worse times in America's history than today. Times when a black man could certainly not make millions as a sportsman. But somehow, some way, all the men and women, regardless of color, managed to find a sense of unity amongst each other and come together for the flag and the anthem. That was the symbolism of it. That no matter what, the ranks of Americans could not be divided.

Some people think that it is fine to use that show of historical unity, as a platform for their protest. That's fine, but don't act surprised when your provocation actually provokes people.

As I said, Trump's just a guy who puts on the TV, watches some Monday Night Football and expects to see a great football game. When he sees people kneeling during the anthem, he gets pissed off like a lot of people would. It doesn't mean he's racist, or that he hates free speech, it's just that he acts like a lot of people would in that situation. He's not some guy that spends every hour of his day thinking about every implication that his words may potentially have, or whether they stand up to scrutiny.

In cases like that, you just need to have people around, who do, that will remind him that the protesters have a right to do what they're doing, as annoying or frustrating as it may be.

Nice cherry picking.
https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=201710010018

NCIDENT SUMMARY:
"10/01/2017: An assailant opened fire from the Mandalay Bay Hotel on the Route 91 Harvest Festival concert in Las Vegas, Nevada, United States. At least 58 people were killed and 851 people were injured in the attack. The assailant shot and killed himself before police reached him. No group claimed responsibility for the incident; however, authorities identified the assailant as Stephen Paddock, an anti-government extremist. Witnesses overheard Paddock espousing anger over the 1990s standoffs in Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge, Idaho. Paddock also expressed concern over the US government "confiscating guns."
​

They don't have the answers in that case, so they categorized it based on what was reported.

It's not "cherry-picking" when an incident causing 59 fatalities is possibly being misrepresented. This attack alone would amount to a lot of the fatalities caused by "politically motivated violence" in the entire country. So it would be best that we are clear on whether it was truly a political attack, or not.

Based on allegations. Doesn't exactly pass the standard for "political violence", I would think. But perhaps the term "politically-motivated violence" can be applied to a lower standard. He didn't make any manifest, he wasn't involved in any political activities or organizations. There didn't seem to be any particular political importance to the target he chose. One would think that a political terrorist would put more effort into making a statement through their actions.

The fact of the matter is that the police are still treating the attack's motive as unknown. The aforementioned claims have been brought up, along with his gambling losses, depression, possessions of child pornography (which his brother would soon be busted for), among other things.

Trump is not "normal". Well adjusted grown ass men, let alone leaders, don't tweet hateful b.s. against people who have slighted them.

"Well adjusted grown ass men" don't exactly grow on trees. Like I said, he's normal, not exemplary.

The normal for America, today, is not exemplary. Considering the amount of bile that I see from Americans in social media, every day, Trump appears to be a perfect representative for the country.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

Oh won't somebody please think of the children!!!

You're not disturbed by a domestic terrorist teaching children? Teachers are allowed to have personal lives, but I don't think active criminals should be allowed to teach. The double standard here is ridiculous. If she had merely be seen on the right-wing side of one of these protests, just acting peacefully, she would have probably been fired. But she's the ringleader of these thugs and gets a pass.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

If that's the case, then Infowars is a respectable and legitimate organization on the right.

I do think people like Trump and Cruz have appeased them too much in order to appease their base which likes Jones to a large extent. However, I would say TYT is generally seen as more respectable than Jones and Co. and for good reason. However, I think they should all be held to a higher standard. TYT praising/promoting Antifa is bad, just like it would be if Infowars endorsed Unite The Right.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

lol just watched the video. I would love to punch that goof Hasan. What a overly emotional, misinformation spreading liberal fucktard.

So which Sherdogger is this no name in the video?

He's actually Cenk's nephew, LOL. Pretty much the only reason why he was hired and will likely never be fired by his uncle. He's like Cenk but with 1/3 the body fat as well as brain cells.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

He's actually Cenk's nephew, LOL. Pretty much the only reason why he was hired and will likely never be fired by his uncle. He's like Cenk but with 1/3 the body fat as well as brain cells.

eeeek 1/3 of the brain cells?

 

[Hollywood Jack]

eeeek 1/3 of the brain cells?

Yeah, he's like the male version of Hannah Cranston, but fortunately for him he's related to Cenk so he didn't get fired like she did.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

Matt Christiansen has a good video on Unite the Right 2 showing the leftist media's vile coverage. He even shows a picture of the two dozen alt-right people who were there.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

I very much enjoyed their 2016 Presidential coverage. That’s all I know of these people.....are they actual Turks? haha

Cenk Uygur and his nephew Hasan Piker are Turks. I don't think any of the others are. Ana Kasparian is actually an Armenian and she gets a lot of crap in the Armenian community for working with them. Especially since Cenk has a history of denying the Armenian genocide. To be fair to him, he has changed his mind since then, though.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

No, it doesn't fit the definition of a terroristic organization. Their goal is political activism whether or not how much you disagree with it, their goal is NOT political violence, they don't have an actual structure and are a "movement" and they have never committed a terror attack.

It is not a terror attack to counterprotest, stop being a baby.

It's debatable whether they qualify as a domestic terrorist organization or not. But to pretend that political violence is not their goal is completely disingenuous. They're there to violently confront people whose political opinions differ from theirs. They also routinely attack others who get in their way or inadvertently offend them, including left-wing journalists and activists.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

I'm not even talking about Antifa. That was about Shailene Woodley and a couple of other actresses (plus Bernie and a first-term Congressional candidate) who talked to TYT, which the TS said means that they're taken seriously by the left. But Antifa is even fringier than TYT. No exaggeration, Hare Krishnas are more numerous than them. It's just bizarre to me that they'd affect anyone's thinking about political issues, much less their vote.

Um, Justice Democrats are being elected to Congress. TYT/Cenk started that. You keep downplaying their influence for some reason. They're already influential and seem to be on the rise...

 

[Jack V Savage]

Um, Justice Democrats are being elected to Congress. TYT/Cenk started that. You keep downplaying their influence for some reason. They're already influential and seem to be on the rise...

"Some reason" being that I legitimately and correctly perceive them as having negligible influence. If you want to construct a prediction test and bet on it, I'm certainly willing.

As I said, when I think liberal pundits, I think John Holbo, Scott Alexander, Paul Krugman, Noah Smith, Jon Chait--if you want influence, maybe sub in Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein for the first two. When I think liberal politicians, it's people like Obama, Warren, Clinton, Biden, etc. No one that supports Antifa. It's just a ridiculous fantasy world the right is living in when they think that there's widespread support for those guys on the left.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

"Some reason" being that I legitimately and correctly perceive them as having negligible influence. If you want to construct a prediction test and bet on it, I'm certainly willing.

As I said, when I think liberal pundits, I think John Holbo, Scott Alexander, Paul Krugman, Noah Smith, Jon Chait--if you want influence, maybe sub in Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein for the first two. When I think liberal politicians, it's people like Obama, Warren, Clinton, Biden, etc. No one that supports Antifa. It's just a ridiculous fantasy world the right is living in when they think that there's widespread support for those guys on the left.

Those pundits aren't getting people elected into Congress. We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

 

[ObamaPhoneLady]

the bisons were killed to get rid of the natives while natives got killed as well at wounded knee by european immigrants.

USA has a very democratic history... for german immigrants like donald trump.

What does any of this have to do with the Aremenian Genocide or the Young Turks btw?

 

[tonni]

It's debatable whether they qualify as a domestic terrorist organization or not. But to pretend that political violence is not their goal is completely disingenuous. They're there to violently confront people whose political opinions differ from theirs. They also routinely attack others who get in their way or inadvertently offend them, including left-wing journalists and activists.

It's not their explicit goal. Again, it's not a structured group as far as I know.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

It's not their explicit goal. Again, it's not a structured group as far as I know.

Yes it is. Specifically the black bloc. It may be loosely structured, but it's still structured. There are affiliates of Antifa who do not engage in violence for various reasons. These people are unmasked. But when you see someone wearing a mask in public and it ain't Halloween, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that he or she is probably up to no good. There is a dedicated part of Antifa that is there to initiate violence. This is well documented. Hell, even unmasked public members/leaders of Antifa like Yvette Felarca have routinely engaged in violence. And indicative of the double standard, she's been allowed out on bail multiple times and allowed to keep her job teaching elementary-aged children and police have been ordered to stand down by the Antifa-sympathizing mayor of Berkeley while her and her cohorts wreak havoc.

 

[Supereem]

Well, they get people like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to do interviews with them, they have Justice Democrats and Wolf-PAC, Hollywood celebrities like Susan Sarandon, Rosario Dawson, Shailene Woodley, etc. They're an emerging force on the left. I think they should be more careful and responsible and not promote groups like Antifa.

They use to deny the Armenian genocide, no so, they are not respected.