Is ANTIFA Fascist? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally by activity where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


DebateIsland Referral Program: Get a Free Month of DebateIsland Diamond Premium Membership ($4.99 Value) Per Each New User That You Refer!

Is ANTIFA Fascist?

Debate Information

A lot of propagandized right-wing pundits seem to think so because some right-wing media host told them, but does that actually hold up to critical rigor?

Not only is this superficially bizarre, but it is in fact quite the opposite.

First off, ANTIFA literally means "Anti-fascist", this alone should be enough to drive a mortal stake through anyone who wishes to equivocate fascism and ANTIFA.

But maybe, just maybe, they have other similarities.

First, what is fascism?
Fascism is a far right-wing political ideology which adheres to strict hierarchy, collectivism based on a capitalist economy, dictatorial control which uses the state as a weapon to violently suppress opposition, and strict government controls.

What is ANTIFA?
ANTIFA is a decentralized ideological movement which opposes authoritarian control and fascist takeover of government which uses protest, violence, and activism to prevent this end.

So, in what ways are the similar?
-Use of violence to silence opposition
-color scheme (black & red)

How are they dissimilar?
- Fascism is strictly organized and hierarchical, ANTIFA isn't even classified as an organization by the FBI.
https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-race-and-ethnicity-archive-bdd3b6078e9efadcfcd0be4b65f2362e
- Fascism often leads to racism, either explicit or implicit while ANTIFA adopts anyone regardless of race or ethnicity.
- ANTIFA is not coupled with a specific economic movement, where Fascism is.
- ANTIFA is decentralized with no single political organizer, where Fascism specifically adopts one.
- Fascism is authoritarian, where ANTIFA is very much opposed to authority.
- ANTIFA does not intend to out live it's targets as it is simply opposing their existence as a reaction, while Fascism seeks to go on for as long as possible.
- Fascism has killed millions of people, ANTIFA has never killed a single person.

Based on all this, the right is simply making a boogeyman out of ANTIFA because they threaten their status, and to unify the right against a group that quite frankly, isn't that big a deal when compared to actual Fascist who openly seek to kill people and establish a militant police state.
PlaffelvohfenAlofRICYDdhartaDebater123xlJ_dolphin_473
At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life 
developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

All of that so we can argue about nothing.
«13



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +



Arguments



Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • AlofRIAlofRI 1390 Pts   -  
    I've been a member of ANTIGI for at least 5 years now. They'll be telling lies about ME next! (ANTIGI = Anti-Giuliani)  B)
    Happy_KillbotPlaffelvohfenTreeManDebater123
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @AlofRI ;

    After I saw that seen in Borat 2 with him very obviously adjusting himself, I don't think I could take him seriously on anything even if I wanted to.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1524 Pts   -  
    Happy_Killbot said:

    So, in what ways are the similar?
    -Use of violence to silence opposition

    That's right up there with Marion Barry's "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country."

    At least you're willing to admit AntiFA are terrorists.

    Happy_KillbotDebater123
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    At least you're willing to admit AntiFA are terrorists.
    Show me where I admit, or for that matter, even suggest this.



    CYDdharta
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • anarchist100anarchist100 491 Pts   -  
    @Happy_Killbot
    Define Fascism.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @anarchist100 ;

    It's in the OP:

    "Fascism is a far right-wing political ideology which adheres to strict hierarchy, collectivism based on a capitalist economy, dictatorial control which uses the state as a weapon to violently suppress opposition, and strict government controls."
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    Fascism is not capitalist in any meaningful way, in terms of economic system it is actually closer to communism in the methods it used to achieve it's goals. nominal private ownership of capital is still allowed, however, what to produce, when to produce it, how much to produce, and which laborers will work where is all determined by the government not by a system of prices coordinated by the free market which is the hallmark of a capitalist system. That being said they aren't fascist. they are communist if anything. Though I'm not sure you can really attach a firm ideological grounding to this group, as they don't even really seem to know what they want. they did however name their group after a Stalinist backed communist paramilitary group from 1930's Germany. I'm open to being told why I'm wrong, but I've read the critiques of fascism and communism from economists and policy experts of the 1920's & 30's, and all of the central planners (people like those in FDR's policy brain trust, and advocates of Keynes, and socialists) fawned over them until it became too unpopular to do so (yknow because of the atrocities and that), and all of the free marketeers recognized their danger from the get go (at least in terms of economic systems and their relationship to freedom). in other words, it was the anti-capitalists who were impressed by the systems of communism and fascism alike, and the capitalists who said "this doesn't seem like a terribly good idea"
    anarchist100Debater123CYDdhartaall4actt
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    At least you're willing to admit AntiFA are terrorists.
    Show me where I admit, or for that matter, even suggest this.




    Also the definition of the word terrorism is : the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
    you admitted that antifa, a group with political aims, uses violence to achieve those aims. so unless you have a definition of terrorism that you pull out whenever a group you like does this kind-of stuff, then you did implicitly admit that in what you wrote in the question.
    Happy_KillbotCYDdhartaall4actt
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    Fascism is not capitalist in any meaningful way, in terms of economic system it is actually closer to communism in the methods it used to achieve it's goals.
    Do you have any evidence for this claim?
     nominal private ownership of capital is still allowed, however, what to produce, when to produce it, how much to produce, and which laborers will work where is all determined by the government not by a system of prices coordinated by the free market which is the hallmark of a capitalist system.
    Do you have any evidence for either of these claims? What makes that system not capitalist, and why do you think that a price coordination system is absent?
     That being said they aren't fascist. they are communist if anything. Though I'm not sure you can really attach a firm ideological grounding to this group, as they don't even really seem to know what they want.
    This is very bizarre as they are classified by the FBI as an ideology, see link in the OP.
     they did however name their group after a Stalinist backed communist paramilitary group from 1930's Germany.
    Yeah, I'm going to need some evidence for that too.
     I'm open to being told why I'm wrong, but I've read the critiques of fascism and communism from economists and policy experts of the 1920's & 30's, and all of the central planners (people like those in FDR's policy brain trust, and advocates of Keynes, and socialists) fawned over them until it became too unpopular to do so (yknow because of the atrocities and that), and all of the free marketeers recognized their danger from the get go (at least in terms of economic systems and their relationship to freedom). in other words, it was the anti-capitalists who were impressed by the systems of communism and fascism alike, and the capitalists who said "this doesn't seem like a terribly good idea"
    You have made many references to economic systems, but I don't see why unless you have some evidence tying ANTIFA ideology to economic theory. Basically just the same for everything here, what evidence can you provide to substantiate your claims?
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    Also the definition of the word terrorism is : the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
    This is an equivocation fallacy.
    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-definitions-terminology-methodology.pdf/view
    you admitted that antifa, a group with political aims, uses violence to achieve those aims. so unless you have a definition of terrorism that you pull out whenever a group you like does this kind-of stuff, then you did implicitly admit that in what you wrote in the question.
    The FBI does not consider ANTIFA a terrorist organization, in fact, they don't even consider them an organization.
    CYDdharta
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    Also the definition of the word terrorism is : the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
    This is an equivocation fallacy.
    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-definitions-terminology-methodology.pdf/view

    It's not, as that was the first time the term was defined, so good try? but secondly lets use that definition you posted, it still seems to fit? self-proclaimed members of antifa have certainly committed acts that threaten human life, in efforts to influence the policy of the US by intimidation. This seems to be their goal? and you said they used violence. do you just not think the violence they used has ever put human life in danger?



    you admitted that antifa, a group with political aims, uses violence to achieve those aims. so unless you have a definition of terrorism that you pull out whenever a group you like does this kind-of stuff, then you did implicitly admit that in what you wrote in the question.
    The FBI does not consider ANTIFA a terrorist organization, in fact, they don't even consider them an organization.
    I didn't know that this was an argument about weather or not the FBI defines them as a terrorist organization, truth does in fact exist outside the proclamations of bureaucrats, have they listed the KKK yet? just askin, clearly no need to worry if not!
    @Happy_Killbot
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -   edited April 29
    this is the group they even took the logo.


    "Do you have any evidence for either of these claims? What makes that system not capitalist, and why do you think that a price coordination system is absent?"
    Yes, this is pretty well known economic history, if you are interested here is a link to video lecture discussing one of the pro-capitalist economists of the time and who he was fighting against in trying to prevent people from moving towards fascism in the west.

    A capitalist system requires that decisions about capital and production be left in private hands. the price system is what is used to transfer information about what is needed and what there is too much of. this is how production and economic coordination happens in a capitalist system. If the government is centrally planning production, and effectively expropriating capital, and controlling prices, then how can you call it capitalist?

    Also I made very clear to qualify in my statement that I didn't think that anti-fa was an ideologically aligned organization. most of what I wrote was countering your statements about fascism being capitalist. However it seems clear that their name and logo are an homage to a communist  paramilitary group. Though I don't know how much we should read into that.


    However it seems to me that we are discussing truth here, not what the government has said, so taking refuge in what the FBI has said in an official capacity as an ultimate defense seems kind-of weak to me.
    Debater123all4actt
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    I didn't know that this was an argument about weather or not the FBI defines them as a terrorist organization, truth does in fact exist outside the proclamations of bureaucrats, have they listed the KKK yet? just askin, clearly no need to worry if not!
    I think you missed the point here, you can't claim definitions for me in order to justify that I made an admission I didn't make. That is intellectually lazy and disingenuous.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    I didn't know that this was an argument about weather or not the FBI defines them as a terrorist organization, truth does in fact exist outside the proclamations of bureaucrats, have they listed the KKK yet? just askin, clearly no need to worry if not!
    I think you missed the point here, you can't claim definitions for me in order to justify that I made an admission I didn't make. That is intellectually lazy and disingenuous.

    that is THE definition, I'm not claiming it, that's what it is. even in the definition you posted (which really isn't all that different from the one I posted), it seems that they fit the bill, so what's your point? did you expect us never to use the definition of terrorism, and compare that with the premise you set, to determine if they were or were not a terrorist group? How was I suppose to know that you would object to a commonly accepted definition of the word, that's not a logical fallacy, it's reasonably assuming the framework unless told otherwise.
    Happy_Killbotall4actt
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    Yes, this is pretty well known economic history, if you are interested here is a link to video lecture discussing one of the pro-capitalist economists of the time and who he was fighting against in trying to prevent people from moving towards fascism in the west.
    There is just one problem: Fascists used prices in order to justify their goods and services, so that would make them a type of capitalism.
    A capitalist system requires that decisions about capital and production be left in private hands. the price system is what is used to transfer information about what is needed and what there is too much of. this is how production and economic coordination happens in a capitalist system. If the government is centrally planning production, and efficiently expropriating capital, then how can you call it capitalist?
    This simply isn't true, as there are types of capitalism such as state capitalism or totalitarian capitalism which are not left in private hands and rely on the state to make and sell goods & services. Fascist regimes still used prices to control the value of labor. The major difference is that corporations are effectively owned by the state and operated by government cronies. It is hard to argue that this isn't capitalist as it has all of the hallmarks of a capitalist economy with the only difference being who is in charge of the means of production.
    Also I made very clear to qualify in my statement that I didn't think that anti-fa was an ideologically aligned organization.
    ANTIFA isn't an organization, see the link in the OP.
    most of what I wrote was countering your statements about fascism being capitalist.
    It seems to me you are only considering capitalism as the free-market variety which quite frankly, has never existed. The corporatists economics of fascism is akin to government monopolies on the market, where the state owns everything and makes operational decisions on that production. Essentially, if a single monopolizing enterprise were to acquire all of the large companies and factories, then sell the production from those enterprises to the people, that would be fascism should this enterprise or individual also be in charge of the government. This is technically capitalist because the production of goods are corporately owned, however the owner has merged with the governing institutions.
    However it seems to me that we are discussing truth here, not what the government has said, so taking refuge in what the FBI has said in an official capacity as an ultimate defense seems kind-of weak to me.
    That's ridiculous considering that the FBI gets to decide who is and isn't a terrorist organization. If you want to make this based on your personal definitions that's fine, but those definition have no bearing beyond your subjective opinion. The FBI is one of the government institutions which among other things has the explicit goal is to discover, investigate, and combat terrorism in the US and abroad. To suggest that this is somehow "weak" is as absurd as saying that the FDA's requirement to place labels and ingredient lists on food products is a poor defense for claims about what is in a given product.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    that is THE definition, I'm not claiming it, that's what it is. even in the definition you posted (which really isn't all that different from the one I posted), it seems that they fit the bill, so what's your point? did you expect us never to use the definition of terrorism, and compare that with the premise you set, to determine if they were or were not a terrorist group? How was I suppose to know that you would object to a commonly accepted definition of the word, that's not a logical fallacy, it's reasonably assuming the framework unless told otherwise.
    Are you claiming that definition are objective? If so, that's hilarious.

    ANTIFA isn't a terrorist organization because they don't fit the definition provided by the FBI. You were supposed to know because I provided a link in the OP. It's a fallacy because you are trying to claim I meant something I didn't say.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    that is THE definition, I'm not claiming it, that's what it is. even in the definition you posted (which really isn't all that different from the one I posted), it seems that they fit the bill, so what's your point? did you expect us never to use the definition of terrorism, and compare that with the premise you set, to determine if they were or were not a terrorist group? How was I suppose to know that you would object to a commonly accepted definition of the word, that's not a logical fallacy, it's reasonably assuming the framework unless told otherwise.
    Are you claiming that definition are objective? If so, that's hilarious.

    ANTIFA isn't a terrorist organization because they don't fit the definition provided by the FBI. You were supposed to know because I provided a link in the OP. It's a fallacy because you are trying to claim I meant something I didn't say.

    not objective but the notion that your own personal definition that you use when you are trying to justify that type of behavior, carries more weight than the definition accepted by wider society, then that is hilarious, in other words, if based on a legal technicality of semantics, ISIS was left out of the official definition, it would still be fair to call them a terrorist group, based on what we as a culture agree what that word means, irrespective of state definition,(you can still accept the KKK is a terrorist group, and indeed was one for it's whole history, even though the FBI or any other state agency did not declare them as such). also If you could quote the specific definition that you are using as in write it out, and then show me how you think antifa does not meet that definition, or what parts of the definition you think don't apply. I think I would understand your point more clearly. because as I read it, the definition you linked, it does apply, but im more than happy to change my mind on that, I simply don't know where you are coming form. which part of the definition does antifa not apply to, without referencing what bureaucrats say, speaking of logical fallacies, just saying that a person of authority said it, therefore its true, also racks up there in non-nonsensical arguments
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1524 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    At least you're willing to admit AntiFA are terrorists.
    Show me where I admit, or for that matter, even suggest this.





    terrorism

    Pronunciation /ˈterəˌrizəm/ /ˈtɛrəˌrɪzəm/ 

    NOUN

    • The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.




    Happy_Killbot said:
    ...
    So, in what ways are the similar?
    -Use of violence to silence opposition
    ...


    You admitted they fit the very definition of terrorism.



    Happy_Killbot
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -   edited April 30
    @Bastiat ;
    not objective but the notion that your own personal definition that you use when you are trying to justify that type of behavior, carries more weight than the definition accepted by wider society, then that is hilarious, in other words, if based on a legal technicality of semantics, ISIS was left out of the official definition, it would still be fair to call them a terrorist group, based on what we as a culture agree what that word means, irrespective of state definition,(you can still accept the KKK is a terrorist group, and indeed was one for it's whole history, even though the FBI or any other state agency did not declare them as such).
    That's why I didn't use a subjective definition, nor did I use vernacular. I used a technical definition from a government institution which tracks this stuff. The FBI's definition and description is both sophisticated and complete. I did not use a "personal definition" and the one I did use happens to include ISIS.
    also If you could quote the specific definition that you are using as in write it out, and then show me how you think antifa does not meet that definition, or what parts of the definition you think don't apply. I think I would understand your point more clearly. because as I read it, the definition you linked, it does apply, but im more than happy to change my mind on that, I simply don't know where you are coming form. which part of the definition does antifa not apply to, without referencing what bureaucrats say, speaking of logical fallacies, just saying that a person of authority said it, therefore its true, also racks up there in non-nonsensical arguments
    You can read it here if you missed it the first time:

    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-definitions-terminology-methodology.pdf/view

    ANTIFA does not constitute a terrorist organization because as already stated multiple times, they are not an organization. In addition, ANTIFA has never hurt or killed anyone so individuals do not meet the criteria to be labeled as terrorists either.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    You didn't watch the video, which is sad, personally I find it very interesting.

    secondly, fascism involved as a matter of fact, central planning of the economy. prices existed, but they were determined by the state. not by the market. additionally the means of production were not in the hands of private interests, they were controlled by the sate. the point is not that no aspects of capitalism exist. the point is, that this system is closer to what the soviets were doing, than to what capitalist countries were doing. The very fact that you need different words to describe those types of capitalism should be a signal that they are very different. it would be like saying Marxism, socialism, and Fabian social democracy are all the same thing. they're not. they fundamentally distinct, though they may arise from the same tradition. If you change an economic system by fundamentally altering the core functions of that system, then how can you say its the same thing? If I have a Mac, but I replace the OS, the chip set, and the mother board with windows based systems and hardware, do I still have a MAC? I have what looks like a mac from the outside, but what functions for all intents and purposes as a PC so no, I don't have a MAC.

    "It is hard to argue that this isn't capitalist as it has all of the hallmarks of a capitalist economy"
    except for literally the two defining hallmarks of a capitalist society. its like, "yeah we're communist, but we don't do the whole collectivization thing, and the means of production are privately owned, but yeah we're communist" no you aren't not unless you redefine communist as "anyone who say's they're a communist"

    Again as far as antifa not being an organization, probably more than 99% of organizations across the world aren't classified as such by the FBI and yet they exist. I'm really just not impressed by appealing to authority as the basis for your argument. However if you argument is that the FBI has not determined them to be a sufficient threat, an organization, or a terrorist organization, then I absolutely agree with you, that the FBI has not done those things. However, it does not follow logically to me, that simply because the FBI has not affirmed it, that we can safely falsify it. would you at least agree with that? that the state does not indeed define reality?
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -   edited April 30
    @CYDdharta ;
    You admitted they fit the very definition of terrorism.
    That's not the FBI's definition, so you are equivocating. I am using the proper technical definition rather than vernacular because I care to make unambiguous statements rather than trying to put words in other's mouths by equivocating on definitions. ANTIFA has not nor do they intend to kill anyone so they are not terrorists.

    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-definitions-terminology-methodology.pdf/view
    CYDdharta
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    not objective but the notion that your own personal definition that you use when you are trying to justify that type of behavior, carries more weight than the definition accepted by wider society, then that is hilarious, in other words, if based on a legal technicality of semantics, ISIS was left out of the official definition, it would still be fair to call them a terrorist group, based on what we as a culture agree what that word means, irrespective of state definition,(you can still accept the KKK is a terrorist group, and indeed was one for it's whole history, even though the FBI or any other state agency did not declare them as such).
    That's why I didn't use a subjective definition, nor did I use vernacular. I used a technical definition from a government institution which tracks this stuff. The FBI's definition and description is both sophisticated and complete. I did not use a "personal definition" and the one I did use happens to include ISIS.
    also If you could quote the specific definition that you are using as in write it out, and then show me how you think antifa does not meet that definition, or what parts of the definition you think don't apply. I think I would understand your point more clearly. because as I read it, the definition you linked, it does apply, but im more than happy to change my mind on that, I simply don't know where you are coming form. which part of the definition does antifa not apply to, without referencing what bureaucrats say, speaking of logical fallacies, just saying that a person of authority said it, therefore its true, also racks up there in non-nonsensical arguments
    You can read it here if you missed it the first time:

    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-definitions-terminology-methodology.pdf/view

    ANTIFA does not constitute a terrorist organization because as already stated multiple times, they are not an organization. In addition, ANTIFA has never hurt or killed anyone so individuals do not meet the criteria to be labeled as terrorists either.

    Are you able to make an argument without basing it on "the people in power say I'm right"?
    Antifa does seem to me, to be an organization, they are not centrally organized, but decentralized organizations do exist, to provide an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_Dispensed ; (does the link work? now that i think about it, I'm not even sure they exist, better check with the FBI :s

    Also The definition you posted makes no reference to "organizations" only "domestic terrorism" and it does not say "hurt or killed" it says "Acts dangerous to human life" of which members of antifa have committed.So If you're argument is:

    "Anti-fa isn't a terrorist organization but simply a bunch of individual domestic terrorists running around and acting in concert in a decentralized way" then I'm not sure what sort of victory you have actually achieved?
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1524 Pts   -  
    That's not the FBI's definition, so you are equivocating. I am using the proper technical definition rather than vernacular because I care to make unambiguous statements rather than trying to put words in other's mouths by equivocating on definitions. ANTIFA has not nor do they intend to kill anyone so they are not terrorists.

    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-definitions-terminology-methodology.pdf/view

    OK, now try actually reading what you post.  There is no mention of murder or killing in that definition.  Dunno about your insane little mind, but most people would consider this "dangerous to human life".


    Happy_Killbot
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    That's not the FBI's definition, so you are equivocating. I am using the proper technical definition rather than vernacular because I care to make unambiguous statements rather than trying to put words in other's mouths by equivocating on definitions. ANTIFA has not nor do they intend to kill anyone so they are not terrorists.

    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-definitions-terminology-methodology.pdf/view

    OK, now try actually reading what you post.  There is no mention of murder or killing in that definition.  Dunno about your insane little mind, but most people would consider this "dangerous to human life".



    Realized this when he posted "his definition" they do meet the standard. In every way. as a point of fact. his only refuge now is that the FBI has not declared them an "organization" I'm a member of a soccer league, better let them know they need to submit their application to FBI in order to be considered!
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    secondly, fascism involved as a matter of fact, central planning of the economy. prices existed, but they were determined by the state. not by the market. additionally the means of production were not in the hands of private interests, they were controlled by the sate. the point is not that no aspects of capitalism exist. the point is, that this system is closer to what the soviets were doing, than to what capitalist countries were doing. The very fact that you need different words to describe those types of capitalism should be a signal that they are very different. it would be like saying Marxism, socialism, and Fabian social democracy are all the same thing. they're not. they fundamentally distinct, though they may arise from the same tradition. If you change an economic system by fundamentally altering the core functions of that system, then how can you say its the same thing? If I have a Mac, but I replace the OS, the chip set, and the mother board with windows based systems and hardware, do I still have a MAC? I have what looks like a mac from the outside, but what functions for all intents and purposes as a PC so no, I don't have a MAC.
    As stated, central planning does not rule out a capitalist economy. Prices were still controlled by competition, and the means of production do not need to be in private hands to justify a capitalist market. See, you are assuming only the strictest of free-market capitalism, but based on that definition the US isn't even capitalist. It isn't free market capitalism, I would grant that. but it is still capitalism, and specifically state capitalism or corportism.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
    except for literally the two defining hallmarks of a capitalist society. its like, "yeah we're communist, but we don't do the whole collectivization thing, and the means of production are privately owned, but yeah we're communist" no you aren't not unless you redefine communist as "anyone who say's they're a communist"
    Private ownership is not a defining aspect of capitalism because there is also the possibility for corporate or government ownership. Competitive markets still exist in a fascist regime, but they are dominated by state-owned monopolies such that any small businesses are rapidly pushed out of the market thanks to government corporations. Thus, both of the hallmarks of capitalism, by your own views, are present.
    Again as far as antifa not being an organization, probably more than 99% of organizations across the world aren't classified as such by the FBI and yet they exist. I'm really just not impressed by appealing to authority as the basis for your argument. However if you argument is that the FBI has not determined them to be a sufficient threat, an organization, or a terrorist organization, then I absolutely agree with you, that the FBI has not done those things.
    Now you are equivocating on the word "organization". Note that this is distinct from "terrorist organization" and the FBI has an inherent interest in tracking one of these types of groups, and are the authority on what constitutes that type of group.

    You must understand that there are two types of appeals to authority, there is the kind where the claimed authority is not an expert on their topic, for example: "I heard it from Bob", or "A physicist told me about quantum spirituality". this type is the bad kind which is considered a fallacy. Then there is the good kind where the stated authority is an appropriate source, for example: "this doctor told me vaccines are totally safe". My appeals to the FBI as a source for knowledge on what constitutes a terrorist organization is the latter type because the FBI is interested in among other things, combating terrorism.
    However, it does not follow logically to me, that simply because the FBI has not affirmed it, that we can safely falsify it. would you at least agree with that?
    No, I would not agree with that because you are looking to prove a negative here. The simple lack of a direct declaration is sufficient to demonstrate the claim insofar as the claims are positively made when they are declared. In other words, it is sufficient to judge the status of an organization as being terrorist or not based on if it is declared such an organization or not.
     that the state does not indeed define reality?
    These are not reality claims. The definition for what is and is not a terrorist is not one that is something objective about reality in the sense that it is something which exists independent of human thought & action. Terrorism is first and foremost, a social construct which is only true by our making it true, and specifically the organization which makes it true is the government and more specifically the FBI as a component of that government.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    OK, now try actually reading what you post.  There is no mention of murder or killing in that definition.  Dunno about your insane little mind, but most people would consider this "dangerous to human life".
    Point to where I define terrorist in the OP. If you can't, then you are as per usual, full of S***.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1524 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    OK, now try actually reading what you post.  There is no mention of murder or killing in that definition.  Dunno about your insane little mind, but most people would consider this "dangerous to human life".
    Point to where I define terrorist in the OP. If you can't, then you are as per usual, full of S***.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA; first you object to the textbook definition and post the legal definition.  Then when you lose that argument as well, now we're down to your definition?!? 


    Happy_KillbotBastiat
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  

    that's simply not true. I can find a "geologist" who got a degree from a reputable institution. and he can say "the earth is 6,000 years old" but that does not make it true by itself. your entire argument is based on legal semantics and appeals to authority. If you think " this smart guy said it was true, therefore it's true" I can't even begin to imagine what kinds of crazy you believe. Medical professionals who were extremely qualified gave cocaine to babies. they gave synthesized heroin and meth to practically anyone who asked for it. and now as a result of people who think like you, that "oh a doctor said so it must be true" we have two huge addiction problems in the country. I'm not going to continue down the capitalism rabbit hole because you really are using definitions that don't apply. socialism, communism, Fabian socialism, Luxembourgian socialism, and Marxism are all different things, they come from the same tradition, they have similarities, but they are different. And if you don't accept that then there's just no point moving forward with the discussion.

    Secondly based on the definition you supplied antifa clearly meets the requirements, maybe not as a "terrorist organization" but maybe just as a bunch of individual domestic terrorists who are also working in concert toward the same goal. (its almost like we have a term for that? i think it rhymes with berrorist schmorginization?) but if you grant that which i think you have to, because the definition makes no mention of an organization or killing, ( you linked it so many times but you didn't read it! shame, that) simply things that are dangerous to human life, then what kind-of victory is that? "its not a group of terrorists, its just a bunch of them running around independently! no need to be scared, its not like its an organization!"
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA; first you object to the textbook definition and post the legal definition.  Then when you lose that argument as well, now we're down to your definition?!? 
    I provided the FBI's definition, which quite frankly is the technically correct definition. Since I don't even mention the word "terrorist" in the OP, and you literally just pulled this out of your A$$ it is safe to say that you are full of S***, and now you are pissed because you lost this argument.

    ANTIFA isn't a terrorist organization as per the FBI, so you are wrong. Get over it snowflake.

    CYDdharta
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    OK, now try actually reading what you post.  There is no mention of murder or killing in that definition.  Dunno about your insane little mind, but most people would consider this "dangerous to human life".
    Point to where I define terrorist in the OP. If you can't, then you are as per usual, full of S***.

    LMAO YOU CANT CHOOSE THE DEFINITION TO TRY TO WIN THE ARGUMENT AND THEN IGNORE THE DEFINITION WHEN YOU REALIZE WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS LOL why did i even engage.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  

    Part of you assertion was antifa is nothing to worry about, idk I personally feel as a generally rule, pretty worried, about, DOMESTIC TERRORISTS so yes you are right, antifa is not fascist in any meaningful sense, we have arrived at the conclusion that they are a bunch of non-fascist domestic terrorists. congratulations
    Happy_Killbot
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    that's simply not true. I can find a "geologist" who got a degree from a reputable institution. and he can say "the earth is 6,000 years old" but that does not make it true by itself. your entire argument is based on legal semantics and appeals to authority. If you think " this smart guy said it was true, therefore it's true" I can't even begin to imagine what kinds of crazy you believe. Medical professionals who were extremely qualified gave cocaine to babies. they gave synthesized heroin and meth to practically anyone who asked for it. and now as a result of people who think like you, that "oh a doctor said so it must be true" we have two huge addiction problems in the country. I'm not going to continue down the capitalism rabbit hole because you really are using definitions that don't apply. socialism, communism, Fabian socialism, Luxembourgian socialism, and Marxism are all different things, they come from the same tradition, they have similarities, but they are different. And if you don't accept that then there's just no point moving forward with the discussion.

    You are conflating objective claims (i.e. age of the earth) with legal definitions (what is a terrorist) Any legal definition or classification is quite obviously, going to be based on what legal and bureaucratic institutions say.   :p 

    See, a "terrorist organization" technically doesn't exist unless we label it, making it a social construct.

    Just answer this: Do you agree or disagree that "terrorism" "terrorists" and what constitutes a "terrorist organization" is a social construct?
    Secondly based on the definition you supplied antifa clearly meets the requirements, maybe not as a "terrorist organization" but maybe just as a bunch of individual domestic terrorists who are also working in concert toward the same goal. (its almost like we have a term for that? i think it rhymes with berrorist schmorginization?) but if you grant that which i think you have to, because the definition makes no mention of an organization or killing, ( you linked it so many times but you didn't read it! shame, that) simply things that are dangerous to human life, then what kind-of victory is that? "its not a group of terrorists, its just a bunch of them running around independently! no need to be scared, its not like its an organization!"
    ANTIFA never killed nor do they intend to kill anyone, so they are disqualified by very first stated criteria.  ;)

    You have to kill someone or intend to be considered a terrorist.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    that's simply not true. I can find a "geologist" who got a degree from a reputable institution. and he can say "the earth is 6,000 years old" but that does not make it true by itself. your entire argument is based on legal semantics and appeals to authority. If you think " this smart guy said it was true, therefore it's true" I can't even begin to imagine what kinds of crazy you believe. Medical professionals who were extremely qualified gave cocaine to babies. they gave synthesized heroin and meth to practically anyone who asked for it. and now as a result of people who think like you, that "oh a doctor said so it must be true" we have two huge addiction problems in the country. I'm not going to continue down the capitalism rabbit hole because you really are using definitions that don't apply. socialism, communism, Fabian socialism, Luxembourgian socialism, and Marxism are all different things, they come from the same tradition, they have similarities, but they are different. And if you don't accept that then there's just no point moving forward with the discussion.

    You are conflating objective claims (i.e. age of the earth) with legal definitions (what is a terrorist) Any legal definition or classification is quite obviously, going to be based on what legal and bureaucratic institutions say.   :p 

    See, a "terrorist organization" technically doesn't exist unless we label it, making it a social construct.

    Just answer this: Do you agree or disagree that "terrorism" "terrorists" and what constitutes a "terrorist organization" is a social construct?
    Secondly based on the definition you supplied antifa clearly meets the requirements, maybe not as a "terrorist organization" but maybe just as a bunch of individual domestic terrorists who are also working in concert toward the same goal. (its almost like we have a term for that? i think it rhymes with berrorist schmorginization?) but if you grant that which i think you have to, because the definition makes no mention of an organization or killing, ( you linked it so many times but you didn't read it! shame, that) simply things that are dangerous to human life, then what kind-of victory is that? "its not a group of terrorists, its just a bunch of them running around independently! no need to be scared, its not like its an organization!"
    ANTIFA never killed nor do they intend to kill anyone, so they are disqualified by very first stated criteria.  ;)

    You have to kill someone or intend to be considered a terrorist.

    that isn't the definition you provided. So are saying that the definition you provided is no longer the definition you are using now, because you realized it didn't actually further your argument? because the definition you provided from the FBI has no such criteria ( if so that is what actual equivocation looks like :p)
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    LMAO YOU CANT CHOOSE THE DEFINITION TO TRY TO WIN THE ARGUMENT AND THEN IGNORE THE DEFINITION WHEN YOU REALIZE WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS LOL why did i even engage.
    This isn't the first time I have had this conversation with CYD, and that last time I used the FBI definition as well. CYD is being deliberately disingenuous to supply another definition he knows I disagree with. The FBI definition is technically sophisticated and takes authoritative precedence over the dictionary terms.
    Part of you assertion was antifa is nothing to worry about, idk I personally feel as a generally rule, pretty worried, about, DOMESTIC TERRORISTS so yes you are right, antifa is not fascist in any meaningful sense, we have arrived at the conclusion that they are a bunch of non-fascist domestic terrorists. congratulations
    I didn't say that, this is a straw man. They are still not terrorists either, so you are appealing to ambiguity.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    that isn't the definition you provided.
    I'm sorry, but did you actually read any of that?

    It's literally the first requirement. 
    So are saying that the definition you provided is no longer the definition you are using now, because you realized it didn't actually further your argument? 
    No, this is the definition I have been consistently using for years. This is not the first time I have had this debate, and I have provided the FBI's official definition which is technically sophisticated every single time. It is CYD and yourself who seek to shift the definition to make it more favorable to your failing argument in order to support your vacuous claims.
    because the definition you provided from the FBI has no such criteria ( if so that is what actual equivocation looks like p)
    Read:



    The sooner you admit you are wrong, the sooner the beating ends.
    CYDdharta
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -   edited April 30
    Bastiat said:
    @Bastiat ;
    that's simply not true. I can find a "geologist" who got a degree from a reputable institution. and he can say "the earth is 6,000 years old" but that does not make it true by itself. your entire argument is based on legal semantics and appeals to authority. If you think " this smart guy said it was true, therefore it's true" I can't even begin to imagine what kinds of crazy you believe. Medical professionals who were extremely qualified gave cocaine to babies. they gave synthesized heroin and meth to practically anyone who asked for it. and now as a result of people who think like you, that "oh a doctor said so it must be true" we have two huge addiction problems in the country. I'm not going to continue down the capitalism rabbit hole because you really are using definitions that don't apply. socialism, communism, Fabian socialism, Luxembourgian socialism, and Marxism are all different things, they come from the same tradition, they have similarities, but they are different. And if you don't accept that then there's just no point moving forward with the discussion.

    You are conflating objective claims (i.e. age of the earth) with legal definitions (what is a terrorist) Any legal definition or classification is quite obviously, going to be based on what legal and bureaucratic institutions say.   :p 

    See, a "terrorist organization" technically doesn't exist unless we label it, making it a social construct.

    Just answer this: Do you agree or disagree that "terrorism" "terrorists" and what constitutes a "terrorist organization" is a social construct?
    Secondly based on the definition you supplied antifa clearly meets the requirements, maybe not as a "terrorist organization" but maybe just as a bunch of individual domestic terrorists who are also working in concert toward the same goal. (its almost like we have a term for that? i think it rhymes with berrorist schmorginization?) but if you grant that which i think you have to, because the definition makes no mention of an organization or killing, ( you linked it so many times but you didn't read it! shame, that) simply things that are dangerous to human life, then what kind-of victory is that? "its not a group of terrorists, its just a bunch of them running around independently! no need to be scared, its not like its an organization!"
    ANTIFA never killed nor do they intend to kill anyone, so they are disqualified by very first stated criteria.  ;)

    You have to kill someone or intend to be considered a terrorist.

    that isn't the definition you provided. So are saying that the definition you provided is no longer the definition you are using now, because you realized it didn't actually further your argument? because the definition you provided from the FBI has no such criteria ( if so that is what actual equivocation looks like :p)
    Also social constructs are not only the power of the state. if the FBI listed the little sisters of the poor as a terrorist organization you would suddenly be terrified of nuns wouldn't you? But everyone (with a brain) would say "yeah actually they're not" and they would be right in saying so. you are suggesting that there can be no legitimate claim recognized on a subjective level without the usage of state definitions. if the government did not exist in America, we would still all have the ability to determine what is and is not terrorism. because we know what that word means devoid of state codification. If there were no government we would still know what fraud was, even though the laws against fraud were no more. language and understanding are not a function of the state, in fact social constructs develop very often completely independent of the state. they have meaning because the people in that group accept they have meaning. not because some worthless bureaucrat told them it does. and again, if you are taking refuge in a semantic victory then congrats. you can go on saying that the KKK and antifa and every other terrorist organization that has not been recognized by the FBI is not one. but the rest of us will carry on without the distinct taste of rubber in our mouths, and delusion in our minds.
    Happy_Killbotall4actt
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1524 Pts   -  
    I provided the FBI's definition, which quite frankly is the technically correct definition. Since I don't even mention the word "terrorist" in the OP, and you literally just pulled this out of your A$$ it is safe to say that you are full of S***, and now you are pissed because you lost this argument.

    ANTIFA isn't a terrorist organization as per the FBI, so you are wrong. Get over it snowflake.


    You posted the legal definition, then you failed at that definition, you literally ignored what you posted with;

    Point to where I define terrorist in the OP



    Happy_Killbot
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1524 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    that isn't the definition you provided.
    I'm sorry, but did you actually read any of that?

    It's literally the first requirement. 
    So are saying that the definition you provided is no longer the definition you are using now, because you realized it didn't actually further your argument? 
    No, this is the definition I have been consistently using for years. This is not the first time I have had this debate, and I have provided the FBI's official definition which is technically sophisticated every single time. It is CYD and yourself who seek to shift the definition to make it more favorable to your failing argument in order to support your vacuous claims.
    because the definition you provided from the FBI has no such criteria ( if so that is what actual equivocation looks like p)
    Read:



    The sooner you admit you are wrong, the sooner the beating ends.

    How, in your diseased mind, is this not an act "dangerous to human life"??


  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    You posted the legal definition, then you failed at that definition, you literally ignored what you posted with;
    The FBI definition perfectly supports my claims.

    but more importantly, it perfectly refutes yours.  >:)

    Since I didn't define terrorism in the OP that means I never admitted that ANTIFA is a terrorist organization, and you are full of S***. As per usual.
    CYDdhartaBastiatLuigi7255
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1524 Pts   -  
    The FBI definition perfectly supports my claims.

    but more importantly, it perfectly refutes yours.  >:)

    Since I didn't define terrorism in the OP that means I never admitted that ANTIFA is a terrorist organization, and you are full of S***. As per usual.
    Wrong, as usual.  You certainly make a habit of it. 
    Happy_KillbotLuigi7255
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    You posted the legal definition, then you failed at that definition, you literally ignored what you posted with;
    The FBI definition perfectly supports my claims.

    but more importantly, it perfectly refutes yours.  >:)

    Since I didn't define terrorism in the OP that means I never admitted that ANTIFA is a terrorist organization, and you are full of S***. As per usual.

    Is this even worth it? its just silly. You are translating "dangerous to human life" to "murder" I'm sorry the definition you touted did not in fact say what you think it said, and that made you look quite foolish, but you don't then get to try to gaslight everyone by redefining what it says in your own mind, and then saying ha i'm right! it does not say what you claimed it said. now wipe the egg off of your face like a good boy.
    CYDdhartaLuigi7255
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -   edited April 30
    d
    Luigi7255
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    Also social constructs are not only the power of the state. if the FBI listed the little sisters of the poor as a terrorist organization you would suddenly be terrified of nuns wouldn't you? But everyone (with a brain) would say "yeah actually they're not" and they would be right in saying so. you are suggesting that there can be no legitimate claim recognized on a subjective level without the usage of state definitions. if the government did not exist in America, we would still all have the ability to determine what is and is not terrorism. because we know what that word means devoid of state codification. If there were no government we would still know what fraud was, even though the laws against fraud were no more. language and understanding are not a function of the state, in fact social constructs develop very often completely independent of the state. they have meaning because the people in that group accept they have meaning. not because some worthless bureaucrat told them it does. and again, if you are taking refuge in a semantic victory then congrats. you can go on saying that the KKK and antifa and every other terrorist organization that has not been recognized by the FBI is not one. but the rest of us will carry on without the distinct taste of rubber in our mouths, and delusion in our minds.
    That's not how the FBI definition works. See, there are several qualifications that need to be met in order for something to be considered a terrorist organization, which I sourced to you several times. The FBI doesn't just willy-nilly call some things terrorist or not, that is a simple straw man, and a completely absent and useless argument.

    If there is no governing body which defines these things, then they have no intersubjective meaning which can be expected to be consistent across a state or territory. Consider that my definition for terrorist might include the little sisters, but yours might not. Who is to say one of us is right? After all, we are both equally motivated and determined. The purpose of bureaucratic definitions is therefore to standardize all these things across a nation, such that without them those institutions could not exist to fulfill their purpose.

    This backwards anti-establishment thinking is a detriment to civilized society. If you do not wish to benefit from such institutions then you are free to leave the country.
    CYDdhartaLuigi7255
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ;
    How, in your diseased mind, is this not an act "dangerous to human life"??
    How in your diseased mind is that an act dangerous to human life?

    They are just beating him up. ANTIFA has never killed anyone, so they are not terrorists according to the FBI.
    CYDdharta
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    Also social constructs are not only the power of the state. if the FBI listed the little sisters of the poor as a terrorist organization you would suddenly be terrified of nuns wouldn't you? But everyone (with a brain) would say "yeah actually they're not" and they would be right in saying so. you are suggesting that there can be no legitimate claim recognized on a subjective level without the usage of state definitions. if the government did not exist in America, we would still all have the ability to determine what is and is not terrorism. because we know what that word means devoid of state codification. If there were no government we would still know what fraud was, even though the laws against fraud were no more. language and understanding are not a function of the state, in fact social constructs develop very often completely independent of the state. they have meaning because the people in that group accept they have meaning. not because some worthless bureaucrat told them it does. and again, if you are taking refuge in a semantic victory then congrats. you can go on saying that the KKK and antifa and every other terrorist organization that has not been recognized by the FBI is not one. but the rest of us will carry on without the distinct taste of rubber in our mouths, and delusion in our minds.
    That's not how the FBI definition works. See, there are several qualifications that need to be met in order for something to be considered a terrorist organization, which I sourced to you several times. The FBI doesn't just willy-nilly call some things terrorist or not, that is a simple straw man, and a completely absent and useless argument.

    If there is no governing body which defines these things, then they have no intersubjective meaning which can be expected to be consistent across a state or territory. Consider that my definition for terrorist might include the little sisters, but yours might not. Who is to say one of us is right? After all, we are both equally motivated and determined. The purpose of bureaucratic definitions is therefore to standardize all these things across a nation, such that without them those institutions could not exist to fulfill their purpose.

    This backwards anti-establishment thinking is a detriment to civilized society. If you do not wish to benefit from such institutions then you are free to leave the country.

    Someone who isn't delusional would say that one of us is right. does this civilized society we live in include the police brutality against black people? does it include the over-criminalization of drug use so that thousands of otherwise innocent men are put in jail for 20 years for a dime bag? and if I don't like these things I suppose I should just leave then? or sit down shut up and and let it continue to happen? what a silly thing to say. And I know the absence of a governing body must terrify you. In fact most of your life must be lived in constant uncertainty about everything the state has not made an explicit determination about. in fact i'm surprised we are even able to have this conversation as there is no law defining what any of the words we are using mean! and that is entirely subjective, and yet we get along just fine. it's almost like we are able to define them devoid of the state :*
    Happy_KillbotCYDdhartaLuigi7255
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    Is this even worth it? its just silly. You are translating "dangerous to human life" to "murder" I'm sorry the definition you touted did not in fact say what you think it said, and that made you look quite foolish, but you don't then get to try to gaslight everyone by redefining what it says in your own mind, and then saying ha i'm right! it does not say what you claimed it said. now wipe the egg off of your face like a good boy.
    Speak for yourself, it's there in black and white, and ironically you and CYD are the ones who are gaslighting here by suggesting my definition, which I have been perfectly clear and consistent on for over a year, is somehow incorrect.

    CYD literally says that I am insane:
    "How, in your diseased mind, is this not an act "dangerous to human life"??"

    What is the definition of "gaslighting" again?



    Yeah, just saying I am not the one gaslighting here as my definition and position has been perfectly consistent and unchanging from the begging. I didn't change things recently, I have been doing this for a long time.

    Just to prove it, here is a quote by me from back in October of last year

    https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/88200/#Comment_88200
    CYDdharta
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
     But anyways im done, you are just too dishonest to continue with. good day sir, enjoy your delusions. @Happy_Killbot
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
    Is this even worth it? its just silly. You are translating "dangerous to human life" to "murder" I'm sorry the definition you touted did not in fact say what you think it said, and that made you look quite foolish, but you don't then get to try to gaslight everyone by redefining what it says in your own mind, and then saying ha i'm right! it does not say what you claimed it said. now wipe the egg off of your face like a good boy.
    Speak for yourself, it's there in black and white, and ironically you and CYD are the ones who are gaslighting here by suggesting my definition, which I have been perfectly clear and consistent on for over a year, is somehow incorrect.

    CYD literally says that I am insane:
    "How, in your diseased mind, is this not an act "dangerous to human life"??"

    What is the definition of "gaslighting" again?



    Yeah, just saying I am not the one gaslighting here as my definition and position has been perfectly consistent and unchanging from the begging. I didn't change things recently, I have been doing this for a long time.

    Just to prove it, here is a quote by me from back in October of last year

    https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/88200/#Comment_88200

    actually fine one more, explain how you got to defining "dangerous to human life" as "murder" or "killing"
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 4919 Pts   -  
    @Bastiat ;
     But anyways im done, you are just too dishonest to continue with. good day sir, enjoy your delusions
    Dishonest? , I can prove consistency going back to October, and I definitely was consistent before that. How can you possibly claim I am dishonest when I have been saying the same thing for this long? I changed nothing. I lied about nothing. I hid nothing. Don't hit me with this S***.
    actually fine one more, explain how you got to defining "dangerous to human life" as "murder" or "killing"

    ಠ_ಠ


    "Dangerous to human life" implies death by action or force. This is a fancy way to say "killing" or "murder" but they can't use those terms because they have other specific legal meaning.
    CYDdharta
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • BastiatBastiat 39 Pts   -  
    @Happy_Killbot

    In the methodology the FBI say they recognize a domestic terrorist incident as an ideological criminal act, including threats or acts of violence. And they make the distinction between “lethal and non-lethal domestic terrorism”

     






Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch