In the light of demonstrations planned today, I thought this article by a former Antifa leader in Australia might prove interesting.
ANTIFA is a growing extreme group who believe violence is legitimate.
. . .
I came to believe that war was a symptom of bigger systems at play in society and they were the real enemy, like white supremacy and patriarchy. Antifa believe these systems need to be smashed through a process of ‘de-platforming’ to save the world. People who don’t necessarily agree on everything are united to attack their common enemy — anyone in the right wing of politics.
This micro-society became my life for four years.
They believe historically their roots were fighting Nazi oppression. They run a website which is updated every couple of weeks with a hit list of right wing names. They believe if these people are allowed to speak, society will suffer. So, they must be pushed back.
There is no mission statement, rather, it’s a dangerous rhetoric. There are a lot of very damaged people who are drawn to it.
. . .
The radical left of Antifa presents itself as being about compassion and empathy; it’s a Trojan horse. All conversations are about entitlement and rights, not responsibility. When these people talk about freedom, they really mean freedom from responsibility.
Often the people who are drawn to this cult don’t have a strong identity outside it. I’m not a psychologist but, like ISIS, it gives people a sense of belonging to something and having purpose.
. . .
It’s a miserable mindset. When I got out of it and stopped feeling oppressed, I finally felt like I could take control of my life. That’s what I intend to do now.
There's more at the link. Recommended reading.
I'm sure the same dynamic is operating in the US branches of Antifa. I've met their ilk in this country, and also overseas. I'd call it a nihilistic approach to life, which - in the absence of any 'traditional' purpose and meaning - makes tearing down the principles and beliefs of others its central objective.
Peter
Couldn't help but wonder, reading the description of Antifa philosophy, how exactly are they any different from the classic bomb throwing anarchist from back in the '20s and '30s?
ReplyDeleteSome of the terminology is different of course, but it seems like their goal is the same "tear it all down" and something better will magically appear.
That about sums them up:
ReplyDelete1) Burn it all down
2) Underpants Gnome
3) Utopia!
It is interesting that these groups all claim that the fascists are all from the political right. Mussolini was a communist as was Adolf. both of their views morphed into what was National Socialism, or Nazism. Still a socialist form of government ruled by a central government using force and fear. No different from "Uncle Joe" Stalin or chairman Mao.
ReplyDeleteThe concept of conservatism is small government and freedom from government oppression / interference. The exact opposite what Mussolini's brown shirts or Hitlers black shirts forced upon their subjects.
And funded by Soros and his ilk...
ReplyDeleteAnd the story has been exposed as a complete and utter stretch. Video of the and transcript of the Media Watch segment is here: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4757575.htm
ReplyDeleteThe black shirts were Mussolini's mob, and the brown shirts were Hitlers. Gotta be careful about this, it's terrible when colors clash!.
ReplyDeleteThe key is to keep an eye out and interdict any charismatic individual who may seek to draw them to his banner. Even better if psy op measure could be taken to get them to kill each other in fights over dogma and purity.
ReplyDeleteIn the long term, these people are a threat and most need to be provided with the opprotunity to die in internecine violence among themselves. Collateral damage is the only issue for concern. For the risk, I offer the following historical similarity.
"In the decade preceding the First World War Germany, the country most advanced on the path toward bureaucratic regimentation, witnessed the appearance of a phenomenon hitherto unheard of: the youth movement. Turbulent gangs of untidy boys and girls roamed the country, making much noise and shirking their school lessons. In bombastic words they announced the gospel of a golden age. All preceding generations, they emphasized, were simply idiotic; their incapacity has converted the earth into a hell. But the rising generation is no longer willing to endure gerontocracy, the supremacy of impotent and imbecile senility. Henceforth the brilliant youths will rule. They will destroy everything that is old and useless, they will reject all that was dear to their parents, they will substitute new real and substantial values and ideologies for the antiquated and false ones of capitalist and bourgeois civilization, and they will build a new society of giants and supermen.
"The inflated verbiage of these adolescents was only a poor disguise for their lack of any ideas and of any definite program. They had nothing to say but this: We are young and therefore chosen; we are ingenious because we are young; we are the carriers of the future; we are the deadly foes of the rotten bourgeois and Philistines. And if somebody was not afraid to ask them what their plans were, they knew only one answer: Our leaders will solve all problems.
"It has always been the task of the new generation to provoke changes. But the characteristic feature of the youth movement was that they had neither new ideas nor plans. They called their action the youth movement precisely because they lacked any program which they could use to give a name to their endeavors. In fact they espoused entirely the program of their parents. They did not oppose the trend toward government omnipotence and bureaucratization. Their revolutionary radicalism was nothing but the impudence of the years between boyhood and manhood; it was a phenomenon of a protracted puberty. It was void of any ideological content.
"The chiefs of the youth movement were mentally unbalanced neurotics. Many of them were affected by a morbid sexuality, they were either profligate or homosexual. None of them excelled in any field of activity or contributed anything to human progress. Their names are long since forgotten; the only trace they left were some books and poems preaching sexual perversity. But the bulk of their followers were quite different. They had one aim only: to get a job as soon as possible with the government. Those who were not killed in the wars and revolutions are today pedantic and timid bureaucrats in the innumerable offices of the German Zwangswirtschaft. They are obedient and faithful slaves of Hitler. But they will be no less obedient and faithful handy men of Hitler’s successor, whether he is a German nationalist or a puppet of Stalin."
von Mises, Ludwig (1945). Bureaucracy
In essence, then: Negativity and destruction - for the simple sake (and quite simple-mindedness) of negation and destructiveness...
ReplyDelete