Redneck Revolt

veya_victaous wrote:I saw this yesterday and was going to post it,
Now I disagree with them carrying guns (but I understand the need to in Uncivilized places without adequate gun controls)
But I support the idea that the good people have to start uniting against the Racists hate groups that are rising and that destroying the racist hate groups by any means necessary is the morally correct thing.

veya_victaous wrote:I saw this yesterday and was going to post it,
Now I disagree with them carrying guns (but I understand the need to in Uncivilized places without adequate gun controls)
But I support the idea that the good people have to start uniting against the Racists hate groups that are rising and that destroying the racist hate groups by any means necessary is the morally correct thing.

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:I saw this yesterday and was going to post it,
Now I disagree with them carrying guns (but I understand the need to in Uncivilized places without adequate gun controls)
But I support the idea that the good people have to start uniting against the Racists hate groups that are rising and that destroying the racist hate groups by any means necessary is the morally correct thing.

Isn't the hammer and sickle a symbol of hate?

It's like hiring the Klan to attack the Nazis.  

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:I saw this yesterday and was going to post it,
Now I disagree with them carrying guns (but I understand the need to in Uncivilized places without adequate gun controls)
But I support the idea that the good people have to start uniting against the Racists hate groups that are rising and that destroying the racist hate groups by any means necessary is the morally correct thing.

Isn't the hammer and sickle a symbol of hate?

It's like hiring the Klan to attack the Nazis.  

Back at the range in rural North Carolina, Mr Dixon is chatting to an unlikely ally in Chance Allen.

Mr Allen is a member of the American Pit Vipers constitutional militia, an armed group that is committed to aiding law enforcement and defending free speech — including by the far right.

He first encountered Redneck Revolt at a pro-Trump rally when one of his members tried to assault one of theirs.

Back then he felt "complete, utter hatred" towards the leftists.

"At one time I was solid 'unite the right'," Mr Allen says.

"I thought originally that they was just 100 per cent anti-Americans."

He attributes that to misinformation in the media.

"Once I started seeing the bullshit out there and wanting to know the facts and get to learn, that's when I started realising 'we the people' means 'we the people'. We're all the people," Mr Allen says.

Part of Redneck Revolt's mission is to win over rural, working-class Americans like Mr Allen, who may be susceptible to the ideologies of the far right.

"I really don't imagine this to be some kind of conversion crusade. But it really is trying to establish lines of affiliation, lines of affection, even," Mr Dixon says.

veya_victaous wrote:

seems they only really Identify as 'white trash' that are willing to stand up and fight for the inclusive secular values against those that would ferment Race hate.

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Isn't the hammer and sickle a symbol of hate?

It's like hiring the Klan to attack the Nazis.  

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-15/redneck-revolt-and-the-hard-lefts-call-to-arms/9303758

There is the article I read and I cant see any hammer and sickles        

Back at the range in rural North Carolina, Mr Dixon is chatting to an unlikely ally in Chance Allen.

Mr Allen is a member of the American Pit Vipers constitutional militia, an armed group that is committed to aiding law enforcement and defending free speech — including by the far right.

He first encountered Redneck Revolt at a pro-Trump rally when one of his members tried to assault one of theirs.

Back then he felt "complete, utter hatred" towards the leftists.

"At one time I was solid 'unite the right'," Mr Allen says.

"I thought originally that they was just 100 per cent anti-Americans."

He attributes that to misinformation in the media.

"Once I started seeing the bullshit out there and wanting to know the facts and get to learn, that's when I started realising 'we the people' means 'we the people'. We're all the people," Mr Allen says.

Part of Redneck Revolt's mission is to win over rural, working-class Americans like Mr Allen, who may be susceptible to the ideologies of the far right.

"I really don't imagine this to be some kind of conversion crusade. But it really is trying to establish lines of affiliation, lines of affection, even," Mr Dixon says.

Didge wrote:Case in point MLK.

He used reason, not hate to bring about civil rights

Maddog wrote:

Didge wrote:Case in point MLK.

He used reason, not hate to bring about civil rights

And he and his confidantes were armed. They didn't go out shooting at the opposition, but they were prepared to defend themselves. He believed in reason and love, but that didn't mean he wouldn't defend himself.  

Maddog wrote:

Didge wrote:Case in point MLK.

He used reason, not hate to bring about civil rights

And he and his confidantes were armed. They didn't go out shooting at the opposition, but they were prepared to defend themselves. He believed in reason and love, but that didn't mean he wouldn't defend himself.  

Softly-spoken and slight of build, Mr Dixon is a vegan who spends his days lecturing in anthropology at a local university.

Today he's preparing for the moment he may raise a deadly weapon on the streets of a US city.

"Guns are a tool," he says between bursts of crackling gunfire.

"You'd rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it."

Didge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Didge wrote:Case in point MLK.

He used reason, not hate to bring about civil rights

And he and his confidantes were armed. They didn't go out shooting at the opposition, but they were prepared to defend themselves. He believed in reason and love, but that didn't mean he wouldn't defend himself.  

There is nothing wrong with defending yourself. Veya though is calling to take on these groups with violence to eradicate them. It never does and just perpetuates violence

As seem MLK did not use violence

Veya wrote: destroying the racist hate groups by any means necessary is the morally correct thing

Maddog wrote:

Veya wrote: destroying the racist hate groups by any means necessary is the morally correct thing

What is "any means necessary"?

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

What is "any means necessary"?

a Trumpism

and talk about cherry picking, considering the first part of the post was how I don't think they should have guns

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

What is "any means necessary"?

a Trumpism

and talk about cherry picking, considering the first part of the post was how I don't think they should have guns

I don't recommend using Trump as a role model. And you can still support violence without guns. I was hardly cherry picking.  

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I don't recommend using Trump as a role model. And you can still support violence without guns. I was hardly cherry picking.  

Do you think Violence is Necessary to remove racist hate groups from America?  Or Would you use Violence against the Anti-racists?        

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I don't recommend using Trump as a role model. And you can still support violence without guns. I was hardly cherry picking.  

Do you think Violence is Necessary to remove racist hate groups from America?  Or Would you use Violence against the Anti-racists?        

I think violence should be used for self defense. I'm not going to be a judge, jury and executioner of those that I disagree with.

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I think violence should be used for self defense. I'm not going to be a judge, jury and executioner of those that I disagree with.

So, like a Black man shooting at White supremacists is ok?  

the Dude has to defend himself and his family, I mean the white Supremacist groups do have a history that justifies a fearful reaction by African Americans.

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I think violence should be used for self defense. I'm not going to be a judge, jury and executioner of those that I disagree with.

So, like a Black man shooting at White supremacists is ok?  

the Dude has to defend himself and his family, I mean the white Supremacist groups do have a history that justifies a fearful reaction by African Americans.

Again still not learning from history or MLK are you?

If a black man shoots a white supremacist when not in self defense, he is then a murderer.

What you are advocating is shooting people based on beliefs.

You just made it acceptable to shoot anyone based on a perceived threat around their beliefs.

This would now include Muslims, based on the reality of prejudice beliefs they have and terrorism from extremists, based on your flawed reasoning

smelly-bandit wrote:Whoo boy

Looks like a civil war is on the cards

veya_victaous wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:Whoo boy

Looks like a civil war is on the cards

So you agree with quill for once

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


Again still not learning from history or MLK are you?

If a black man shoots a white supremacist when not in self defense, he is then a murderer.

What you are advocating is shooting people based on beliefs.

You just made it acceptable to shoot anyone based on a perceived threat around their beliefs.

This would now include Muslims, based on the reality of prejudice beliefs they have and terrorism from extremists, based on your flawed reasoning

Follow the thread
I am asking Maddog if he thinks Blacks in America can/should consider white supremacists a sufficient threat to warrant self defense, they do say they want to kill or enslave the black guy and as Quill will be more than happy to tell you in some parts of the USA white supremacists have done that not that long ago  

smelly-bandit wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:Whoo boy

Looks like a civil war is on the cards

So you agree with quill for once

I think we should all have a civil war, left vs right.

I don't see why we should all be forced to live with each other.

Self imposed apartheid is what we need.

eddie wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

I think we should all have a civil war, left vs right.

I don't see why we should all be forced to live with each other.

Self imposed apartheid is what we need.

The healthy, young, left agaisnt the diddery-doddery RW old men shaking their angry fists at the sky.  

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I think violence should be used for self defense. I'm not going to be a judge, jury and executioner of those that I disagree with.

So, like a Black man shooting at White supremacists is ok?  

the Dude has to defend himself and his family, I mean the white Supremacist groups do have a history that justifies a fearful reaction by African Americans.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


Again still not learning from history or MLK are you?

If a black man shoots a white supremacist when not in self defense, he is then a murderer.

What you are advocating is shooting people based on beliefs.

You just made it acceptable to shoot anyone based on a perceived threat around their beliefs.

This would now include Muslims, based on the reality of prejudice beliefs they have and terrorism from extremists, based on your flawed reasoning

Follow the thread
I am asking Maddog if he thinks Blacks in America can/should consider white supremacists a sufficient threat to warrant self defense, they do say they want to kill or enslave the black guy and as Quill will be more than happy to tell you in some parts of the USA white supremacists have done that not that long ago  

Maddog wrote:What Veya is suggesting is that gays should be able to shoot the Westboro idiots because of their hateful signs.  It doesn't work that way in a free-ish country.