5 ms·

> As if that holds any value, especially considering the rest of your comment, which completely ignores the rhetoric of that "designation". I am not saying tha

> As if that holds any value, especially considering the rest of your comment, which completely ignores the rhetoric of that "designation". I am not saying that you have to hold my experience to any value, but I am stating that was my experience. Anyone is free to interpret as they prefer, but I would question your argument as to why. It sounds a lot like "whataboutism". The fact that the designation is bad does not change my experience with the rhetoric of the collective. If you'd rather know why I do not express much judgement on the designation: I did not pass any judgement of the dialectic in the designation because I don't claim to have the same experience with such - or any - dialect in English. I also state that 'a broken clock ...' underlining - I thought - the fact that I don't think the US government does normally much good. > "violent Antifa cells" in the second sentence should be the wake up signal. It's not as obvious to me as it is to you why "violent antifa cells" is a wake up signal. Would you mind explaining further? > There was/is no protest group called the no-global movement.. you are using language the same way Trump & co Admittedly, these are memories from quite a while ago, I don't exclude some of them might be wrong, but as much as it's not a movement with a cohesive leadership and structured belief, for what it's worth, wikipedia seems to agree with me on the existence of a "No global movment" and its connection with the Genova G8 issues [1]. I would invite you to avoid name calling, such as comparing me to Trump :D I had no connection with black bloc, and while I agree with you that it was a small minority in the protest having violent intentions, I disagree that only black bloc was to blame for those violent intentions. I also don't absolve the police, what happened was horrifying, but this again does not take away from the fact that the rhetoric used in the communication by the collective reminds me of the 'not so not violent' groups that at the very least orbited the violence, and, in my personal opinion, very much winked at and approved of it. I don't see you make an argument contrary to what I am saying other than discrediting my own experience based on the fact that - in your opinion - I don't criticize both sides equally? [1]https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movimento_no-global https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movimento_no-global

dudefeliciano 9d ago
First of all I apologize if my previous comment was overly aggressive. Perhaps I got heated because I think this is an an issue that shows were we are going as a society, and it's nowhere good. > question your argument as to why. I am also Italian, and I don't feel that "the dialectic and rhetoric" of their statements in any way gives and credibility to the US designation of a "violent antifa cells" equating them to terrorists on the level of Al-Qaeda, ISIS and so on. So there's that, being Italian is not some skill or ability that allows you or me to better understand their statements, especially since they are also translated to English... > the same experience with such - or any - dialect in English. That sounds like a cop-out to me, you obviously can express yourself in English quite well, and even if that were not the case phrases like "violent antifa cells", "far-left terrorist networks, built to enable them to organize, recruit, communicate, disseminate propaganda, share target information and tactics, and carry out violent attacks" should clearly show that is nothing more than the lowest form of fearmongering, propaganda and silencing of dissent by an authoritarian government. Furthermore, especially as Italians, we should support these projects and not give in to notions that "maybe the broken fascist clock is right once in a while". > wikipedia seems to agree with me on the existence of a "No global movment" The first sentence: indica organizzazioni non governative, associazioni e singoli individui relativamente ETEROGENEI. As you put it previously, "a protest group", does not at all convey the notion that these are many people with differing views, and as such there may well be also a violent minority like in any group. No, your comment paints them all with the same brush. > such as comparing me to Trump :D I did not compare you as a person to Trump, but the way you are misusing words. > does not take away from the fact that the rhetoric used in the communication by the collective reminds me of the 'not so not violent' groups that at the very least orbited the violence, and, in my personal opinion, very much winked at and approved of it. This would be the point were you cite some sources or quotes that give you that impression, rather than relying on your "Italianness" to support your argument. > in your opinion - I don't criticize both sides equally? As Italians we should criticize only one side and that is the fascists.
- Dansvidania 9d ago
  I appreciate the apology, but this is much of the same. > being Italian is not some skill Some of the A/I statements being in Italian, and some of the seditious rhetoric being known to me because I have experienced the Italian far left, I think it is a relevant 'competency' in this thread. > That sounds like a cop-out to me.. It's a good thing I have no obligation of par-conditio :D Anyway, whether the US document is good or not was not my point, and I never hinted at the fact that it might be good. I repeat that I don't think it is. You are rather just using that to ignore the point I was attempting to make, which is that the language used by the collective is reminding me of language that winks at violence. > As Italians we should criticize only one side and that is the fascists. I reject the requirement you try to impose on me of criticizing only the fascists, as if far left - which this collective definitely was - is tolerable or ok or positive. I do not agree. I prefer to keep my own independence of thought, and would rather point out your statement being ironically oppressive.

dudefeliciano 9d ago

First of all I apologize if my previous comment was overly aggressive. Perhaps I got heated because I think this is an an issue that shows were we are going as a society, and it's nowhere good. > question your argument as to why. I am also Italian, and I don't feel that "the dialectic and rhetoric" of their statements in any way gives and credibility to the US designation of a "violent antifa cells" equating them to terrorists on the level of Al-Qaeda, ISIS and so on. So there's that, being Italian is not some skill or ability that allows you or me to better understand their statements, especially since they are also translated to English... > the same experience with such - or any - dialect in English. That sounds like a cop-out to me, you obviously can express yourself in English quite well, and even if that were not the case phrases like "violent antifa cells", "far-left terrorist networks, built to enable them to organize, recruit, communicate, disseminate propaganda, share target information and tactics, and carry out violent attacks" should clearly show that is nothing more than the lowest form of fearmongering, propaganda and silencing of dissent by an authoritarian government. Furthermore, especially as Italians, we should support these projects and not give in to notions that "maybe the broken fascist clock is right once in a while". > wikipedia seems to agree with me on the existence of a "No global movment" The first sentence: indica organizzazioni non governative, associazioni e singoli individui relativamente ETEROGENEI. As you put it previously, "a protest group", does not at all convey the notion that these are many people with differing views, and as such there may well be also a violent minority like in any group. No, your comment paints them all with the same brush. > such as comparing me to Trump :D I did not compare you as a person to Trump, but the way you are misusing words. > does not take away from the fact that the rhetoric used in the communication by the collective reminds me of the 'not so not violent' groups that at the very least orbited the violence, and, in my personal opinion, very much winked at and approved of it. This would be the point were you cite some sources or quotes that give you that impression, rather than relying on your "Italianness" to support your argument. > in your opinion - I don't criticize both sides equally? As Italians we should criticize only one side and that is the fascists.

Dansvidania 9d ago
I appreciate the apology, but this is much of the same. > being Italian is not some skill Some of the A/I statements being in Italian, and some of the seditious rhetoric being known to me because I have experienced the Italian far left, I think it is a relevant 'competency' in this thread. > That sounds like a cop-out to me.. It's a good thing I have no obligation of par-conditio :D Anyway, whether the US document is good or not was not my point, and I never hinted at the fact that it might be good. I repeat that I don't think it is. You are rather just using that to ignore the point I was attempting to make, which is that the language used by the collective is reminding me of language that winks at violence. > As Italians we should criticize only one side and that is the fascists. I reject the requirement you try to impose on me of criticizing only the fascists, as if far left - which this collective definitely was - is tolerable or ok or positive. I do not agree. I prefer to keep my own independence of thought, and would rather point out your statement being ironically oppressive.