Do not help Trump or his supporters. It's a trap.


via @steveannear

Humanity has the right to use force against all non-democratic forces.1 All non-democratic forces are forces of aggression. Using physical resistance against non-democratic forces is self-defence.

Issues related to this page:

ProjectSummaryStatusPriorityCategoryLast updatedAssigned to
websiteReview 'Fascism' / 'Antifascism' tagsactivenormaltask1 year 8 weeks
websitePolicy: appeal to violence and hatredactivemajortask1 year 7 weeksaugustin




1) Which side murdered a person and injured 19 others by driving their car through a crowd of counterprotesters in Charlottesville?1

2) Based on the answer to question 1, which side's violence should we really be concerned with?


Imani is a beautiful soul, God bless her!
Thank you for sharing her story.
Her action speaks louder than all our good intentions.
She is the kind of woman that I'd like have as co-member in this site.
I hope I can provide the best possible tools for such artivists.

Good heart

I think Imani has a good heart, but people with a good heart often get tricked by people who will hurt and take advantage of them.


The solution is to both have a good heart and find strategies to avoid being taken advantage of by predatory forces.


There is an implied albeit important logical fallacy in your "Good heart" comment. Can you spot it?

I fully agree with your second comment on solutions. This is where our focus should be: policy and solutions (promotion and implementation).

There are well known cases of fake charities who prey on the good heart of the people who donate money. See for example: Kids Wish Network, as reported by the Tampa Bay Times, Center for Investigative Journalism.
Solution? Properly document the scam, with specific and concrete evidence, and inform people.
At the same time, let's not discourage people's good will and let's applaud together those who show a good example.


I think Imani has a good heart. People with a good heart often get tricked by people who will hurt and take advantage of them.

Calls for violence

you wrote:

Humanity has the right to use force against all non-democratic forces. All non-democratic forces are forces of aggression. Using physical resistance against non-democratic forces is self-defence.

I don't care how you justify it, but you hit again against some hard limits that I will not tolerate any member to cross: I will actively censor any hate speech and any call or justification for physical violence. This is the last warning. Next time I will delete straight away all your threads where you advocate for violence (self defence or no self defence).
You may offer your input here: #16546: Policy: appeal to violence and hatred, but your comments there are subject to the same policy.

I have implored you before to focus your criticism on policies and on wrongful actions. Ad hominem attacks against Trump supporters are no more welcome than against any other group of people. You may follow this ticket: #16545: Review 'Fascism' / 'Antifascism' tags.

Speaking of tags, you have not yet acknowledged this issue: #16318: Taxonomy: explain use of tid1+tid2, which is meant to help you better share the information you find on some interesting topics you cover.

Panoramics, last week was for me yet another long work week. I worked just over 84 hours in 7 days. Today was yet another 12 hour working day. I'd love having a constructive, productive interaction with you. I have a limited amount of time to spend here, and I don't want it to be wasted because I constantly have to reign in your excesses. You have a lot of positive things to share. Instead of having my energy and my time cancel yours out, I'd much rather we combined our time and energies to create something positive and valuable. You have interesting things to say on the environment and land reform, as well as on a few other topics. Can't we work together on this or another topic where we could productively cooperate?
Speaking of cooperation, here is another TODO item: #16547: Document on community cooperation.

I am sorry that today, the conditions are not yet met for this site to achieve meaningful success, but it's only a matter of time before they are. I am working very hard towards that goal. I really hope that you will become the first person to fully understand what I'm really after, and that you will become one of the first key people to help me make it happen. Meanwhile, a post like the one above is not acceptable and slowing us down.

French Revolution

Tags:+French Revolution

So if you were alive during the French Revolution, you would immediately censor all calls for violent overthrow of the brutal estate system and oppressive monarchy?

French Revolution

It's not the first time you appeal to my French sensibilities. It's all well, but always assume that I know more about my country's history than you would about it.

As a Canadian, you can be forgiven to only have a caricatural, romanticized view of the French Revolution. The historical facts are much more bloody, much less clear-cut than you would imagine. I could write a short essay on the topic, that would give weight to my policy and prove you wrong.

Anyhow, we do live in different times, and there are many other, much more peaceful and more democratic avenues open to us. I'll forcibly apply my policy against incitments to physical (and even verbal) violence, hoping it will encourage you and future members to focus on peaceful alternatives, and discussions on policies.


Fact: Physical violence was used during the French Revolution.

Overall, was that violence justified?

Sophism turns everything backwards

A member of the alt-right tries to murder as many people as possible by plowing his car through a crowd of anti-fascist protesters and manages to murder 1 and injure 19 others.

Mainstream reaction: "Let's pretend anti-fascists acted violently by obstructing the path of the neo-Nazi's car and get anti-fascists labeled as terrorists."

via @PrisonPlanet

(Orwell was a fake liberal and a slave-maker, in my opinion.)

Aggression cannot be used as a self-defence strategy.


The use of physical force comprises aggression, but there are times when the use of physical force is not considered aggression. In a global emocratic system (where global direct democracy via emocracy has highest authority), if it's a law that apartheid is illegal, using physical force against those enforcing apartheid would not be considered aggression. However, those who are using violence against others for merely being a different race would be considered aggressors.

Using aggression as a self-defence tactic is evil. Picture being trapped on an island with a young girl. If you murder or enslave that young girl, you limit the possibility that she will murder or enslave you.

The Spartans used aggression as a "self-defence" strategy against the helots. Obviously, it wasn't self-defence at all. The Dorians were just the aggressors who wanted slaves because they were too lazy to do any real work.

Our world is currently being run by people who are pretending that the use of aggression is a legitimate "self-defence" tactic.