That's actually a good idea. Don't get involved for your own safety.

The only way to win, is to not play the game!

Fuck, I just lost the game

Ah fuck, thanks

Well if I lose I’m taking everyone with me!

I once went about 4 or 5 years without losing the game. And today the counter is back at 0.

But Trump claimed that those who march alongside Nazis are "very fine people."

The nazi march occurred at night and funnily enough no one attacked them. Huh.

So what do we do?

Do exactly what OP is doing. Inform people. You don't have to drop the whole red pill; anyone with a brain would not want to be associated with protests like those.

Uhh sounds like cowards to me

You believe it is cowardice to not involve yourself in the arguments of two radical groups with a propensity for violence toward dissenting opinion? I call that a healthy life choice, but to each his own...

So what are you going to do? Spread info on the Internet? Reddit? Lulz

Go to the Winchester and wait for it to all blow over

You assume too much of me, good sir. I'm gonna keep doing what I've always done: living my life to the fullest and helping those around me while ignoring petty divisive bullshit. Have a fantastic day, and try to spread some love.

So doing nothing? I'm confused a tad typo in first response but. Is doing nothing any better?

Am I doing nothing? I don't think so. I don't need or want to be a leader or a hero or a Messiah. I don't want to change the world. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the world change, but I'm not the man to do it. I'm satisfied with making my community a better place. I think too many of us feel that doing a little is not enough, but doing a little is actually more than enough, and if everyone contributed a little, life would be utopian in nature.

Stay chill, dude.

Yea idk about that..

Given the contradictive nature of your words you set yourself up for failure.

Your opinion is meaningless "continue to aid your community"

Your high horse will be followed with a steep fall

This isn't a war, and I would greatly enjoy avoiding a war.

Our government has us in one for nearly 18 years, and apparently the rhetoric seems to drift towards warring tactics, and if you aren't fighting on the streets, you're a coward.

This is regressive thinking. We know who the enemy is, and it isn't poor Hispanics, poor blacks, poor whites. In fact, the color doesn't really matter. It's the amount of Cash and influence they have, and most poor people don't have that.

Don't let them get off on us killing each other.

So when are we going to over throw the government?

When you wanna?

I'm ready, let's start by enlightening the masses through social media

I only use literary quotes on social media to express my opinions because I have low self-esteem and don't want to isolate my friends. I'm too friendly in real life to cause the derision.

I only really use Reddit to get into the meat and potatoes of issues anyway because I have no qualms talking with random strangers about the issues. Although there is no possible way for an upward punch to the elites from here.

I'm not scared, just always wary of my internet thumbprint and the fact that it doesn't take much anymore to do someone and ruin their career :)

Thus, explains the sad state of affairs that brings me here all the time.

Given that contradictive isn't a word, I'd say you set yourself up for failure. I agree, opinions are meaningless, that's why I create change through action. Unfortunately, opinion seems to be all you have to offer, and it's a shitty opinion to boot.

I have fallen many times, the measure of a man is whether he gets back up.

Word or not the point was still made.

You don't know my actions but you've made yours very clear.

Yes all I have to offer you is a opinion since you've already made up your mind.

That was overly cryptic, but I'll make one last push to end this with some positivity. If you would stop assuming everything you think you know about me and simply ask what I mean when I say something we could avoid this whole negative feedback loop. I work in home construction/remodel. I literally build better lives for people. I volunteer with groups like Habitat for Humanity and Loaves & Fishes. I give rides to hitch hikers, food to homeless people, and help to those who ask. I do this because this is the change I wish to see in the world. Now that I have "made my actions clear", none of this is contrary to what I have stated prior, nor does it require me to go toe to toe with militant mobs, so I do not see where your point is made.

I don't know your actions because you have made no attempt to share, only criticised me. If you can explain to me where my faulty reasoning is, I'd be happy to hear it.

"stop assuming everything you think you know about me"

You told me about yourself...

"I work in home construction/remodel. I literally build better lives for people."

Glorified construction worker?

I fix cars what does that make me?

"I'd love to see the world change, but I'm not the man to do it."

Contradiction. You should look into the law of attraction. you're pretty much stopping before you start.

" ignoring petty divisive bullshit"

Slippery slope

Ngl I don't think you're a terrible person just a tad full of themselves. With a "moral high road" complex.

but yea

Well at least we have an open dialogue going now. Yes I am a glorified construction worker, and when I was just a laborer I still felt the same way. You fix cars? You're what keeps people's world going dude. You got me on world changing thing. I guess a more accurate way of putting it is I don't care to change others to fit my worldview.

And I'm totally full of myself and I totally love it. No reason not to be, for any of us. Thanks for the explanation, it helped me get where you were coming from.

"putting it is I don't care to change others to fit my worldview"

Fibbing or else this conversation would of never happened. It's not an inherently bad line of thought. So don't be scared of it.

"You're what keeps people's world going dude."

Thanks, man keep doing you too.

I feel bad now <3

Haha, you may be right about that. Have a good one dude.

you too man..

should look into mindfulness your energy is noble

Their doing far more than you are.

The Vice documentary just made it all seem so fake. I know there are truly hateful people out there, but it didn't seem organic at all. That's just me, though.

I didn't watch the Vice thing, but yes... these white supremacists came from all over the country for this event and only got a few hundred together. What was it, 200, 300?

So even if it was real, and I think it was, it's just not a lot of people. Nowhere near the number of people that the MSM would like you to believe.

Same thing goes with the Antifa nutcases. The political party nonsense makes each person on each side believe there are millions of each and that we are at war with each other.

Look around, talk to neighbors and family. It's quite telling of an individual when all they do is talk about this stuff, the MSM bubble isn't a very healthy one to surround yourself with.

There are definitely a lot more Antifa and Antifa sympathizers though, when compared to any of the groups they claim to be against. Mostly just kids and angry 20-somethings who think it's cool... but they managed to get ~40,000 people in Boston to protest against free speech.

Yeah, and who were they protesting? BLM. Anti-Monsanto activists, legal marijuana activists. It was pretty sad to see.

You think 40k people were Antifa protestors? Many groups that weren't them organized to be there and lots of people just showed up because they don't like nazis. How can that be hard to believe?

Following your line of reasoning, how hard is it to believe a lot of people showed up in Charlottesville to protest the removal of a statue and weren't actually nazis? I hope both sides can follow your suggestion and meet in the middle.

When I saw hundreds marching lockstep by torchlight chanting actual nazi slogans, I'm inclined to believe they were nazis. That seems reasonable to me. Looking at a disparate group of protesters and declaring them all to one group, when other groups had permits seems like an attempt to declare two things the same that aren't.

So if you were to see imagery of the Charlottesville rally that depicted a disparate group of protesters would you reconsider your opinion? To what extent would you say imagery has contributed to your understanding of the Charlottesville event?

The march the night before made it clear who was there to protest the statue removal. I'm not falling for this effort to muddy the waters.

Thank you for debating with me, I'm genuinely not trying to muddy the waters, I'm attempting to work out how some people saw the event with such clarity when I was unable to reach a clear conclusion. Any input is useful as I'm far removed from proceedings and the accompanying water cooler conversations

No worries. I believe the video of the night before speaks for itself. That wasn't about a monument. It was about hating Jews and chanting nazi slogans.

If you saw a bunch of people marching with torches and chanting Nazi slogans to protest the removal of confederate symbols, but were "unable to reach a clear conclusion", then you might want to interrogate where that lack of clarity stems from.

Yeah, I didn't see/hear any civil war history buffs there. Saw/heard lots of Nazi bs.

You think 40k people were Antifa protestors?

No, I don't. That's why I didn't say it.

Were there any Nazis in Boston?

If even a tenth of a percent of those 40k were Antifa (and I'd be willing to bet much more were) then they still outnumbered those Neo Nazi/KKK at Charlottesville. Really puts the MSM narrative into perspective.

A tenth of a percent of 40k is 40 people. There were several hundred at Charlottesville. That doesn't much matter though. And yes, it turns out that there are far more people that don't approve of Charlottesville than do.

whoops fixed

The final number, straight from Boston PD, was no more than 13000 combined.

but they managed to get ~40,000 people in Boston to protest against free speech.

The majority of Boston protesters were showing up in protest of what happened in Charlottesville.

Secondly, calling them all antifa or antifa sympathizers is bullshit.

The majority of Boston protesters were showing up in protest of what happened in Charlottesville.

Why didn't they show up at a Canadian McDonald's to protest the price of tea in India? I mean... how was the Boston free speech event related in any way to what happened in Charlottesville?

I ask again: were there Nazis in Boston?

Secondly, calling them all antifa or antifa sympathizers is bullshit.

I didn't though.

Why didn't they show up at a Canadian McDonald's to protest the price of tea in India?

Non-sequitur.

how was the Boston free speech event related in any way to what happened in Charlottesville?

Originally, the Boston rally included many alt-right and white nationalist figureheads and speakers. The same groups who promoted the 'unite the right' rally in Charlottesville. Obviously after what in happened in Charlottesville, many of them decided not to show up.

I didn't though.

But you did though.

There are definitely a lot more Antifa and Antifa sympathizers though... they managed to get ~40,000 people in Boston to protest against free speech.

Here, you're using 'they' to label the counter-protesters in Boston as antifa sympathizers.

Here, you're using 'they' to label the counter-protesters in Boston as antifa sympathizers.

All he did was clearly state that there are more Antifa and Antifa sympathizers in the US.

Non-sequitur.

Oh, you picked up on that subtlety? It was supposed to be an absurd example to make a point.

Originally, the Boston rally included many alt-right and white nationalist figureheads and speakers. The same groups who promoted the 'unite the right' rally in Charlottesville. Obviously after what in happened in Charlottesville, many of them decided not to show up.

So why didn't the protesters go home, or go watch a movie, when there was no fire to put out? You know... the usual things that don't involve throwing piss at the police.

Here, you're using 'they' to label the counter-protesters in Boston as antifa sympathizers.

Actually, I labelled the protesters as "people". Read it again - my pronouns were a little vague I guess. Here, like this:

"... they [Antifa and Antifa sympathizers] managed to get ~40,000 people [the protesters as a whole] in Boston to protest against free speech."

Just as if I said X managed to get [however many] people to show up at the Women's March... it doesn't mean the [however many] people belong to X.

It was supposed to be an absurd example to make a point.

It wasn't a point though. I don't think you know a non-sequitur is if you think you just made a point with it.

So why didn't the protesters go home, or go watch a movie, when there was no fire to put out? You know... the usual things that don't involve throwing piss at the police.

Why do you have a problem with them exercising their right to free speech?

In fact, didn't you just claim that the rally was about free speech? And now here you are trying to argue against people exercising it. That's very hypocritical of you.

Actually, I labelled the protesters as "people". Read it again - my pronouns were a little vague I guess. Here, like this: "... they [Antifa and Antifa sympathizers] managed to get ~40,000 people [the protesters as a whole] in Boston to protest against free speech."

Ah yes, that makes it much clearer. The counter-protesters who showed up weren't actually capable of making the decision to protest on their own. They needed antifa and antifa sympathizers to convince them. Thanks for clearing that one up /s

I don't think you know a non-sequitur is if you think you just made a point with it.

I didn't call it a non-sequitur - you did. Argue my words, not your own.

Why do you have a problem with them exercising their right to free speech?

I didn't say I have a problem with free speech. See above. You called them counter-protesters. When there is nothing to counter, what are they doing? When there is no fire, the fire department leaves. Another example that you may label as you please, while ignoring the fact that the police had to ask these animals not to throw piss at them (not speech, piss).

Thanks for clearing that one up

No problem.

I didn't call it a non-sequitur - you did. Argue my words, not your own.

Yes I did. Which is why I didn't answer it and instead called it out for being nonsensical.

I didn't say I have a problem with free speech. See above. You called them counter-protesters. When there is nothing to counter, what are they doing? When there is no fire, the fire department leaves. Another example that you may label as you please, while ignoring the fact that the police had to ask these animals not to throw piss at them (not speech, piss).

Clearly you do have a problem with them exercising their right to free speech if you're going to such great lengths to mis-characterize their protests.

According to the Boston Police Department, there were only 33 people arrested out of roughly 40,000 people. Just in case you don't feel like doing math, that's 0.08% of the people. In other words, 99.92% were law abiding protesters exercising their right to free speech.

Yet here you are calling them animals and trying to misrepresent their protests for what they were. Your agenda is becoming clearer with every additional post you make.

Oh come on, don't play dense.

I didn't call it a non-sequitur - you did. Argue my words, not your own.

Yes I did. Which is why I didn't answer it and instead called it out for being nonsensical. If your words are silly and pointless then don't be upset when they are ignored.

Please allow me to resolve this little logical conundrum for you. Spoiler alert: you are in the wrong.

/u/SomeoneLikeYouToo thought it was absurd for people to go to a Donald Trump rally in Boston to protest the actions of neo-nazis in Charlottesville. You later relevantly pointed out that overlapping speaker engagements made this less absurd, frankly winning the real debate over this point right there! However, I am a stickler for cold, dry logic, so your win will unfortunately not come into play in this analysis. Instead we must restrict ourselves to the premises that were at hand when you leveraged your inadequate accusation of the "non-sequitur" fallacy.

So, /u/SomeoneLikeYouToo thought the premise for the demonstration was absurd. To illustrate why he thought it absurd, he constructed a parallel example that demonstrated the same error of logic that he thought could be seen in the Boston demonstration. The strategy being, if you could be made to agree that the parallel example contained obviously inconsistent logic, then it would follow that the argument for the Boston demonstration would be inconsistent as well if it followed the same inconsistent logic.

To this, you replied "non-sequitur", as if by pointing out that /u/SomeoneLikeYouToo's parallel example contained inconsistencies, you were thereby able to disqualify it as the starting point of a logical debate.

But those logical inconsistencies were the point of /u/SomeoneLikeYouToo's example, and by agreeing that it is indeed ridiculous you have in fact agreed that the Boston demonstrators were equally ridiculous in their motivations - unless you can show that the two cases don't share the faulty logic! Which it turned out you could, with the speaker list argument, but alas that was too late with respects to your faulty usage of "non-sequitur".

Hope that helped!

According to the Boston Police Department, there were only 33 people arrested out of roughly 40,000 people. Just in case you don't feel like doing math, that's 0.08% of the people. In other words, 99.92% were law abiding protesters exercising their right to free speech.

Because everyone who commits a crime gets arrested. 100% of the time. Nobody gets away with anything, and having a large group of people to cover you and protect you from cops means nothing. Give me a break...

Yet here you are calling them animals

Because they throw piss at people, you fucking dope. Got a better word to call people who throw piss at people?

And you want to talk about my agenda... pffff. What a joke.

Your continual reference to it as a "free speech event" does an admirable job of showing on which side your bread is buttered.

Your continual reference to it as a "free speech event" does an admirable job of showing on which side your bread is buttered.

Yes, you're right. Free speech actually does "butter my bread". What do you do for a living? Stock shelves at the local gas station? You better hope that pays more than I think it does, and you never need to speak or write something that masked mobs of thugs disagree with.

Secondly, calling them all antifa or antifa sympathizers is bullshit.

But it's ok to call all the free speech supporters nazis and nazi sympathizers, right?

When they march alongside Neo-Nazis and are part of a crowd chanting Nazi slogans? Specifically while attending an event whose goal is to UNITE the people attending?

Yeah. Yeah, that's fine.

UNITE "the right", not UNITE "nazis and white supremacists".

Are you saying antifa wasn't in Boston? I guess it was just normal Democrat protesters throwing urine and rocks then?

In the Portland free speech rally protest there was a few hundred Antifa. Maybe close to five hundred. And that wasn't even a big event with a lot of press coverage, although it did garner more attention because DHS came in because the rally was held in a federal park. That and the mayor tried to cancel it even though it falls out of his jurisdiction, lol.

I realize there aren't "millions" of Antifa, but there's definitely quite a lot considering how far-left they are on the spectrum. Look at Berkeley, there was a shit ton of them there.

I would have agreed fully here but tonight for the first time I saw a group of 5 Antifa at Walmart buying "supplies"...

I've never seen a white supremacist.

The president straight up praising people who protest with Nazis definitely made it seem like the establishment has a role in it.

I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. Are you saying those who proudly wave Nazi flags or don KKK outfits are actually establishment, and that it's not possible they're real?

I'm sure there are some real people, and further real people mistakenly attracted by the fakes.

That being said - yeah - most of them appear to be intentionally deceiving for the almighty dollar.

We already live in the world where corporations and wall street have become too powerful and are able to buy anything.

They can easily hire LOADS of apathetic, unemployed and angry millenials that are happy to pretend to be raging nazi-ninjas for 25 bucks an hour.

most of them appear to be intentionally deceiving for the almighty dollar

Can you give details of what you mean?

Got paid

Literally any proof of that?

No. I was clarifying what he meant

There isn't proof of that, so that's not why he believes it. What does it mean that they "appeared" to be getting paid. I'm curious what that means.

They can EASILY hire loads of apathetic, unemployed and angry millenials that are happy to pretend to be raging nazi-ninjas for 25 bucks an hour.

Is there any proof that this happened?

Do you really not understand what OP is saying?

How does someone pull off a lie? By mixing a lot of truth in. Hes not saying there are no real ones, or that a majority arent real.

He's saying there is almost no way to tell anymore. If people start waving flags, get the fuck out of there, because the proverbial car is about to slam into that proverbial crowd.

Interesting, because that's exactly how I feel how about this sub. It's been co-opted by the right and really isn't organic/unpartisan. Can't trust anyone here anymore

I mean, you're not wrong. Pretty much at all moments you need to wonder if you're being funneled into an opinion.

We are all being funneled, it just depends on what day and who is working it.

We've had waves of both my opinion, but the reason it isn't organic is because we are literally fighting tooth and nail to fight propaganda from each side, both sides have bloody hands in this sad, stupid war for our mind.

msm hates trump,

we hate msm.

they say some shit about trump,

we dont give a fuck because they usually lie.

If you see someone discussing what one side of the so-called "political spectrum" is doing, that person only sees half of the conspiracy.

So it's fine to march with them until they put flags up? Maybe don't march with racists at all? Is OP saying don't protest at all?

Jesus Christ, you're purposefully playing dumb.

Removed. Rule 10.

Warning, further violations may result in a ban.

Is anyone who advocates free speech and slightly right leaning a Nazi to you?

If that's the definition then it's easy for those guys to make that decision, but having any sort of empathy to realize that there are incredibly dumb southerns who aren't racist and are terrible at expressing their frustrations with the current administration and political fervor that still surrounds it. They go to work, they go home, and then they watch the news. They get the fox scoop, and others get the MSNBC scoop and they are just absolutely crushed to watch literal Nazis and Stalinist march on their streets as if they are the only two movements in existence to represent the right and left.

So they decide to protest to protect a Confederate monument, because they don't see the point in it. It's a state decision, is it not?

This is why I'm so determined to figure out who is actually a Nazi, before forcing myself to be facetious enough to encourage violence.

Why would anyone risk dressing up like a Nazi if they're not actually one?

Maybe you missed this part

They are agent provocateurs

That statement answers your question. Why would they do it? Because those two words literally mean something. They describe a type of person/people who "play act" in order to achieve an end result on society.

They exist. There is historical precedent to believe these exist, and a government that literally prints their own money has plenty of capital to pay people to fill these roles. The FBI/CIA/3-letter alphabet agencies have a long history of infiltrating groups by pretending to be apart of them. There is a lot of past evidence to believe that not only has this happened in the past, it never really stopped happening.

So the answer of "why would they risk it?" is because they're being paid and they thing they're serving whatever group they work for(both government and private such as masons, church of satan etc)

To get on tv and be martyrs for their cause.

This is how you embolden them, everytime we put Spencer or David Duke on the news it emboldens them. The only reason they crawled out from whatever punkrock, white trash, doc Martin booted hole is because of this apparent 'whitelash' the media spoke about, it gave them a fucking cause and something to fight for.

That's why they are dressing up, because they will get coverage.

I think he knows Nazis are real, we've all seen American History X.

Where he is drawing his line is that both groups are being funded by some section of the elite, and he believes there is elements of grassroots organization (I know everyone of you protestors 'work' super hard) but is ultimately being directed to certain cities and places that they can whip up racial anger, they tried it in my state but it failed (which is why no one has heard about that protest here.

Someone wants bloodshed, and it's not limited to the lower classes.

Good advice, not an entirely accurate argument. This divide is overwhelmingly fabricated but there are still legitimate radicals on both sides. In any case, the point has been made. We understand what's going on. Now, let's actually figure out how to take advantage of it. That's the only logical step going forward.

Exactly, but I don't look it as bad necessarily. Look at Boston for example. 40,000 people showed up to take on what, 50 people huddled in a gazebo? That's an immense show of force regardless of how it came to be. That kind of force is needed in the war against the real enemies. So, we try shifting the narrative ever so slightly and get this anger back on track. 40,000 people in New York City locking down Wall Street sounds like my kind of game. We just need that same anger and desperation.

If only we could hone that anger on the dangerous, unhinged, elites without it being co-opted by the government a-la Wall Street.

We can only take action against the lower classes apparently, and I'm sure they are pretty jazzed about that.

There's no question they're gleaming at us fighting each other. No matter what action is taken, infiltration is inevitable. There's no stopping it, but we could use it to our advantage as well.

Even the obvious agitation tactics don't turn off enough people to totally derail a movement, so baiting the state to strike first could turn the tide just enough.

Neither job ad lately for a scattered crisis actor..........

Stay away from psyops, kids!

You mean crisis actors & paid provocateurs?

If the signs are professionally printed, and many people all have the same sign, it is a manufactured "protest". If the signs are scribbled sharpie on a piece of cardboard, that is probably a (misinformed) concerned citizen.

If the signs are professionally printed, and many people all have the same sign, it is a manufactured "protest".

What if they all have the same tiki torches? lol

yes. stay inside and keep your activism digital, everyone.

Ask your self this. Are Nazi's even right/alt-right? ...no. Why were they there? Because actual alt-right polar extreme is KKK, which aren't quite extreme enough.

It is like PETA paying people to pretend to be a baby seal beating club at a hunter's rights rally; super transparently fake and meant to be exaggeratedly extreme.

Ask your selves this. Are Nazi's even right/alt-right?

Ummm... yes?

If yet another stooge preps another set-up rally to define the 'right' like 'Unite the Right' and no one but white supremacists and the faKKKe show up, it makes it seem like the right is nothing BUT those people.

The best course is to show up in numbers and drown them out. The MSM cameras will be on the stooges no matter what we do.

Yep, you're right, everyone who was there was a shill getting those fat Soros bucks...

Hit the nail on the head with this. This is staged protests by establishment. The violence will get bad enough where they outlaw some forms of protesting.

The rumor going around is that BLM and KKK protesters were seen getting off of the same bus.

So I should avoid nazi or kkk protesters because they may be fake, and not because they may be nazi or kkk protesters?

Actually, I'd avoid them because I'm neither a nazi or kkk member.

Oh shit, me either.

And they don't like non Nazis, or non antifa members. So that itself is a good reason not to be near them.

Or you know, you can use your brain (if it's functioning) and realize that Insane Clown posse has more followers than Nazis, and that all the "nazis" you're seeing are either you getting spooked by your own shadow - or Feds.

I have met genuine neo-nazis. I shared a house with one for three years. I've met his friends - they protested, they marched, they attended "rock against communism" events, they harassed brown and queer people in the streets. I'm reasonably confident that none of them were getting fat shill bucks from the "Feds".

There's a history of using controversial symbols as a message of anti-authoritarianism even without directly supporting the "intended" message of that symbol. In the early days of punk, for example, swastikas were sometimes "appropriated"-- not because the punks were Nazis necessarily, but because they wanted to be shocking and controversial. When you were younger, you probably knew people who would draw pentagrams despite not actually being satanists. Similar idea.

There have also been efforts to "take back" the swastika. Before the Nazis, it used to be a symbol for Buddhism. Even today some east Asian cultures still use it in non-Nazi contexts. For example, a Pokemon card released in Japan has one on it and the US release of the card had to change it. I've seen it suggested that we should use the swastika in non-Nazi ways like that to blunt the offensiveness of the image, but doing this would just result in people thinking you're a Nazi anyway.

Sorry, not every single one of them is an agent provocateur.

Do not engage with people like this on the Internet, too.

If you come across someone who suggests adorning swastikas or other national socialist symbols at rallies, they are probably a shill.

What about people insulting and or shaming you for not protesting for the other side?

Follow your will.

Do research, evaluate it and think critical. Maybe they're right, maybe not. That's up for you to decide.

What if he has a pointed stick?

Act accordingly.

If you're an adult no one is responsible for your well being. Only you are.

Thank you

Those people are the worst IMO.

Infiltrated? Seems highly likely the entire fauxtroversy was engineered from the beginning.

Note that one grouping of political tools is styling themselves as 'The Resistance' these days. Reminiscent of WW2 obviously.

And now we have 'nazis' and 'anti-fascists' all of a sudden.

Uh huh.

Everything old is new again - made possible for you by an educational system captured by the New Left in the 60s and charged with entirely unmooring education from reality. You know that cultural relativism schtick? It scaled.

My issue with your statement is my issue with this sub.

Every time a horrible incident occurs you can count on someone here to have a theory as to why it was fake, a false flag, etc. And for the most part, that's fine, because after all this is /r/conspiracy.

My point is that real attacks/incidents occur. Therefore, if some incidents are real, and every incident is portrayed as being fake, then we're ignoring some real attacks (Sandy Hook, anyone?).

The same argument applies here. You aren't even saying "most", you just flat out say if anyone protests with flags or uniforms then it's clearly fake.

You realize there are dumbasses on the right and the left? And you realize these dumbasses will protest?

You aren't even saying "most", you just flat out say if anyone protests with flags or uniforms then it's clearly fake.

Even if a 100% real Nazi waves a Nazi flag, and it's definitely not a fake, the end result in public opinion is the same. I think the point op was trying to make is that you should basically assume they're acting in bad faith, because even if they're being honest, they're still acting in bad faith.

The term is agent provocateur.

funfact: the plural form is "agents provacateur" due to being french

not to mention it's not safe

you'll never convince the other side to change their believes in the protest setting. if you walk up to the opposing side looking for a friendly debate, you're more likely to be assaulted by some nazi/antifa fuck.

true changes of belief come from within.

And Someone got what he ultimately wanted, No one talking about his Shady Russia Ties anymore or whatever. This is all just another distraction.

I'm fairly confident there are paid agitators and/or plants on both sides of every single one of these protests.

The media loves to paint any and all protestors as bad. Think about that.

is he antifa or nazi?

probably getting buried but black hole sun fragment is painted on the shield

Is there any proof of this?

You're on the wrong sub...

There has to be some viable proof for it to be considered a conspiracy

Oh, I agree with wholeheartedly! I just wish more posters here did.

There is a lot of proof that organizations use agents provacateur to cause trouble. It's an established practice that's been known of for decades.

Yes, but both of these groups are a small minority that not a lot of people care about, well except the Nazis. The average American isn't scared of Antifa, so why would organizations pay actors to join a group not many Americans think about?

No worries. I believe the video of the night before speaks for itself. That wasn't about a monument. It was about hating Jews and chanting nazi slogans.

Haha, you may be right about that. Have a good one dude.

If you saw a bunch of people marching with torches and chanting Nazi slogans to protest the removal of confederate symbols, but were "unable to reach a clear conclusion", then you might want to interrogate where that lack of clarity stems from.