FL: White nationalists still plan on coming to University of Florida

Source: Gainesville Sun

"White nationalist Richard Spencer intends to come to Gainesville, whether he has a permit or not. 'I can confirm we are coming to the University of Florida, regardless,' said Cameron Padgett, who organizes speaking events for Spencer. 'Hopefully it’s in a controlled environment, like the Phillips Center.' Earlier this month, the University of Florida denied a permit, filed by Padgett, for Spencer and others aligned with Spencer’s National Policy Institute to speak at the Phillips Center on Sept. 12. … 'We were informed late this afternoon that representatives of the organization have retained legal counsel and plan to pursue efforts to hold this event as originally requested,' UF President Kent Fuchs said in a statement sent out to the university community at 8 p.m. Wednesday. … A counter-protest event on Facebook called 'No Nazis at UF — Protest Richard Spencer' is also planned for Sept. 12. More than 2,000 people have indicated they plan to attend." [editor's note: Spencer has as much a right to speak as anyone. But if his thug supporters show up looking for a fight, they won't get off as easily as they did in Charlottesville – TLK] (08/30/17)

http://www.gainesville.com/news/20170830/white-nationalists-still-plan-on-coming-to-university-of-florida

  • JdL

    But if [Spencer's] thug supporters show up looking for a fight, they won't get off as easily as they did in Charlottesville.

    The same statement is equally likely to apply to the thugs on the left, who as far as I can tell, have been more eager to start a fight than Spencer and friends.

    • dL

      nope…there is no moral equivalence between anitfa and the alt-right

      • JdL

        I didn't make any statement one way or the other about moral equivalence or lack thereof. But since you bring it up, I'll call it a tie: we have white supremacist sacks of shit on one hand and free speech opposing sacks of shit on the other.

        And what exact relevance does moral standing of ideas have in the context of violence? Even if I thought one group was worse philosophically than the other, I'd support the bad one's right to march and speak without being subjected to blows, including to defend themselves from violence initiated by someone else.

        Do you feel differently?

        • dL

          I didn't make any statement one way or the other about moral equivalence or lack thereof.

          Actually, you did. You implied that the antifa is the more violent faction compared to the neo-nazis.

          Do you feel differently?

          yes.

          I support no state sanctioned abridgment of speech. However, I also find no moral obligation for civilian passivity in the event of groups who organize for violence.

          There is nothing new about antifa or fascism. Where there has been organized fascism(state or otherwise), there has always been an antifa counter. This goes back, hell, to the Spanish civil war.

          Fascism is a reactionary organization for the capture of state power to serve the moral objective of the reactionary state. Antifa is the counter-organization to such organization that relies on direct action as the counter- means instead of the state.

          Now, I'm not a social anarchist, but I am a liberal one. And I wouldn't be much of an anarchist if I made a moral equivalence between fascists and antifa, now would I? Now this doesn't mean I necessarily agree w/ all the tactics employed by antifa. But it does mean I don't suffer from knee-jerk leftist derangement syndrome at the mention of the term.

    • I'm not eager to start a fight at all. But this is Florida. I have no legal duty to retreat.

      • JdL

        That's fine: if you're gratuitously attacked, by all means use whatever force is necessary to defend yourself. There are no doubt many, probably a majority, of protesters on the "left" side of this issue, who don't advocate violent suppression of speech. There are also a significant, well documented minority on the left who very openly and definitely advocate and practice unprovoked violence in an attempt to shut down speech they disagree with.

        I hope you don't find yourself in a situation (assuming I'm inferring correctly that you plan to join the protest against the white supremacists) where violence provoked initially by the left results in a melee. Equal wish if violence is initially provoked by the other side. Stay safe.

        • The white supremacists have already made an offer to do harm. Any violence used against them will by definition be self-defense.

          • JdL

            So … if person A "makes an offer to do harm" to person B, then person B is justified in initiating violence? And calling it "self-defense"?? Reminds me of Nixon's "Protective Reaction Strikes".

          • If person A "makes an offer to do harm" to person B, then person A has initiated violence and person B is acting in self-defense.

            Pulling a gun and pointing it at me while screaming you're going to kill me is an "offer to do harm." It's the "assault" part of "assault and battery." I don't have to wait for you to pull the trigger, because you've already initiated force.

            The white supremacists have said they're coming to Gainesville looking for a fight (screaming that they'e going to kill). If they come to Gainesville (pulling the gun out and pointing it), they're the aggressors and should be treated as such.

          • JdL

            OK, if we define "makes an offer to do harm" as "pulls out and points a gun while stating murderous resolve", then I agree. Take away the gun (or some other clearly lethal weapon), and I would change my vote.

            This upcoming event: the supremacists will be outnumbered, what, maybe 100:1? Very lopsided, whatever the final number. They'll be aware of this. I expect them NOT to initiate violence, just because (as far as I know) they're not actually suicidal.

            Maybe we'll get lucky and the "public servants" we pay top dollar for will actually do their jobs for a change and will keep the groups separate (to any reasonable extent possible) and thus avoid physical confrontation. If designated areas for each side are clearly laid out, at least it will be quite clear who is the aggressor, if there is aggression.

          • They were outnumbered in Charlottesville, too, but that didn't stop them from showing up and starting the fight they had said they were going to show up and start.

            Of course, they expected the cops to protect them from retaliation and that didn't happen. Maybe they got the message.