Laughing Man wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
You could literally read the article you posted and know the answer to your question.

According to the Anti-Defamation League, the gesture -- made by forming a circle with the thumb and index finger, and extending and separating the other three fingers -- has been used in recent years by white supremacists to form the letters W and P, but has also long been used as a sign signifying "OK" or approval.

Therefore it shouldn't be assumed to be a white supremacy symbol unless there is other evidence to support those claims, according to the ADL.

Except that doesn't really answer anything, as it doesn't specify what that evidence is. If you need more "evidence" for your symbol to work then it isn't really a symbol now is it? I doubt that real white supremacists actually use it for that reason, due to the confusion it would cause.
Hence why that rumor about it being a /pol/ prank seems likely, because is the sort of crap they would pull to mess with the ADL.
People still lost their jobs over it, so it seems your "context" doesn't even matter to begin with.

It's absolutely a /pol/ prank, and it's absolutely also a white power thing now, because neonazis have a distinct lack of critical thinking ability and when told something's a white power symbol they'll pick it up and use it. It's come up in the recent Charlottesville case, and the defendants happily admitted it's a white supremacist thing, just like chugging gallons of milk is now. Because nazis are dumb.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Laughing Man wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
You could literally read the article you posted and know the answer to your question.

According to the Anti-Defamation League, the gesture -- made by forming a circle with the thumb and index finger, and extending and separating the other three fingers -- has been used in recent years by white supremacists to form the letters W and P, but has also long been used as a sign signifying "OK" or approval.

Therefore it shouldn't be assumed to be a white supremacy symbol unless there is other evidence to support those claims, according to the ADL.

Except that doesn't really answer anything, as it doesn't specify what that evidence is. If you need more "evidence" for your symbol to work then it isn't really a symbol now is it? I doubt that real white supremacists actually use it for that reason, due to the confusion it would cause.
Hence why that rumor about it being a /pol/ prank seems likely, because is the sort of crap they would pull to mess with the ADL.
People still lost their jobs over it, so it seems your "context" doesn't even matter to begin with.

It's absolutely a /pol/ prank, and it's absolutely also a white power thing now, because neonazis have a distinct lack of critical thinking ability and when told something's a white power symbol they'll pick it up and use it. It's come up in the recent Charlottesville case, and the defendants happily admitted it's a white supremacist thing, just like chugging gallons of milk is now. Because nazis are dumb.

If true, that is both sad and hilarious.
And yeah, Nazis are dumb.

 Olthannon wrote:
You know the weirdest thing to me is that Nazis aren't just skinheads anymore, it's also a huge bunch of weird nerdy kids who live in their own internet bubble of proper mental and serious unchecked hatred.

 Formosa wrote:
I wonder if this will apply to other violent hate groups like BLM or ANTIFA, I'm all for turfing out the Natsocs but doubt the staff at our local tournies and GW would be willing to upset those violent extremists.

I get this is a conversation some of the more radical members here do not want nor like having as it shines a light on elements they prefer to pretend do not exist.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
I wonder if this will apply to other violent hate groups like BLM or ANTIFA, I'm all for turfing out the Natsocs but doubt the staff at our local tournies and GW would be willing to upset those violent extremists.

I get this is a conversation some of the more radical members here do not want nor like having as it shines a light on elements they prefer to pretend do not exist.

But BLM and antifa are not violent hate groups.

They may have some hateful people in them but they aren't movements dedicated to hating portions of society, that's the difference.

Deadnight wrote:
Read gw's statement and I support it absolutely. Zero issues with what they say here.

It's not just on gw though. I think we as players also have a role to play in keeping our communities safe and keeping the hate out.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Do i really need to explain why Nazis are different from BLM and Antifa?
Do you understand the stated goals of each and why they are formed?

Audustum wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
I wonder if this will apply to other violent hate groups like BLM or ANTIFA, I'm all for turfing out the Natsocs but doubt the staff at our local tournies and GW would be willing to upset those violent extremists.

I get this is a conversation some of the more radical members here do not want nor like having as it shines a light on elements they prefer to pretend do not exist.

But BLM and antifa are not violent hate groups.

They may have some hateful people in them but they aren't movements dedicated to hating portions of society, that's the difference.

There are quite a few people who can and do, in public media, make the arguments that they are actually quite hateful organizations with hateful goals. Who says who gets to be the arbiter of what is hateful and what isn't? There's no objective way to do this.

I want to respond to all the times I was quoted but this thread moved fast.

 ScarletRose wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Do i really need to explain why Nazis are different from BLM and Antifa?
Do you understand the stated goals of each and why they are formed?

I mean this is pretty much how the previous thread got locked - endless whataboutism to distract from the very real issue posed by one side of the political spectrum.

 Formosa wrote:
Sure they are not .. sure, BLM did not literally just threaten terrorist actions in New York if the anti crime unit was reinstated, as I said on the other page please don't use the "my violent extremists are ok but yours are evil and bad cos reasons" excuse, parity of treatment is needed for all violent extremism, not just the ones that some of your agree with.

If we want a safe, compassionate community we cannot tolerate these hate groups.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Audustum wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
I wonder if this will apply to other violent hate groups like BLM or ANTIFA, I'm all for turfing out the Natsocs but doubt the staff at our local tournies and GW would be willing to upset those violent extremists.

I get this is a conversation some of the more radical members here do not want nor like having as it shines a light on elements they prefer to pretend do not exist.

But BLM and antifa are not violent hate groups.

They may have some hateful people in them but they aren't movements dedicated to hating portions of society, that's the difference.

There are quite a few people who can and do, in public media, make the arguments that they are actually quite hateful organizations with hateful goals. Who says who gets to be the arbiter of what is hateful and what isn't? There's no objective way to do this.

I want to respond to all the times I was quoted but this thread moved fast.

Nazis want to kill entire groups of people.
BLM want people to understand that just because someone is black doesn't make them any less of a person or deserving of respect and dignity.

I won't say that every single BLM person is a saint, because that'd be bull. There are people who can take anything too far. But there's a huge difference between the foundations of the two.

The phrase "Black Lives Matter" can refer to a Twitter hashtag, a slogan, a social movement, a political action committee,[20] or a loose confederation of groups advocating for racial justice. As a movement, Black Lives Matter is grassroots and decentralized, and leaders have emphasized the importance of local organizing over national leadership.[21][22] The structure differs from previous black movements, like the Civil Rights Movement. Such differences have been the subject of scholarly literature.[23] Activist DeRay McKesson has commented that the movement "encompasses all who publicly declare that black lives matter and devote their time and energy accordingly."[24]

In 2013, Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal Tometi formed the Black Lives Matter Network. Garza described the network as an online platform that existed to provide activists with a shared set of principles and goals. Local Black Lives Matter chapters are asked to commit to the organization's list of guiding principles but operate without a central structure or hierarchy. Garza has commented that the Network was not interested in "policing who is and who is not part of the movement."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter#Loose_structure

Audustum wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Audustum wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
I wonder if this will apply to other violent hate groups like BLM or ANTIFA, I'm all for turfing out the Natsocs but doubt the staff at our local tournies and GW would be willing to upset those violent extremists.

I get this is a conversation some of the more radical members here do not want nor like having as it shines a light on elements they prefer to pretend do not exist.

But BLM and antifa are not violent hate groups.

They may have some hateful people in them but they aren't movements dedicated to hating portions of society, that's the difference.

There are quite a few people who can and do, in public media, make the arguments that they are actually quite hateful organizations with hateful goals. Who says who gets to be the arbiter of what is hateful and what isn't? There's no objective way to do this.

I want to respond to all the times I was quoted but this thread moved fast.

Nazis want to kill entire groups of people.
BLM want people to understand that just because someone is black doesn't make them any less of a person or deserving of respect and dignity.

I won't say that every single BLM person is a saint, because that'd be bull. There are people who can take anything too far. But there's a huge difference between the foundations of the two.

Case in point. That's your opinion on BLM, but BLM actually doesn't have such a thing.

The phrase "Black Lives Matter" can refer to a Twitter hashtag, a slogan, a social movement, a political action committee,[20] or a loose confederation of groups advocating for racial justice. As a movement, Black Lives Matter is grassroots and decentralized, and leaders have emphasized the importance of local organizing over national leadership.[21][22] The structure differs from previous black movements, like the Civil Rights Movement. Such differences have been the subject of scholarly literature.[23] Activist DeRay McKesson has commented that the movement "encompasses all who publicly declare that black lives matter and devote their time and energy accordingly."[24]

In 2013, Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal Tometi formed the Black Lives Matter Network. Garza described the network as an online platform that existed to provide activists with a shared set of principles and goals. Local Black Lives Matter chapters are asked to commit to the organization's list of guiding principles but operate without a central structure or hierarchy. Garza has commented that the Network was not interested in "policing who is and who is not part of the movement."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter#Loose_structure

The people advocating racial supremacy and/or violence in BLM are just as much a part of the movement and 'what it is' because the movement has no authority and no definition of 'what it is'. You see a BLM shirt it could be benign, it could be not. Is the TO supposed to interrogate the wearer? Why is everyone forced to assume it's a peaceful?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
GW was 100% right to make a statement on this recent event. The problem is that they didn't make a statement on this recent event. They gave no context. They should have started with "At a recent tournament in Spain..." and then gone on to deliver their message.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Audustum wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Audustum wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
I wonder if this will apply to other violent hate groups like BLM or ANTIFA, I'm all for turfing out the Natsocs but doubt the staff at our local tournies and GW would be willing to upset those violent extremists.

I get this is a conversation some of the more radical members here do not want nor like having as it shines a light on elements they prefer to pretend do not exist.

But BLM and antifa are not violent hate groups.

They may have some hateful people in them but they aren't movements dedicated to hating portions of society, that's the difference.

There are quite a few people who can and do, in public media, make the arguments that they are actually quite hateful organizations with hateful goals. Who says who gets to be the arbiter of what is hateful and what isn't? There's no objective way to do this.

I want to respond to all the times I was quoted but this thread moved fast.

Nazis want to kill entire groups of people.
BLM want people to understand that just because someone is black doesn't make them any less of a person or deserving of respect and dignity.

I won't say that every single BLM person is a saint, because that'd be bull. There are people who can take anything too far. But there's a huge difference between the foundations of the two.

Case in point. That's your opinion on BLM, but BLM actually doesn't have such a thing.

The phrase "Black Lives Matter" can refer to a Twitter hashtag, a slogan, a social movement, a political action committee,[20] or a loose confederation of groups advocating for racial justice. As a movement, Black Lives Matter is grassroots and decentralized, and leaders have emphasized the importance of local organizing over national leadership.[21][22] The structure differs from previous black movements, like the Civil Rights Movement. Such differences have been the subject of scholarly literature.[23] Activist DeRay McKesson has commented that the movement "encompasses all who publicly declare that black lives matter and devote their time and energy accordingly."[24]

In 2013, Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal Tometi formed the Black Lives Matter Network. Garza described the network as an online platform that existed to provide activists with a shared set of principles and goals. Local Black Lives Matter chapters are asked to commit to the organization's list of guiding principles but operate without a central structure or hierarchy. Garza has commented that the Network was not interested in "policing who is and who is not part of the movement."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter#Loose_structure

The people advocating racial supremacy and/or violence in BLM are just as much a part of the movement and 'what it is' because the movement has no authority and no definition of 'what it is'. You see a BLM shirt it could be benign, it could be not. Is the TO supposed to interrogate the wearer? Why is everyone forced to assume it's a peaceful?

Yes. People who advocate for racial justice are the same as Nazis. That makes perfect sense, and is absolutely impenetrable in its logic. /s

Audustum wrote:

The people advocating racial supremacy and/or violence in BLM are just as much a part of the movement and 'what it is' because the movement has no authority and no definition of 'what it is'. You see a BLM shirt it could be benign, it could be not. Is the TO supposed to interrogate the wearer? Why is everyone forced to assume it's a peaceful?

 Thadin wrote:

However, had the shirt worn by the person that this Statement was directed to (spanish facist group) gone to a US tournament, who would recognize that it is a facist symbol?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Do i really need to explain why Nazis are different from BLM and Antifa?
Do you understand the stated goals of each and why they are formed?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Thadin wrote:

However, had the shirt worn by the person that this Statement was directed to (spanish facist group) gone to a US tournament, who would recognize that it is a facist symbol?

Anyone who played Hearts of Iron IV, specifically as Spain.