Thousands of activists who were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq are suddenly all for preemptively attacking suspected Nazis incase they do something dangerous further down the line.
Speaking exclusively to lokithescottishrapper.com one pro-violence passifist said: “Nazi’s cannot be allowed to organise – end of story. Yes it might not be a holocaust right now but you bet your arse if these scum-bags are given the time and space to reconstitute themselves then we are all in grave danger further down the line.”
When asked why she rejected a similar argument in 2003, when the US and UK forcibly removed Saddam Hussein for pretty much the same reason, she said: “That was nothing like this. Saddam wasn’t a Nazi, he was an authoritarian dictator who used violence against people who disagreed with him. Big difference.”
It has emerged that many of the same people advocating physical assault are opposed any sort of military intervention, even against ISIS, who are about as close to Nazi’s as you can get without being a Nazi. However, apparently these irreconcilable moral positions are not in conflict with one another because people on the left are incapable of hypocrisy.
One anti-capitalist took a break from selling Che Guevara t-shirts, to tell us: “It’s different when we do it.”
Most people agree that Nazi’s are dangerous and should be physically resisted when necessary. However, some have expressed concern that the term ‘Nazi’ has been broadened so much that it might lead to people who are not actually Nazi’s being assaulted anyway – which could lead to an escalation in violence as dialogue breaks down. However, this reservation has been preemptively condemned and people, currently fighting for everyone’s right to express themselves freely without fear, have warned anyone with these opinions to shut up – or else.
More as we get it. In the meantime, support the blog by subscribing or hitting the button below.