The argument isn't weak because I removed the bad person, the argument is weak because the rationale behind it is weak. It's defense is weak. And you know that - maybe you're consciously aware it's a bad argument, maybe it's only subconscious - but that's why you had to throw on a qualifier to alter the argument. You threw on the condition "GIVEN THAT ________ is bad...", in which case, why would you even tack on the point of him having a different opinion? You might as well have said "Hitler had a mustache, violence is justified." If your criteria for violent response is that the person simply be Hitler ("bad" as you put it), then you can throw on near anything following that and still end your argument with saying violence is justified.

Hitler having a mustache did is not related to the horrible things he did, fascist opinions were related.

This is dishonest.

... you openly admitted that differing opinions don't justify violence and we have to look at other things.

Yes, its what the opinions lead to, fascism as an opinion will evolve into political fascism.

So that brings me back to my earlier question in this comment, why even bother tacking on "he had different opinions" when we both know that doesn't determine justification?

Its that the different opinion is the opinion that we should create fascism which is an action, its a threat as an expressed opinion, a threat of oppression.

So now we've cut out that superfluous part, and we actually get to the meat of your argument which is "bad people justify violence". Here things get more tricky and more subjective because we have to go back and forth on what is "bad" or "oppressive". I think you and I have very different definitions of these two words and based on you saying...

Do you not agree that fascism is bad and oppressive...?

To me I'd say, having a small group of people that have unilaterally given themselves the moral authority to decide what is "bad" and "oppressive" for all society and people the people involved in it and, even more so, decided (again, by their own declaration alone) that it's their responsibility to publicly assault and kill anyone that has done something as small as exercise a right that has been promised to them for generations is all a pretty "oppressive" and "bad" thing and

Tolerance cant tolerate intolerance

Also we didnt say kill, we just want them to not be comfortable spreading oppression.

Antifa has killed at most three people, oppression kills many more in america alone every year through the §