Don’t words matter? Isn’t it important, when framing our argument, to understand what specific words mean? To understand actual fact from what we perceive as fact, or would wish is fact? To understand that titles and names are more than just titles and names; they are all they represent underneath said title? This post aims to answer some of this, regarding two words being bandied about a lot lately, and not always correctly: fascism and Antifa. It is in response to an open letter posted by an Antifa supporter, in itself fact-checked below. This is a long blogpost. The open letter is shared at the bottom of this post. I am not debating the core concepts of Antifa; rather, some of the quaint concepts surrounding them.

I feel the need to address some definitions, based on some misinformation out there. I’m addressing it because words matter. Over-generalizing matters. Not understanding the full depth or context of what you say matters. Repeating talking points like “Antifa is just an idea, not an organization” matters. You cannot mean what you say if you don’t first correctly say what you mean.

First is the idea of fascism as a current concept. It isn’t. Fascism was a specific thing in a specific time (early to mid-20th century). It would be more accurate to use the term neo-fascism. Next is the quaint idea that fascism is anything progressives are against, such as capitalism. Or the church. What is fascism exactly? A read-through of some political science or history books on the subject make it clear that even political scientists or political historians do not necessarily agree with each other on finer points. But there is common ground. A simple search on Wikipedia defines fascism as a form of far-right, authoritarian ultra-nationalism. A nationalist usually advocates authoritarianism and at least a little racism is built into the very fabric of nationalism, and there is no getting away from it. Fascism is characterized by “dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong regimentation of society and of the economy.”

Fascism is generally accepted to have begun during World War I, though its roots go farther back. It is generally accepted to have ended—as a political movement—with the end of the Nazis. Ergo, just as the proper term for current Nazi followers is neo-Nazis, the proper term for people who want a right-wing authoritarian government is neo-Fascists. (NOTE: As I discuss farther down, despite what some may believe, there have also been plenty of left-wing authoritarian states, with similar oppression.)  Fascism was usually hierarchical in nature (arranged by race, education, wealth, gender, and a host of other socioeconomic factors). (This was in opposition to the far-left structure of social equality, usually in the form of socialism, but often authoritarian communism.) Most nation-states of either of the far wings (fascism or communism) tend to be under a one-party system, with rigged elections, and extremely limited rights, including little to no open press. Fascists were NOT capitalists, as I’m seeing a lot of lately. A fascist economy was a mixed economy and had the “goal of achieving autarky through protectionist and interventionist economic policies and often a closed economy”. Capitalism in its truest laissez-faire sense, advocates complete openness and zero regulation. Fascism was also not Christian, or of any religion. Hitler, the most famous and powerful fascist, was anti-religious and his doctrine, in aiming for the extermination of Jews was not from the belief in Christian superiority so much as ideological racism; that said, he also advocated the removal of church power structure. Any other power is seen as a threat to an authoritarian leader. Thus, this insistence by the modern far-left of referring to those “capitalist, evangelical fascists”, while not contradictory, is also just not factual.

Today, almost no group calls themselves fascist; rather, it is used pejoratively against the left’s opposition, again often without any regard to actual facts or history, or how centrist that opposition may be (I’ve even heard some on the far left call Joe Biden a fascist).

I’ve also seen this idea (it is also in the letter) that you are either a human being, or you are fascist. Again, this idea that anyone who disagrees with me must a fascist. In point of fact, far-left governments, usually in the form of communism, have had more than their share of authoritarian leaders, with the same violence to citizens (i.e. a police state), no rights, no freedom of the press, etc. Stalin, Castro, Mao, Franco. All three leaders in North Korea. There are others. In point of fact, fascists and communists hated each other, and it created a real brutality during WWII. It is important to note that too many people are using the term fascism incorrectly and while they may think I’m splitting hairs, they lose the right to criticize their enemies (who often misuse words or who don’t understand context) if they themselves are incorrect. I must repeat that there are many far-left totalitarian governments in modern history. That progressives choose not to acknowledge that is a real problem, to say nothing of hypocritical. In fact, there is considerable debate as to who was worse between Hitler and Stalin, more to the point, who killed more civilians, even taking the Holocaust into account. (Without getting into too much specifics, it is worth pointing out Hitler was in power for 12 years, Stalin about 25. In such a debate, it is also worth considering whether it is worse to aim for genocide or to just not care who you are killing.)

Parts of Eastern Europe stand as an example to the difference between the two extremes (fascism and communism). Czechoslovakia was a newly thriving democracy when the right-wing Nazis invaded. After years either just surviving them or hiding (or escaping) from them, Czechs welcomed what they thought would be a return to democracy. However, a growing socialist faction had grown in the country during the war years and it was the left-wing political solution that went into effect post-war. Like the fascists before them (whom they hated) it involved authoritarianism, lack of rights, spying on your neighbors, co-workers, family, friends. The book Under a Cruel Star (a memoir by Heda Kovaly) is a great read to demonstrate this phenomenon of authoritarianism and all it comes with, from both political wings. And 1968 stands out as what can happen when a society tries to back out. Again, this was the left side.

Understand that I’m neither intentionally nor accidentally trying to falsely equivocate or its opposite. I’m trying to get people to understand that words, definitions, reality, matter. I’m also trying to get people to understand that while they may think their “side” is pure as the driven snow, rarely is any side in politics that pure. And as Zedd Zorander (pop-culture reference) pointed out, all sides think they are in the right, and their enemies in the wrong. It is a good idea sometimes to remember that.

Now let’s move to the Antifa movement. There is not yet a great deal of scholarship on the subject of Antifa; the movement is too relatively recent. However, here too, it is useful to do a simple search in Wikipedia for a definition. Antifa: “an anti-fascist political movement in the United States, comprising a diverse array of autonomous groups that aim to achieve their objectives through the use of both non-violent and violent action rather than through policy reform” [italics added]. They engage in protest tactics such as “digital activism and militancy, sometimes involving property damage, physical violence and harassment, against fascists, racists and those on the far-right”—or those they perceive as enemies. Continuing with some Wikipedia information, they tend to “hold anti-authoritarian and anti-capitalist views, usually subscribing to anarchism, communism, Marxism, social democracy, and socialism.” While they may not be a single organization, they are cohesive enough to have a logo, a general way of dressing (“uniform”), Antifa specific social media pages, and spokesmen. The fact that such spokesmen (such as the writer of the letter) claim they only speak their own opinions means nothing when they use words that indicate they are speaking for all. Their creed is the belief that had people on the street fought back in the 1930s, the horrors of World War II would not have happened.

The Anti-Defamation League says the label Antifa should be for those who “proactively” seek physical confrontations with their fascist “adversaries” and not all anti-fascist counter-protestors (i.e. the majority of the protestors, who may claim to be Antifa in the loosest “I hate fascists” sense, but who have never even met an actual Antifa “member”). As a reminder, the Anti-Defamation League is a Jewish organization whose existence is to root out and call out anti-Semitism and (other) extremism. While the ADL is itself problematic, attacked from the left as too right-supporting and attacked from the right as being an arm of the Democrats, the arguments against its existence or its public statements are not based on facts (which the League is excellent in giving) but rather ideological.

There is a quaint notion that the movement consists of nothing but hippie “peaceniks”, whose main connection is a mutual hatred of things fascist (and like those defending them, not fully understanding what they’re against). But it isn’t just an agreement. Something does not become a movement just because a lot of people like or dislike something. It becomes a movement because people want to effect change. Political change. Policy change. By definition, this means that there has to be an alternative. An alternative suggests someone thought it up. It also suggests there has to be a way to make the change. The ballot box. Civil disobedience that influence leaders to make change on their own. Civil war. Revolution. It suggests a probable desire for it to happen peacefully but an equally probable willingness to effect change violently. Otherwise, what is the point? The alternative is peace and love, exactly like the hippies of the 60s.  They stood for something, but it was nebulous, and most did little about it (I freely acknowledge that many did much to try to effect real change). I think everyone understands Antifa isn’t like that, some nebulous ideological simplistic “idea”.

According to the ADL, Antifa’s roots lie in anarchism, though in the past couple of years, more mainstream progressives have joined the movement. Recent history has suggested that their platform and the Democratic Party platform are not in sync, and the BBC has gone on record saying the movement is more about fighting far-right ideology than supporting far-left policy” [Italics added]. They are “self-described” revolutionaries, anarchists and communists outside the normal political spectrum. Wikipedia describes Antifa as not having a unified organization, but a movement without a hierarchical leadership structure, of many different autonomous groups and individuals. Apparently, there is some amount of secrecy built in over concerns of infiltration (concerns that, whatever their activity, has been borne out since the George Floyd protests began).  They appear to avoid violence, but that said, they have repeatedly engaged in violence to defend the undefended. While Antifa is most assuredly not an organization, the natural evolution for any successful movement is toward organization. Most organizations began as an idea. With enough supporters, that idea becomes a movement. It becomes a loose federation under the movement’s umbrella. It becomes an organization.  Some never make it to the end state, such as Occupy Wall Street. Others do. The NAACP. The BLM. The Tea Party, etc. It is worth noting that White Supremacists (rightly) point out they are not an organization, either. But that neither weakens their agenda, nor their danger.

Before addressing specifically questionable or specifically wrong parts of the letter, here is some final food for thought. I’ve heard many times “about the white supremacist groups posing as Antifa and part of the BLM peaceful protest marches who are actually the ones participating in and instigating violence, vandalism, and property damage”. This strikes me as the most base arrogance to suggest that one’s own side is, as I said above, pure as the driven snow, and that only the enemy is guilty of bad thoughts, action, violence. It also goes against evidence, among which are the many Black protestors who have vandalized. As I said in another post, to suggest that it wasn’t by their own design or initiative is an insult to Blacks and going into paternalism territory. Other things I’m hearing a lot of is that “anyone can wear dark clothing and a mask.” “Anyone inciting violence is probably not Antifa.” “Antifa is an idea, a way of thinking. It merely means to be against fascism and that is good, right? Shouldn’t we all? Why would someone so pure want to destroy private property?” “When far-left and far-right gather against each other, why is it only Antifa garnering attention?” “Why are they blamed for all the violence and destruction during such confrontations?” I hardly know where to even begin with this set of comments. It is conspiracy-level stuff to suggest that not only is it more likely that the dark clothing (the clothing preferred by Antifa) is being worn only by rightists masquerading, but almost certain. Again, Antifa is NOT, NOT, NOT just an idea. Movements are born of ideas; they themselves have moved to action. Antifa does NOT garner all the attention at confrontations, not by any stretch, but the evidence suggests that any event Antifa attends is more likely to erupt in violence (for the record, the same is true of White Supremacist groups.). Charlottesville is an example of what can happen. All that said, do I think that Trump and his supporters are using Antifa as a weapon? Yes. Absolutely. They are calling for Antifa to be named a terrorist organization. They are not an organization. Nor are they terrorists in the traditional sense of the word. But again, my post here is not about hating on Antifa. It is about being honest about who and what they are, and that must start by acknowledging its own history. [It is also worth noting that some on the right did, in fact, dress up in Antifa dress. But no evidence it was the majority.]

Below are some falsehoods or questionable statements in Antifa’s open letter to Trump. After that is the original letter, posted June 2.

FALSEHOODS or QUESTIONABLE statements in the letter:

1. The letter begins with a falsehood. The writer opens with stating it is a letter from “Antifa”. Yes, he puts it in quotations, to acknowledge it isn’t that simple. But the damage is done regardless. By stating it is from Antifa and posting it on their Facebook page (another contradiction, that this loose federation of groups has a Facebook page), he is suggesting the exact opposite of what he goes on to say. That “Antifa” is simply an “idea”. Ideas don’t write statements.
2. “It is, literally, an idea and nothing more.” Once again, movements arise out of ideas. They do not sustain long merely as ideas. There is a wealth of positions between “an idea” and a full-blown organization. Antifa is a movement, no longer just an idea and certainly not “nothing more”.
3. “Either you are a decent human being with a conscience, or you are a fascist.” This comment shows the writer has zero concept of fascism and is driven by absolutes. A person can be a perfectly lousy human and lack much conscience, and still be for the BLM movement. A person can be for socialism and the idea of freedom for all, and still harbor latent hatred and bias against individual groups. It is silly and irresponsible to suggest that everyone left of far right is just a great human being. Read above about communist regimes. Was Stalin a decent human? How’s about Kim Jong Un (or his father, or his grandfather)? Mao? Castro? These are/were on the left. Stop with stupid comments like that. It doesn’t advance the conversation in any meaningful way.
4. “Trump has openly declared today he is a fascist and he intends to turn military power into a fascist tool.” Okay, this may be not far from the mark. Trump is a moral cesspool and completely incompetent. And he certainly has fascist tendencies. However, he did NOT “openly” declare anything. The editor in me says that is better worded “today he showed his fascist colors”. Again, it is splitting hairs. Again, I think it is terribly important to split hairs and be very careful about the extremity of the words we use, especially the more out perceived enemies do it.
5. “The Facebook page that has been maintained since 2017.” What? “The” Facebook page of something that is just an idea? That is not an organization (but does have a logo and a general way of dressing). “Nuff said on this one.
6. “It is never our intent to engage in violent or destructive behavior…we understand some people are not feeling that nice.” While Antifa has no mission statement, those that have studied them the past few years have pointed out that while violence is not their first avenue, it is very open to discussion and has, in fact, been used. Furthermore, to imply that while they themselves would never think of violence, they get that others feel differently is just disingenuous. Again, it is attempting to paint them lily-white, “shucks, us? Never”.
7. Antifa are “peaceniks” and have no reason to destroy property. Here are some examples that go directly against this idea. They protested Milo Yiannopoulos, throwing Molotov cocktails. There was $100k in damages. A parade in Portland was cancelled after Antifa threatened violence because a Republican candidate would be part of the parade. At a protest at Evergreen State College, there was some vandalism and assault on right-wing people there. At Charlottesville, they used clubs and dyed liquids against White Supremacists. The Antifa group Smash Racism D.C. threatened Tucker Carlson and vandalized his property. While most protestors at events are peaceful, the ADL suggests that Antifa showing up automatically ratchets up the chances of violence. From the ADL website: “the use of violent measures by some antifa against their adversaries can create a vicious, self-defeating cycle of attacks, counter-attacks, and blame. This is why most established civil rights organizations criticize antifa tactics as dangerous and counterproductive. The current political climate increases the chances of violence.” According to the ADL, Antifa has “enlargened” their attack zone to not just White Supremacists, but anyone against their belief, such as Trump supporters, and falsely characterized Trump (or others’) rallies as “Nazi” events, despite there being no White Supremacists. ADL also expresses concern that too many people are labeling anyone one the left who is against racism, et al, with the Antifa movement. People saying things such as “all Antifa really is are people against fascism” is simplistic and disingenuous and are part of the problem. This is in no way to draw a false equivalency between them and White Supremacists. It is to demonstrate that those who believe willy nilly in the “peacenik” narrative are perpetuating a falsehood.
8. Antifa loves everyone and has no biases, racism, prejudice, etc. ANSWER TO THIS: Tamika Mallory, one of the most vocal political activists of the BLM movement, and who spoke in a press conference at the governor’s mansion or the capitol, mere days after George Floyd’s death, is a notorious anti-Semite. Or rather, to be more specific, she has used words, phrases, tropes, clichés (pick your phrase) that are anti-Semitic. She is famously pro BDS (themselves very prone to anti-Semitic expression). This isn’t a post about anti-Semitism, so I shall say nothing more on that. Amy Cooper, the Central Park Karen, is apparently a registered Democrat and donated to Clinton’s campaign and (if I remember right) Obama’s before that. It just serves as a reminder that in point of fact, even those who claim to love everyone, do not necessarily. And not everyone who is an activist under one realm of human rights is an activist or even believer, in others.
9. “This destructive and burning and looting is largely the behavior of outsiders, white people taking advantage of the situation.” First of all, many Whites and Blacks have been seen looting and vandalizing. Period. It is on camera. Second, while there is evidence that some of those arrested had known ties to White Supremacist groups, that hardly qualifies as proof that all, or even the majority, of looters fell under that group. In point of fact, it is much more likely that as with all riots, those looting and destroying property were a mixture of peaceful protestors who allowed their anger to get out of hand, rightists posing as leftists, and yes, leftists as well, having lost their control. (I might add another group, those who are apolitical but love a good anarchic demonstration, and destroy just to destroy.)
10. “Traditionally, this type of document is accompanied by a list of “demands.” Here are our demands:” The actual list of demands is unimportant here; they can be debated as a separate conversation. The point is that “an idea” does not have demands. A movement that is getting more cohesive has demands. A movement that is working toward organization and policy change has demands. One cannot claim to just be an idea, and yet have got so far as demands. That is completely contradictory.
11. “America is not, in spite of having an openly admitted fascist as “president,” a fascist nation. We’ve had wars about this. The fascists are 0-2.” Leaving aside the second reference to “openly admitted” which is not true, I’d ask exactly what we are 0 and 2 in. Fascist wars? Does the writer incorrectly suppose World War I to have been about fascism or defeating fascism? It wasn’t. The Korean War? The Cold War? Those latter two were against communism and the Korean War was not won, or even ended. Again, what it comes down to is anything those on the right side of history say, being questioned because it is either inaccurate, totally exaggerated, completely without context, or anything else along those lines. Yes, it matters.

“TO: ALL MEDIA

PUBLIC STATEMENT FROM “ANTIFA” IN RESPONSE TO THE THREATS ISSUED BY UNITED STATES PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

Dear Mr. Trump:

Let us be perfectly clear:

“Antifa” isn’t an organization. There’s no membership, no meetings, no dues, no rules, no leaders, no structure. It is, literally, an idea and nothing more. Even the claim of this author to represent “Antifa” is one made unilaterally for the purposes of this communication and nothing more; there is no governing body nor trademark owner to dispute the author’s right to represent “AntiFa.”

“Antifa” is a neologism constructed from a contraction of the phrase “anti-fascist.” The truth is, there’s no such thing as being “anti-Fascist.” Either you are a decent human being with a conscience, or you are a fascist.

The ostensible president of the United States has, today, openly declared that he is a fascist, and that he intends to turn the military power of the United States into a fascist tool.

Now there is no question, and we can stop pretending that this man represents anything but the worst in humanity, which his supporters embody.

And that is the only effect his words will have.

It will likely be no problem for LEO to identify the author of this document, who also has maintained the “AntiFa” page on Facebook since founding it in 2017.

The author of this document is unconcerned with that inevitability because neither that author, nor this document, has been involved in a crime of any sort in any way.

But, since both the “president” and the media insist on acting as though “AntiFa” is this big, scary organization, the author supposes it’s time for “AntiFa” to make a statement.

Thus:

“AntiFa supports and defends the right of all people to live free from oppressive abuse of power, whether that power is unjustly derived from wealth, status as an employer, or political popularity.

Particularly, AntiFa defends and supports the right of oppressed and marginalized people to protest, march, and engage in civil disobedience in pursuit of justice. While it is never our intent to engage in violent or destructive behavior, we cannot and will not take responsibility for telling people how they are allowed to be righteously outraged. We prefer and encourage non-violent action. We also understand that some people just aren’t feeling that nice anymore. Their feelings are entirely justified, and it is neither our role nor our privilege to tell them otherwise.

Mass civil disobedience is what happens when people say they’re hurting and whoever’s hurting them refuses to stop.

Stop hurting them. Fix your broken systems. Get real and meaningful psychological evaluations and background checks – police in some nations have to pass a more stringent test to carry pepper spray than any police department in the US, or the US military, have in place. As a direct and possibly deliberate consequence, our military and paramilitary personnel simply cannot be assumed to be fighting in the interests of the people of this country.

We’ve all seen the photos. This destruction and burning and looting is largely the behavior of outsiders; white people taking advantage of the situation both to enrich themselves by looting under cover of the protests, and to provide excuses for uncontrolled fascist elements within our military and police forces as plausible cover for killing more black, brown, and poor people without fear of sanction. The so-called “accellerationists” who have committed to ensuring that, any time a marginalized community stands up and demands justice, construct a narrative of criminality and destruction that white bigots and affluent oligarchs who benefit from our broken system to validate their bigotry and injustice retroactively. They are successful in this for two reasons: because people like you are easily manipulated in your banal, self-serving ignorance, and because people like you are more than happy to passive-aggressively reap the benefits of pretending to believe this destruction is the act of the oppressed.

This game has gone on for decades on an endless loop since the very dawn of the civil rights era, and we the people are saying ‘no more.’”

And that, “President” Trump, is your solution. No more. Get the dirt out of your law enforcement and your military. Get the dirt out of your government and administration. Ideally, resign now and take your VP and cabinet with you; Nancy Pelosi isn’t a great deal of improvement, but she’ll only be president for a few months.

You can’t arrest 100 million of us, sir, and you would be well-advised not to try. If you think that targeting and “making an example of” the author of this document will get you anywhere, you may rest assured that this author is more than prepared to allow his real name to be used as a rallying cry for justice and civil disobedience from coast to coast.

It is time for you and everyone who thinks like you to understand that whether black, red, brown, white, or any other color, Americans are done living in a nation of empty platitudes and broken promises.

Traditionally, this type of document is accompanied by a list of “demands.” Here are our demands:

-Universal single payer health care, without regard for citizenship status.
-Universal basic income WITH a federal job guarantee, under which the federal government becomes the “employer of last resort.” Involuntary unemployment is a function of profiteering by fascist capitalist oligarchs who are willing to sacrifice the lives of others for their own enrichment. It must end.
-The abolition of “right to work laws” which do exactly the opposite of ensuring anyone’s right to work.
-Publicly funded higher education.
-Robust and effective social welfare programs to include child care, education, employment training and counseling, parenting skills training, and life skills training including fiscal education.
-A requirement that functional proficiency in media, political, and economic literacy be demonstrated to graduate high school.
-The creation of a publicly funded non-partisan media source to serve as the primary source of government information, to be overseen and managed day to day by a coalition of well-known communicators, political scientists, and other experts in propaganda to strip ALL bias from official information before it is broadcast.
-Federal charges of treason filed against anyone willfully and knowingly attempting to minimize public perception of the impact and risks of the coronavirus.
-Reform of whistleblower laws to ensure they have teeth, and particularly to ensure that a whistleblower, acting in good faith, is not identified to the public, ever.

In the end, Mr. “President,” the simple reality is that “AntiFa” isn’t a thing. You can’t end it, you can’t arrest it, and you can’t silence it. Nor, in any decent nation, would the attempt even be made.

“Antifa” means “Anti-Fascism.” The only position that opposes that is fascism. In the end, there is no “organization” that you can “declare terrorists.”

You, sir, and yours, are the terrorists, and your victims are done putting up with it.

America is not, in spite of having an openly admitted fascist as “president,” a fascist nation. We’ve had wars about this. The fascists are 0-2.

Please, Mr. “President” – let’s not try to make it 0-3? Because it will never, ever be 1-2, and none of us wants to see the death toll from your attempt to make it so.

Currently, media and other actors wishing to contact this author may do so through the page. Should Mr. Zuckerberg, who has displayed plenty of authoritarian and fascist tendencies himself, decide not to host that page any longer, this document will be updated.

Best Regards,
“AntiFa.”