- you know "antifa" is not an organization and therefore isn't one that can be designated as terrorist, or - you don't know that
If the latter, you just sound like a really big internet tough guy. If the former, you also know that "antifa" is short for "antifascist" and your clear designation of that as an enemy is also clear signaling that you're in for fascism.
We're not talking about criticizing antifa, but calling it a 1.) terrorist 2.) organization.
> Many of those proclaiming to be antifa have committed acts of violence
And many people who criticize antifa are fascists, but neither of these facts are an argument for the above.
> You can be completely against fascism but disagree with the violent tendencies of many who associate themselves with the antifa label.
And how do you get from there to "declaring antifa a terrorist organization"? You have done nothing to explain that leap.
> If the former, you also know that "antifa" is short for "antifascist" and your clear designation of that as an enemy is also clear signaling that you're in for fascism.
In particular, I'm responding to "designation of that as an enemy" which is not the same as calling it a terrorist organization. People who oppose fascism and violence may call antifa an enemy for the violence committed and espoused in antifa's name. If someone commits violence against me, or any other innocent people I call allies, then they are certainly my enemy, whether I agree with their ideology or not. You can agree with something in principle (be anti-fascist) but not support particular methods (violence).
> People who oppose fascism and violence may call antifa an enemy for the violence committed and espoused in antifa's name.
Great, but can they either a.) bring that up on their own, or at least b.) pay attention to the context they attach this complaint to?
Unless you want to make the case for labeling antifa a terrorist organization, what you may "call enemy" or "disagree with" some or all aspects of what you may or may not consider antifa is simply not relevant. The strong ["antifa is a terrorist organization"] has been made, it's on the table; and you're defending an infinitely weaker claim nobody even hinted at disagreeing with, apropos nothing.
Without a clear argument as to why antifa is a.) an organization and b.) as such terrorist, I don't think you can. It's like saying "Jews start all wars, I'm against antisemitism".
I'm not interested in debating whether or not antifa is a terrorist organization, and doing so is not necessary to support the point I am making. All I am saying is that some people may have a different understanding of antifa, and believe antifa is a terrorist organization not for its stance against fascism, but for its violent methods. These same people may be completely against fascism but oppose those labeled antifa for the baggage associated with such a label.
The root issue is the implication that being antifa is nothing more than being against fascism. If that were true, then I agree with you. But it's not. The antifa label has become associated with political violence (just read the Wikipedia article). To most people, it no longer means simply being against fascism, but also has associations to antifa's violent methods. Many of the debates about antifa, and I think also this one, stem from the fact that people have different understandings of what antifa actually means. I think it is deceptive to pretend that antifa means nothing more than being against fascism, in the current political context. Perhaps it meant that in the past, but that is not the common understanding anymore.
If course most of this that are in or support antifa are well intentioned and not probe to violence. There are also enough influencers and leadership, or what passes for it in the ranks that insight a lot of damage.
It's not dissimilar from the various socialist groups in early 20th century Russia, and has some of the same origins.
For dissenting opinions, I'm not a fan of fascism or communism. They are responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths.
While there are violent white nationalist groups, antifa otherness them by a massive amount… over 70:1 iirc.
It's not even remotely the same. "Antifa" is not "confederated" in any way. It's a value position and nothing more. If you are against fascism, you are "antifa".
Also, if that's all there is to it, why are there branded merchandise, flags and organizations around antifa? Where does the funding for the antifa actions come from?
Surely anyone can be inconsistent, ignorant or a hypocrite in their profession of any belief.
> Also, if that's all there is to it, why are there branded merchandise, flags and organizations around antifa?
Because in capitalism, someone will commodify everything?
> Where does the funding for the antifa actions come from?
It's unclear what you mean by "antifa actions".
If you mean protests, they're not funded at all. People who are anti-fascist attend these demonstrations because they feel personally compelled to speak out about racist injustice.
If you mean things like bail funds, organizations working on racial justice and other causes attractive to anti-fascists... we donate to them, at least those of us who have the means.
Antifa equates capitalism to fascism as something that must be stopped, the governments and police of included. And that violent means are acceptable to those goals.
Who paid for the stacks of bricks conveniently placed throughout the protest areas? Who is ambusing and killing cops in various cities? This behavior should not be encouraged or excused.
Looting or rioting may be protests, depending on whether they're performed in protest or for some other purpose.
> Antifa equates capitalism to fascism as something that must be stopped, the governments and police of included. And that violent means are acceptable to those goals.
No, it doesn't. You will certainly find some folks who have the believes you're describing, but antifa does not inherently take any of those positions. It only takes the position of opposition to fascism. It leaves the definition of fascism ambiguous, and there are quite a wide range of definitions people use. Antifa takes no position on violence whatsoever.
> Who paid for the stacks of bricks conveniently placed throughout the protest areas?
In some cases, cops. In many other cases, the stories are completely made up.
> Who is ambusing and killing cops in various cities?
No clue.
> This behavior should not be encouraged or excused.
Not sure where you got the impression I was encouraging or excusing this or any behavior other than understanding that antifa is not an organization and its only criteria is opposition to fascism.
In my mind, the violent Antifa types, which are prominent, are very similar to Jihadist minded islamic extremists. And classifying them as a terrorist group is not much different than ISIS as a terrorist group.
Antifa considers capitalist governments as fascist. They consider fascism to be violent in and of itself and violent means to overthrow fascism is ergo justified. They consider any organization that serves to protect, serve or enforce a fascist government (police, fd, etc) as fascist and that they should also be violently opposed.
It's ironic that you can burn down a business and the political infrastructure says it's fine, yet try to open your salon or attend a church mass and your arrested.