Organized does not necessarily mean brimming with marketing material about their organizational structure. Antifa obviously has members and planning. They make great effort to counter who they perceive to be their political rivals. Analyzing from the outside, I imagine they would prefer their structure remain as opaque as possible for pragmatic reasons. I can’t point you to a “starter link” of my local Catholics; yet they exist and are organized.
Your curt inquiry should be directed at journalists, who for whatever reason are delinquent in their duty to investigate this organization.
So was your comment supposed to be cute? An invitation to a purported dead-end investiture? I assume you think yourself adjacent politically to Antifa. I find that most “fellow-travelers” tend to be the most vocal defenders of them online. Would you be this cavalier and flippant if your political rivals were doing the same thing Antifa is doing but for the opposite political “team?”
Just a thought.
1) no source confirming the existence of such an organization exists but-
2) that this absence is due to an endemic and total failure on the part of the conservative media (Hannity, The Hill, Lincoln Project, etc) to properly investigate as-
3) the organizational structure DOES exist so apparently that its obviousness renders a source unnecessary.
Is that accurate? Because if so I have to say I remain unconvinced.
And while I certainly have many cherubic qualities, I think calling someone “cute” for asking the most basic questions in response to a claim of comprehensive organizational structure is, at best, misguided. At worst, one might consider it an attempt to gaslight and minimize realistic obstacles to winning over people to your POV.
Just a thought ;)
And no; it's not a journalists job to investigate every accusation out there; journalists - and people tend to forget this these days - ought to have credible sources.
And my the way, Anonymous emerged from antifa, and is probably the most prominent antifa group online. Do they feel organized to you?
Post DJT (US) AntiFa that came well after US Anonymous, or ~ 1935 Spanish Civil War Antifa ?
Either way, it bears no relationship to any discussion of either group at any time that I'm aware of.
But by all means expand on that and provide solid referenced details.
Or simply, i was in an Antifa group from 2010-2013. Not in a street occupation group, but in a "search and confirm" group where we observed far right events and took notice of who went there, correlate that with police/military files (or politics). Social media watch too. The scandal about actual Nazis in the French army came from a parallel group from mine (i was in the west, the scandal is from a similar group in the east is think, i don't have that much info).
I was also an anonymous script kiddie between 2007-2010, anonymous pushed me towards local antifa groups. And this is one reason why i went into tech btw.
Is everybodys story identical to yours?
Did one group actually spawn the other (given the timelines, loose structure, and global diffusion) or is it merely the case that some members in common moved from one group to other?
Short answer : I don't really know. Antifa is way older than anonymous, but the intersection could have happened naturally, as both groups have the same "anarchist" ideology. That would mean that anarchism as a way to organize is somehow viable? Not sure.
clearly wrong. First of all, BLM is a way for a few guys at the top to steal money and live in mega mansions at the expense of to some degree goodhearted fools that have been misled grossly.
and Antifa is extremely organised, you have no idea what you are talking about. I would strongly urge you to look (much) further into the subject, and you will soon find that there is a lot of it