Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This administration is on a witch hunt for anything they can identify as "antifa" when no such central organization insists. Instead it's being used as an over broad label to attack organized opposition to it's broadly unpopular policy agenda.

(If you're opposed to antifascists what does that make you?)



> (If you're opposed to antifascists what does that make you?

You cant judge a group by its name. Otherwise, Make America Great Again is great, the National Socialist German Workers' party seems fine, etc.


It's not an organized group. It's a label being used as a cudgel to attack anyone who doesn't like the current president (who also happens to have the world's most fragile ego/thinnest skin/whatever his soul crushing pathology actually is).


It's not a group. There are several smaller orgs that call themselves antifascist but there's no such centralized group or political structure. It's not even a specific ideology. It's just oppositional to fascism


So, its not a group, its just multiple groups with the same label. My point stands. You cant just believe what someone labels themselves as, nor what others label them as. I never called them a centralized group.


If you're opposed to one antifascist group you're just opposed to that group. But if you're opposed to all antifascism, then you're a fascist. The American government didn't just designate this group as terrorists, but additional designated all antifascism as terrorism.


The word is being used descriptively. Opposing the National Socialist German Worker's Party doesn't mean you oppose socialists, because those aren't socialists. You could have said that a/i isn't antifascist, but you didn't say that.


I didnt say they weren't antifacist because its both irrelevant to my point and i dont know nearly enough about them to claim so.


In the case of antifa, the content and the label are congruent. They are, literally and practically, anti fascist. That's not the case for the NSDAP.


> when no such central organization insists

No any such organization exists. It is a movement, and a description one can describe one's self or actions: "anti-fascist".

But of course, their logic for sanctioning-by-association would mean that they all - Trump, Bessent, Rubio etc. - with their innumerable contacts with "violent terrorist groups and regimes" everywhere around the world, and just themselves really - should have been sanctioned, arrested, tried, or just disposed of like the US does with so many it dislikes.


Yes. The president fomented a violent insurrection and then pardoned its participants (who should all still be in prison). He shouldn't be in office and you could similarly sanction his own social media platform, X and any other number of their supporters.


Well, maybe that too, but I meant the Gaza genocide and the slaughter of civilians in Iran, Yemen, on Venezuelan boats etc.


Or the long tail of bodies that will come out of the USAID cuts.


What makes you think the tail of bodies dying due to the cuts will not be offset by the tail of bodies not-dying due to the cuts?


Like who?


Exactly. Antifa is short for "opposed to fascism". Which, you know, is the bad thing where you hurt a lot of people just because they are different from the "group" you defined, with the aim of spoliating the outsiders to enrich the members, or make them an inferior cast, etc...

Having to explain why fascism is to be fought against...

Ugh, what a world. Not even science-fiction writers dared to write such a nonsensical reality.


Nomenclature alone is meaningless. Is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea which professes anti-fascist messaging and motives both democratic and anti-fascist? I wouldn't assume every "antifa" group is principled and accurate in its diagnosis of what fascism is and who are acceptable targets for their outgroup directed aggression.


Perhaps not, but this administration is in no way principled or accurate in its diagnosis of anything so their labelling of any group doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt.


The fact that nomenclature can be applied arbitrarily doesn't mean it is in this case. In this case, antifa groups do in fact generally oppose facism.


NK is a dictatorship. I don't know where you got the misunderstanding that they would be "anti-fascist".........

Anti fascist => anti dictatorship.

Anti fascist means that you don't like fascism and that you are not going to let it happen passively.

(Tired of explaining the obvious. But I guess that somebody has to.)

A dictatorship mechanically leads to a situation where the governing group is working for their own wealth, thus in this case the "group" is the governing class. The extent and definition of that class is voluntarily limited so that wealth and power converges to them.

Now you see it? Yes that is a fascism, meaning that:

dictatorship => fascism

And the reverse stems from the "groupism" (i.e. tribalism) of fascism, which entails that you need exclude large portions of the population from the political system.

As this "group" definition becomes narrower and narrower (in order to make more wealth converge to the alleged "true humans" of its center), it becomes a harsher and harsher dictatorship, and finally a strongman regime.

fascism => dictatorship


The point is that people who proclaim themselves "antifa", be they in dictatorial power over half of Korea, or merely a band of organized activists, are not automatically due credibility and trust because of some grammatical fixation that magically guarantees alignment. Do you only become skeptical when the message is twisted after winning power?

"Antifa" factions in the Spanish Civil War ultimately did not win and accidentally enable a Spanish DPRK, but they still were perfectly capable of being and doing evil, such as committing mass rape and shooting of nuns.


You are assigning this magical reality and then getting mad about it.

Anti-fascists are not concerned with the magical weight of this in-group designation. They are concerned with all things non-fascist.


What somebody says != what somebody does.

If somebody says something nice and does nothing, that's good.

If at the same time somebody does something bad, that's bad.

That does not remove the evaluation (nice or bad) of the speech alone.

Saying "I am against this thing that is objectively despicable" is GOOD.

So, saying to be anti fascist is good.

Saying to be anti fascist and doing fascist things is bad.

I don't know how much more obvious things I am supposed to explain...

I guess there is no limit to it.


And you are factually wrong.

You are probably thinking about the Communist factions among the Republican forces opposed to Franco.

ALL of the Republican factions were opposed to Franco and to fascism, not only the Communists.

And, besides, nobody was calling themselves "antifa" at that time, because that was damn obvious that if you were in the Resistance, you were opposed to that despicable tyrant. But they were absolutely anti fascists, all of them and not only the Communists.


Are we talking about antifa or are we talking about all people who proclaim to be antifa?


[flagged]


And if a Christian group is doing Demonic stuff that's a problem.

And seeing slop where there is not, you are being rude to me without purpose.

Not everybody is born in an English-speaking country.

I laid down the ideas logically, maybe that is what sounded foreign to you.

By the way you are the person writing nonsensical stuff such as "Antifa is a terrorist organization", while everybody is repeating tirelessly that it is just an adjective meaning to be opposed to fascism:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49483072


The Democratic People's Republic of Korea isn't a democratic people's republic. I don't have to say I oppose democratic people's republics in order to oppose the DPRK, because they aren't one. If I did say that I oppose democratic people's republics, wouldn't that seem mighty suspicious to you? Maybe an indicator that I was a fascist or monarchist?


[flagged]


Opposing someone who happens to be anti-fascist doesn't make you anti-anti-fascist or fascist any more than opposing someone who is blue makes you anti-blue or yellow.

However if I say all blue are terrorists and it's legal to shoot blue on sight. Then I'm anti-blue. If I say all anti-blue are terrorists and it's legal to shoot anti-blue on sight, then I'm very pro-blue. It doesn't matter if there's a bunch of green over there calling itself blue. If I meant the green calling itself blue was terrorists, then I would have said that.


yes, that's exactly my point


Trump's doing the latter thing. He's said all anti-blue are terrorists. He's not opposing specific anti-blue people except when an example is needed. That makes him pro-blue.


While we're doing hypotheticals, what does Elon Musk's destruction of USAID and the downstream deaths resulting from it make him?


If someone is opposed to Communism they should oppose Communism, not anti-fascism. Seems pretty straightforward

Oddly the US is very cozy with some modern Communists!


[flagged]


This is a terrible take.

Were the Allied powers antifascist?


Biggest antifa "rally" in history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normandy_landings


Sorry but antifa does not get to claim the allied powers


What does that actually mean? This sentence only makes sense to me if antifa is a person




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: