Talk:Anti-fascism/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Founders of AntiFa in 1932 - Stalin's Antidemocratic Henchmen

The Stalinist controlled KPD founded "Antifashistishe Aktion" in 1932 mainly to do harm to the more moderate Socialdemocrats. "AntiFa paved the way to Hitler" by fighting all democratic parties, espacially the Socialdemocrats, please see photo on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yziRK7j0Zpw&t=1050s ... Weird thing: On the geopolitcal stage, Stalin had been a henchman of Hitler, both coordinated their actions on attacking Poland, White Russia, Finland and the Baltic countries. So AntiFa only CLAIMED to be "antifashistic" but in fact they focussed on damaging democracy. Why is there not a single word about these underlying contradictions in the article? 188.99.111.103 (talk) 14:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Things Wikipedia doesn't use as sources for articles: (1) YouTube. (2) Andy Ngo. (3) Random assertions from contributors. Yes, not everyone who claimed to be anti-fascist has had exactly the same motivations. This is unsurprising, given that opposition to fascism has come from almost the entire political spectrum, bar the far right. Your assertions re Stalin are based on a shallow understanding of a much more complex situation, and even to the extent that they are valid for what the KPD did (which is grossly oversimplified, ignores their repeated changes of strategy, and ignores subsequent events which makes your 'Henchman' assertion utterly unsustainable) says nothing about 'underlying contradictions' amongst opponents of fascism as a whole. If you want to propagate Ngo's self-serving clickbait pseudohistory, you will have to do so somewhere else. Please read WP:NOTFORUM, and WP:RS. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

What happened 1939-1941?

The period Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact-Operation Barbarossa deserves to be described here.Xx234 (talk) 08:59, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

No, it should not. Anti-facist describes anti-Mussolini movements within Italy. There is no article for anti-nazism or anti-facism. CheeseInTea (talk) 17:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
@CheeseInTea: there’s no point in responding to a 2025 post, but it’s pretty clear you haven’t read the article in any case. Doug Weller talk 18:15, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Death attributed to Anti-Fascism

About a week ago I updated the part where it was said that there has been no death attributed to Anti-fascism by saying that after the study was published 1 killing has been attributed to anti-fascism, the Killings of Aaron Danielson and Michael Reinoehl, which has since been reverted. The article from the Guardian was given an editor's note says this. As well on the page itself for the killings list anti-fascism as the motive and most sources cited there repeat that. Personally, I think there is enough evidence to add, but what do others think? 3Kingdoms (talk) 15:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

It would probably make more sense to cite this, which is cited in that editor's note and explicitly mentions the Danielson shooting, rather than trying to cite the editor's note itself. You also added the claim that 22 death [sic] [were] attributed more generally to left-wing terrorism, but the relevance of that "more general" claim to this article that's specifically about anti-fascism isn't at all clear. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 14:05, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The rationale for adding left-wing terrorism in general was meant to contrast with the number from right-wing terrorism. I can see why it was removed. Should the right-wing deaths also be removed? 3Kingdoms (talk) 03:52, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
This is the general anti-fascism article. This detail is discussed at the US page which has the space to go into the nuance. Text here as it is now is good. BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:29, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
My issue is that the study is out of date due to the Killings of Aaron Danielson and Michael Reinoehl. If it is not added than I really don't see the point of keeping that whole section up and instead just link to the one for the USA. 3Kingdoms (talk) 03:10, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Sources (emphasis added):

  • The June 2020 study[1]
  • The CSIS, which did the study, blog post from July 2020.In July 2019, William Van Spronsen, a self-proclaimed Antifa, attempted to bomb the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Tacoma, Washington, using a propane tank but was killed by police....Based on a CSIS data set of 893 terrorist incidents in the United States between January 1994 and May 2020, attacks from left-wing perpetrators like Antifa made up a tiny percentage of overall terrorist attacks and casualties... left-wing attacks caused 22 deaths... Viewed in this context, the threat from Antifa-associated actors in the United States is relatively small.[2]
  • NPR: In his letter, van Spronsen wrote: "I am antifa," a reference to antifascist activists who fight the far right in a variety of extrajudicial ways — but seldom with fatal violence. "What they're not doing is killing many people. In fact, killing almost no one," said Seth Jones, a terrorism analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The Trump administration portrays antifa, militant antifascists, as the leftist equivalent to violent hate groups on the right. By most any metric, that's simply wrong, extremism researchers say. In 2019, according to domestic terrorism statistics, far-right extremists killed at least 38 people. The death toll attributed to antifa: one. The attacker himself, van Spronsen. I think this is a 2019 death attributed by NPR not by CSIS to antifa, and it is clearly not a killing by an antifa person.[3]
  • Guardian July 2020 report on the study: A new database of nearly 900 politically motivated attacks and plots in the United States since 1994 includes just one attack staged by an anti-fascist that led to fatalities. In that case, the single person killed was the perpetrator. However, a hatnote was later added: Since this piece was published in July 2020, the data has changed: domestic terrorism experts now link one homicide in the US to a self-described anti-fascist, the first such killing in 25 years.[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/27/us-rightwing-extremists-attacks-deaths-database-leftwing-antifa}
  • Business Insider, July 2020: New research, based on almost 900 politically-motivated plots and murders in the US since 1994, found only one person's death in the last 25 years was linked to "antifa" or anti-fascists, and the person who died was the attacker.[4]
  • Guardian, October 2020, on an October update: The [October] report found only a single deadly “far-left” attack in 2020, the shooting of Aaron Danielson, a rightwing activist, by a self-described “anti-fascist” during a protest in Portland this August. Experts on extremism said this was the first killing linked to an anti-fascist in the United States in 25 years. Violent rightwing actors were responsible for 41 politically motivated attacks and plots this year, while “far-left” actors were responsible for 12, according to analysts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), who have assembled a database of domestic terror attacks going back to 1994. The new data stands in stark contrast to claims by Donald Trump and justice department officials.[5]

In short, the June 2020 study clearly found one antifa-linked death: a self-proclaimed antifa person killed by police. It is only later, in October, that there was a killing by a self-proclaimed antifa-linked person. BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:21, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

" 893 terrorist incidents in the United States between January 1994 and May 2020" There were less than 1000 incidents of terrorism in a 26-years period? Wow, the United States is less crime-infested than I thought. In any case, that left-wing terrorism has been less lethal in the United States is far from surprising. It has had a marginal presence in the country since the May 19th Communist Organization disbanded in 1985. Dimadick (talk) 03:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Great deep dive and write-up, Bob. I was working on something similar, and found the following:
That's another trail of breadcrumbs from the 2020 study to mention of this one linked death (prior to August 2020). As previously mentioned, the CSIS blog post that has been used as a citation for the study itself does not contain the whole study; relevantly, the blog post doesn't mention "murder" once, despite being used as a source for the claim that they "found no murder that was specifically attributed to anti-fascists or antifa" in this article.
If nobody can find a source for the study in its entirety (which would almost certainly include mention of the 2019 Tacoma incident as an antifa-related death), then I think this part should be re-worded to place less emphasis on the study, and include the Tacoma incident based on the other sources. In that same vein, I believe the August 2020 Killing of Aaron Danielson should be included in the same section. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 20:22, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

"Several analyses, reports and studies..."

I think the phrase starting after this ref link should be removed. Neither of its sources are strong enough to support its inclusion:

  • Source 1, NBCNews: Actually just a news story of a right-wing crime. No mention of a report or study on antifa.
  • Source 2, POLITICO: Details a report from the DHS, but said report does not mention antifa. This isn't an article about right-wing extremism, it's an article about antifa, and we should try to keep it focused as such.

@Beyond My Ken Why do you disagree with this removal? And does anyone else have a concern with removing it? PhotogenicScientist (talk) 14:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Antifa (United States) uses [6] and [7]. Doug Weller talk 16:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
6 is cited above this phrase in reference to the 2020 CSIS study, but doesn't mention any other reports or studies, and so doesn't really back up this phrase. I can understand 7 being a good source for something in the Antifa (United States) article, but it doesn't mention any studies or reports specifically including antifa. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 16:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
What I objected to was removal of sourced content without discussion. I would agree that the text is possibly too strongly worded to be supported by the sources cited, but that's an argument for re-writing, not for deleting. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
@Bobfrombrockley see above regarding source 1 - it is not an analysis or study. With the soruces currently provided, the wording "several analyses and studies" is inaccurate PhotogenicScientist (talk) 14:44, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
@PhotogenicScientist, you're correct; I'll revert myself. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:56, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Oh you did already. But you've also reversed the meaning of the Tacoma shooting discussed in the previous section. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Let's discuss that in the section above PhotogenicScientist (talk) 15:02, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

2019 Tacoma attack and Killing of Aaron Danielson -- No

No, the 2019 Tacoma attack and Killing of Aaron Danielson were not "done by Antifa," that is a right wing lie. Spray painting "antifa" on things does not make someone a "member of antifa." As the extant article notes, antifa is not an organization or group, it is someone who is anti-fascism -- which is about 90% of the Amercan populace and about 80% of the world's populace. SoftwareThing (talk) 19:23, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

The killing of Aaron Danielson was done by Michael Reinoehl as he himself admitted. The killing occurred during the civil unrest in Portland, immediately after a demonstration of far-right Trump supporters, of which Danielson was one. Reinhoehl had previously described himself as "100% ANTIFA all the way!" Antifa is not an incorporated group with strict membership requirements; and earlier in this same article, antifa is described as "a highly decentralized movement. Antifa political activists are anti-racists who engage in protest tactics, seeking to combat fascists and racists such as neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other far-right extremists." By that very definition, by the nature of the man he targeted, and by his self-admissions, Reinoehl's actions can be considered to be inspired by or in service to the cause of antifa.
My edits contain no language to suggest that these actions were "done by antifa," as you claim; merely that the movement has been noted as a motivating factor in both of those instances. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 21:58, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Which was not Antifa. Read the article. Antifa does not exist, 90% of Americans are anti-fascists. SoftwareThing (talk) 22:36, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
  • The NPR source you keep adding doesn't support your statements. First, you cannot change the results of the June 2020 study - they are what they are whether you agree with them or not. Second, WP:HEADLINES are not appropriate to cite; the body of the NPR source is much more cautious and does not directly state any of the things you're citing it for. --Aquillion (talk) 00:24, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Which, again, is not antifa. I'm done arguing with fascists. Do not put the text back. SoftwareThing (talk) 01:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
The NPR source has no bearing on the study; I added it because it adds context to the single death noted by the study. Moreover, I've never said anything inaccurate about the study - as I said in my edit summary, the csis.org link is not the comprehensive study. The study DID in fact find "1 death" linked to antifa, as attested by the businessinsider source. Before you revert my edit again, I challenge you to present a source for the comprehensive study, showing that it does not mention this death. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 14:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
In fact, the onus is rather on you to persuade. We will listen if you can do so. Generalrelative (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the 2020 Study, all I can do is point to the source that mentions the study and claims that it identifies one death. If that isn't convincing enough, I'd like to know why, so I can try again.
Regarding the inclusion of 2019 Tacoma attack and Killing of Aaron Danielson, I have not heard support from anyone why these SHOULDN'T be in the article, while I've provided explanation of why they should be. It hasn't been much of a discussion so far; just reversion of my edits.PhotogenicScientist (talk) 14:56, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
I mean, I just read the study itself and do not see what you could possibly be talking about. It mentions that between 1994 and 2020 "left-wing attacks caused 22 deaths" (compared to right-wing attacks which caused 335) but does not tie these explicitly to anti-fascism. Is there something I'm missing here? Generalrelative (talk) 15:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the 2019 Tacoma attack and Killing of Aaron Danielson, actually you have received reasoning. It appears that you have simply summarized the WP:HEADLINES. I'll also add that inclusion of sourced information is not guaranteed. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS and content must pass the WP:10YEARTEST. Generalrelative (talk) 15:08, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
"someone who is anti-fascism -- which is about 90% of the Amercan populace" Is this a joke? Much of the American population seems to support neo-fascist organizations, such as Patriot Front and Vanguard America. Dimadick (talk) 03:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Not sure how you're sourcing the opinion that "much of the American population" supports neo-fascists. Patriot Front has between 200-300 members, and Vanguard America is a now-defunct group that had "200+" members at its peak. That would be... 0.00009% and 0.00006% of the American population, respectively. Doesn't really seem like "much" to me. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 13:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley The wording I used - "found just one attack staged by an anti-fascist that led to fatalities" - comes directly from the article in the Guardian. The wording you've replaced it with - "found just one attack connected to anti-fascism that led a fatality" - seems like unnecessary editorializing. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 15:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I guess I'll leave this but I'd be keen on other editors' views. It feels to me that this wording is misleading, as the Tacoma "anti-fascist" was not the perpetrator but was himself the fatality. (diff for reference) BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:03, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

End of Fascism as a state ideology

The article suggests that fascism ended as a State ideology with the defeat of the WW2 Axis powers ignoring Spain, Portugal or (arguably) South Africa where it endured for several decades thereafter ? 109.158.106.62 (talk) 12:57, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Those States are generally not considered fascist by most experts on the subject. 3Kingdoms (talk) 15:19, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Rwanda was also fascist. --山下宮本 (talk) 05:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anti-fascism/Archive_3&oldid=1195156246"