Antifa is a poor label to adopt for protest in the USA

[MineralMan]

All you have to do is go to this link:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Antifa&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS730US730&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKlYa5vf_VAhUq5oMKHXZtBAAQ_AUIDCgD&biw=1920&bih=950

The problem is that the label is inextricably attached to European anti-fascist groups that use violence as their modus operandi. When anyone tries to defend the "Antifa" movement, the images at the link above are associated with that word.

It is the wrong word to use here in the US. Due to the links to violent activism in Europe, it taints the label and arguments saying that it is not inherently violent are wasted.

It is a mistake to adopt that term to associate anti-fascist activity that is non-violent. The association with violence is clear and extensive.

A new term is needed. The Antifa label is tainted and there is no way to remove that taint. Resistance and protest is necessary, but violence is a mistake in this country. It simply will not fly.

Find a new word, folks. Really.

[YCHDT]

1. True win ever they are should get something the right can't define

[oberliner]

2. There are some folks in the US who are not opposed to violent protest

They embrace the Antifa label, deliberately and are proud of the affiliation with their counterparts in Europe.

[Eliot Rosewater]

4. You are thinking of the GOP, Nazi's, KKK.

[oberliner]

27. No, I'm not

Read up on the Antifa movement.

[MineralMan]

5. Yes, I am aware of that. I would not associate myself with that label

in any way. Those people are not furthering any goals I recognize as valid. Instead, they are working toward goals I do not support, and in ways I cannot countenance. I abhor violence as a means of change. I always have and always will.

Those who are defending Antifa are defending the use of violence as means of change. That will simply not work here. Not a chance. It can, however poison any chance of progressive change. That, it certainly can accomplish.

[ancianita]

19. I would. I support antifa and their defense against the violence infiltrating provocateurs use.

My defense of antifa does not mean that I defend the use of violence as a means of change, just because you say so.

MLK said that his non-violent protestors would be blamed for any violence that comes at them, and they were. Today, you sound tempted to similarly blame antifa for what others do to them as they defend downtrodden people of color.

The only change antifa seek is the end of this fascist display of white supremacist sickness. Theirs is a worthy upholding of Western values, and I don't hold that, because others cause them problems, they deserve to be conflated with the problem of growing neoNaziism.

I abhor standing by, watching a racist, sick ideology spread in this country, and support non-violent antifa who conduct, in solidarity, a dangerous, front line hold against people whose ideology is the US's poison.

If you want a new word for antifa, do you have a constructive suggestion?

[Eliot Rosewater]

3. And counter protesters are not ANTIFA but are being lumped in with them.

One nazi in Berkely is beaten, allegedly (watching the video something seems fishy to me) and now all liberals are black clad and violent.

We are patriots, we dont need any other label.

[MineralMan]

7. Correct. They are not. However, there are those who have adopted

the label and who are defending the tactics of Antifa by association. It's a bad idea. A different label is needed. Antifa is tainted by violence and cannot be separated from the violent actions done in the name of Antifa.

[ancianita]

20. Labels are important. So what have you come up with?

[MineralMan]

30. Identifying a problem is the first step.

I don't have a replacement label. Perhaps one is not needed. We already have Resist! and others. We also have Antifa, and people are using it widely. I think that is a mistake. I am not part of any such movement at this time. My days of active street activism are behind me. I'm no longer able to participate in the way I used to.

My post is about the flaw in using a label that comes from a violent movement in Europe. And there's no mistake about the violence associated with that label, as the images at my Google search makes abundantly clear.

Is it my job to find a new label? I don't think so. I don't even think a label is needed, really. Labels are limiting and often exclusive of some groups who share a goal. So, if you want to create one, as you have tried to do downthread, please be my guest.

[Thomas Hurt]

6. exactly, the right has learned this simple fact....why do you think they use terms like...

tea party, globalist and alt-right...because they don't carry the far right baggage of nazi, KKK or Jew.

[MineralMan]

8. Following in the right's footsteps is a poor choice, I believe.

Behaving as the far right does, too, is the wrong choice. We cannot win by being exactly like the people we are fighting.

[Hortensis]

9. "Due to the links to violent activism in Europe" -- Yes. To people prone to

extremism and thus vulnerable to being swept up by very bad leaders. Hitler added "Socialist" to the name of his party specifically to sucker left-wing fools into supporting his rise to power. And some did.

[MineralMan]

10. The European Antifa is not in the business of creating solidarity.

It is in the violence and anarchy business. It will attack anyone who does not support the movement. It is a contradiction.

Here in the United States, we should find our own label for opposing fascism. We should not use someone else's label.

The associations are all wrong for an American movement.

Violent anarchy is not compatible with freedom. It is a totalitarian, destructive model. It is quite simply wrong.

[Expecting Rain]

12. Liberals and Progressives should be (and are) on the front lines of opposing Nazis

But we should not have common cause with Antifa or give over to this violent and anti-liberal movement.

We Democrats should be ultra-clear about that IMO.

[MineralMan]

14. Yes. Exactly.

[Hortensis]

15. Absolutely agree. Antifa is being used the same way "radical liberal" whatever

was in the 1980s and 1990s to smear us all as, at best, irrational extremists with ties to dangerous extremists. This is a very deliberate, and obviously very professional and well funded campaign.

[Expecting Rain]

11. Oberliber is correct in saying there are some folks in the US who are not opposed to violent protest

Less passively, and (more accurately) one can say that there are folks who embrace violent protest as their modus operandi.

The (Bernie Sanders endorsed) progressive Mayor of Berkeley said this week:

I think we should classify them as a gang. They come dressed in uniforms. They have weapons, almost like a militia, and I think we need to think about that in terms of our law enforcement approach.

We are going to have to think ‘big picture’ about what is the strategy for how we are going to deal with these violent elements on the left as well.

We also need to hold accountable and encourage people not to associate with these extremists because it empowers them and gives them cover.

http://www.newsweek.com/berkeley-mayor-calls-antifa-be-classified-crime-gang-after-clashes-sunday-656286

[MineralMan]

13. We must be careful not to include violent anarchy as part of progressivism.

It is not that. It has nothing to do with progressive principles at all. And European Antifa is a violent anarchistic movement, not a progressive movement. Most progressives would be considered to be fascists by most Antifa participants. We are the enemy, too, as far is Antifa is concerned.

All government is fascist to the Antifa.

[Not Ruth]

17. "I'm talking about stomping on Nazis BEFORE they gain any power"

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1856240

I think that the Nazis are defined as the enemy, but the definition of fascist aka Nazi is loose.

[samnsara]

16. shouldnt all americans be ANTI facism? im confused....

[Not Ruth]

18. Of course, but the methods differ

I am anti smoking, but non violently, for example.

[ancianita]

21. Seriously? You haven't gone first? Not once yet? Okay. I'll try: U.S. DEFENDERS

US Defending Every Force Ending neoNazi Destruction (of) Equality, Race, and Solidarity

Both words look good on the back of any shirt. The acronym here looks good on the front:

'I'm a U.S. DEFENDER
(formerly antifa) '

Fixed that for you.

[MineralMan]

23. That would be a good choice, yes.

But I don't understand some of your questions of me?

Yes, Seriously.
Gone first in what?
Not once yet what?

It's up to people to define their own labels. I'm what I've always been, since the 1960s. I'm for equality, fairness, peace, non-violence and progress. That's what I'm for. I wasn't first in that, but I will be around until the end of my life.

[ancianita]

26. You're people here, too, right? I thought you'd tackle the problem you set out to solve. That simple

Me, too. I'm for all the things you're for 'til the end of my life.

[MineralMan]

28. I did tackle the problem. I named the problem with the label Antifa.

Did I think of a replacement for it? Nope. Was I expected to? I don't think so. You seem to have come up with a good suggestion. I can get behind that label. I'm for defending against violence and disruption, for sure.

[ancianita]

29. It's also about defending against forces -- any forces -- of fascism and those they target.

[ancianita]

31. Edit: note my improvements above.

[MineralMan]

32. Now, to work on making it popular.

That, I don't have any idea how to do.

[ancianita]

35. Perhaps you can start another thread calling all people with contacts? It just might work.

[MineralMan]

36. It's your suggested label. Not mine.

[ancianita]

40. Haha, by that standard, you should have tasked yourself to answer your OP. I see what you're doing.

Does DU ever do fundraisers to underwrite projects?

If so, churches would love the heck out of wearing this label in white, which is a traditional color worn by those who want to be identified as the 'good guys' -- a tactic of both unity, visibility and message framing against infiltrators.

Probably Millennial groups would snatch it up, too. Thousands of DU donated shirts would fly into the neoNazi hell, make great media content -- interviews, videos -- for days. Social media could amplify America's new anti-fascist movement.

I just don't know any monied backers.

Anyone here know or have pull with Skinner?

Just remember. You started this.

[ancianita]

41. Crickets, eh?

[MineralMan]

42. Nope. I have nothing more to add.

Nothing more to say.

[Not Ruth]

37. MLK

May Love Konquer

[JonLP24]

22. That's up to the Antifa what label to use

I'm not a member so this isn't relevant to me.

[oasis]

24. Gandhi, Martin Luther King. That's how it's done.

Violence gets us nowhere fast.

[MineralMan]

25. Oh, violence gets us somewhere - It gets us more violence.

I don't think that's a good goal, frankly. You're right. The path of non-violent protest is a long one that has worked effectively. The path of violence is equally long, but has a poor record of success, overall, as a minority movement for a major goal.

[dembotoz]

33. We should not let others define what we r called

Because we then become bonded to the names previous transgressions.
If called antifa perhaps say not connected to Europe just a good old American upset by the Nazis and Klan gop

[MineralMan]

34. Labels actually do generate meaning through actions.

Antifa does mean something. What it has come to mean is not a good thing, but it has accumulated meaning.

In fact, that meaning is pretty well established, which makes taking it up in another way probably won't work and will only make whatever you're doing misunderstood.

It's dangerous to adopt labels that already have a meaning you do not wish to have attached to yourself.

[dembotoz]

38. But with label ur actions are defined by that label

Example
Bad test grade 2 kids
Kid 1normal... Joey had a bad day
Kid2 slow...well what did you expect...mark is a retard...

Same score widely different interpretation

If Gandhi was labeled as antifa he would be considered a thug

[MineralMan]

39. You know, I don't read textish very well.

Sorry.

[melman]

43. You know those pics in google images

don't just pop up there by themselves. They all have sources.

And if you take the time to look at where they're coming from, it's almost all right wing sites pushing an agenda. So if you're suggesting we all have to buy into the way those site present things...well I'd rather not.

[maxsolomon]

44. Your post prompted me to go on FB and "like" Emerald City & Rose City Antifa

This "free speech" campaign of the Right Wing is designed to provoke conflict - that's why they're doing it in Liberal Bastions like Berkeley and Seattle. Its a deliberate attempt to discredit and smear Progressives as violent Marxists.

If Antifa doesn't start the violence, the Right is happy to do it themselves and then blame the Left for self-defense. See Charlottesville, see Seattle.

I suggest you read up on Joshua Dukes, who was shot by Elizabeth Hokoana at the Univ of Washington for taking pepper spray being deployed by Mark Hokoana on Inauguration Day. He nearly died.