One of the things which have stumped me for years is trying to understand why Antifa members don't look at their actions as Fascistic, while so many of its detractors do. I think I have finally begun to understand in a way I can articulate, and this has lead to several other realizations.

To begin with, let's clarify that “AntiFa” and the organization they named their movement after “Antifaschistische Aktion ” are both Communist front groups, there isn't any genuine argument to be made against this if you understand the organizations and their histories, so I won't engage in it. I suspect less of you would argue that point with me today as their mask slips further by the minute. The “There is no 'Antifa' organization.” strategy dates back to 1933 and serves the same purpose today. It's an attempt to make actual conversations or critical thoughts about the organization more difficult, which is to their advantage. They let you fill in whatever motive or ideology you like when you run around at their event doing their bidding and acting as cover for them. The ideology of those organizing and pulling the strings is never exposed to scrutiny and they don't have to make you agree to do what they want. Stop falling for it. The tactic is on the level of a child responding “What Cookie? I didn't eat a cookie, I didn't even know there WERE cookies.” when confronted with chocolate-covered face and crumbs all over their clothes. No matter how many of their friends with similarly incriminating evidence scream it, it doesn't make it true. Now that we have that ironed out we can move on.

The confusion and disagreement of terms are understandable for several reasons. To begin with, Fascism and Communism are both based on extremely similar origins, modes of thought, and are in most respects, identical in the actions they take.

Fascism was not created by Mussolini or Hitler, it wasn't even a product of the 20th century, they just gave it their spin in an attempt to seize power. It popped up as a result of idea mixing among French, German, Austrian, and Italian writers as a reaction to the revolutions from 1789 to 1871, the enlightenment and liberalism in general. To boil it down crudely for the sake of brevity: they had major issues with the way the enlightenment and science had displaced the church, nobility, and those who were able to bribe nobility as the arbiter of what was true, just, and moral in society. They thought the state should fill this function. It's just “Might makes right” with some special dressings on top, like the state cloaking itself in the mantle of the church. The idea of family was to be rigidly controlled by the state in an effort to maintain power.

Communism on the other had is Karl Marx's paint slapped on ideas about socialism which date back as far as we have recorded history. Karl ALSO hated liberalism and the enlightenment for the same reason, he wanted the state to rule over all domains of truth, justice, and morality. Marx also believed ultimately in “Might Makes Right” with his special dressings on top. Rather than cloaking the state in an existing religion, he would abolish religion and make the state serve that function as well. The idea of family labeled as one of the traditionalist ideas which had to be destroyed as it threatened the power of the state.

Both ideologies believe that “There is no truth other than that which I can enforce on others at gunpoint.” Both believe that individual humans should be utterly subservient to the state. Both believe it's not just OK but necessary to violently silence any who descent, which is to say, the soul of each is utterly authoritarian. Both are against science, logic, objectivity, individual liberty, and liberalism. Each has its dogmatic propaganda campaigns to keep the average citizen in line. Each still uses state power structures to create an underclass and a ruling class. They both fight for ideologies that are older than dirt.

The REAL difference is all in the dressing and how they style themselves. Fascism sought to protect the power structures of the middle ages. They loved trappings and tags like Royalty, nobility, and religion and wanted to use them for their leadership. Communism on the other hand replaces those trappings with poorly defined things like “the people” “the workers” etc which ultimately mean the same thing, only they don't carry DIRECT hereditary implications.

Because of this simple divorce from the TRAPPINGS of older thought and organizations, they proclaim their ideology to be wholly new, and thus define themselves as “fighting against traditionalism.” Their belief in no objective truth shields them from the fact that their ideology is rooted in significantly older and more traditionalist thoughts than what they claim to fight. Apart from the trappings they have chosen to slap on, “might makes right” is still the core, and it's still caveman thinking. Articulating that thought was, in all likelihood, humanity's first philosophical act.

Once you understand this, the implications are HUGE. Just one small example, “If you're not with us you're against us” is a patently absurd argument UNLESS you believe that might makes right, in which case it makes absolute sense. If you believe that lie, anybody who is not actively supporting you is muddying the water and decreasing your power. THIS is why the started calling anybody not directly aligned with Antifa Fascist, Racist, Sexist, you name it if they think it will hurt you or hurt others' perception of you they will hurl it at you, regardless of accuracy. “Might makes right” in their mind, so if they SAY your a fascist and a racist, it's true so long as they can enforce it on you. It's why they feel they can get away with yelling racial slurs at those of a different skin color who don't utterly believe and actively push their message.

I still don't have an answer for how to deal with this tactically on an ideological combat front, but at least now you know where the attack is coming from. You can also at least understand now how trying to defend yourself with logic, facts, receipts, old quotes the mob used to agree with or any other trappings of rational thought is like trying to defend yourself against lightning strikes by wearing un-insulated metal plate armor.

We NEED to develop tactics to fight groups like this more effectively, their ideological similarity means any tactics which work against them which don't require you to become like them can be used against both Fascists and Communists. I suspect comedy will hold many of these answers.

I do think I have at least one answer for how to deal with this strategically. Much like the computer in the movie “War Games” said, “A strange game, the only winning move is not to play.” Speak out, organize around your values. Whenever possible refrain from defining yourselves in opposition to their movement, but instead in favor of basic enlightenment values. When the mob comes for you have a plan. If it's only online, ignore them to the best of your abilities. Build-in redundancy so you can maintain your connections if “canceled” from their platforms. Use ideological “hit and run” tactics. Get in, speak your truth, get out. Don't read or engage in the comments. You cannot win an argument when the other side doesn't believe in using language to communicate, so don't try to. It's not them you are trying to speak too, it's those on the fence, and occasionally putting cracks in the walls others have built. Sticking around to let them pick you apart with their emotionalism, or waste time engaging with the few who WILL argue for hours but will do so with utter intellectual dishonestly as a time-wasting and frustration tactic is less than useless. Don't write your articles, posts, or statements speaking to their side trying to convert them, but don't just preach to the choir. Stick to speaking to the middle. It's a better strategy in the long run anyway, there are FAR more people and power in the middle, and they are increasingly resentful of being forced into taking sides.

Be tactful, be deliberate in your actions, and most importantly, whenever possible try to act and never react. The war for truth is never lost, so long as someone is willing to fight for it.