Are We Justified in Classifying Antifa as Terrorist?

With Trump tweeting out that the US ‘will be designating ANTIFA as a Terrorist Organization’, increased attention has recently been brought to the violent conduct of the militant group in the US.

Trump’s tweet was likely motivated by a recent incident in which an alleged Antifa member has been arrested for throwing a Molotov cocktail at a police van amid unrest in NYC.

Such violent conduct has been a core part of Antifa groups on an international scale for many years. Being founded for the professed purpose of organizing against Nazis and fascists, its methods in the UK have involved on-the-street assaults, and threats and property damage against perceived political opponents.

Although there has been a crackdown in 2009 on the ‘original’ Antifa in the UK, it was not conducted under the auspices of counterterrorism. Instead, most members were charged with ‘conspiracy to commit violent disorder’. Since then, the new Anti-Fascist Network (AFN), which includes some old-Antifa veterans, was founded, focusing now more on ‘pitched battles on large demonstrations’ and ‘community organizing’ against political opponents, as the priority for many is to avoid imprisonment.

However, over the last several years, there have been many more violent incidents with connections to Antifa across the Western world:

- In April 2017, a protester in California was assaulted with a bike lock by Eric Clanton, an apparent Antifa member and an East Bay College professor of ethics and moral philosophy. The attack occurred amid wider riots following the 2016 US election, which persisted throughout the year.

- During the G20 summit in July 2017, a number of far-left ‘Black Bloc’ groups tied to Antifa led riots which ripped through Hamburg, Germany, leaving vandalized streets and cars set ablaze in its wake. 

- In March 2018, when Thuringian authorities uncovered a mobile bomb workshop and seized more than 100 kg of explosives, talks of a ‘left-wing terrorist cell’ in the German province have sprung up. Welt.de reported: ‘The government’s silence is more than strange’. 

- In January 2019, a German MP of the AfD party, which has long been targeted by far-left groups for alleged fascist leanings, was assaulted in what the police reported to be a politically motivated attack by Antifa members. 

- Also in January 2019, a member of the Portland Antifa group was shot and killed after opening fire on the police. According to his wife, he had been ‘radicalized’ at the University of Oregon and was preparing for a ‘violent uprising’. 

- In 2019, a planned bombing of an ICE facility in Washington state was foiled, which, if successful, would have cost ‘hundreds of lives’, according to the ICE former Acting Director. 

- In May 2020, four Antifa members were arrested in Paris on the charges of manufacturing explosives. 

Despite this record, it has proven difficult in recent years to criticize Antifa’s actions, as it uses a strategy of conflating an anti-fascist sentiment with Antifa-the-organization to shield itself. It is often enough to imply that the critic might be anti-anti-fascist (meaning pro-fascist) to cast doubt on his or her character and the validity of the concerns he or she might have. Combined with significant support from the corporate media, academia, Hollywood, big business, and politics, Antifa has been able to maintain its favorable standing to a remarkable extent, considering the sheer scale of its ventures throughout the US just this year.

In such context, Trump’s remarks are nowhere near as far-fetched as defenders of Antifa would claim. However, while the US Department of State keeps a list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, it is not clear whether or how an organization can be officially designated a domestic terrorist group. From its dated records, it seems that the FBI maintains a list of Gangs/Extremist Groups, but whether the President can have any say over the contents of these records (or indeed whether including Antifa in them would have any practical impact) is doubtful. In the upcoming election, however, even a noneffectual gesture in this direction could earn Trump extra support, as 49% of likely US voters agree with his sentiment on the issue of Antifa, while only 30% do not.

The UK, in contrast, has much clearer criteria for designating organizations as terrorist. Terrorism is defined, in short, as serious violence, damage to property, causing risk to health or safety, or disrupting electronic systems – with the aim of influencing the government or intimidating the public, in order to advance a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.

A terrorist organization is then any group which either commits, participates, prepares, promotes or encourages terrorism as defined above.

Antifa has been treading the line of falling under this definition in the UK for some time, as its recent activities include assaulting an MEP candidate, disrupting parliamentary hustings, or attempting to shut down university guest speakers and intimidate the audience. As the AFN was founded for the explicit reason of being a ‘militant’ organization for ideological and political goals, a case for them fitting the UK definition of terrorism could easily be made on their intentions and methods alone.

Considering the laudable diligence with which every potentially right-wing organized violence is investigated in the West today, the notable leniency when it comes to militant left-wing groups can be viewed, conversely, as particularly telling. An unwillingness to disavow, condemn, not accommodate, or prosecute such violence should be viewed with utmost suspicion. If we are justified in viewing Antifa as a terrorist organization, we also need to take very seriously the issue of proliferation of terrorist sympathizers within our institutions and our culture.