Antifa and the KKK Are Doppelgangers, and the Federal Government Should Go After the Former Like it Did the Latter
Trump declared Antifa a terrorist organization. Which–I hope you are seated before you read this–sent Democrats into paroxysms of rage. Because Antifa doesn’t exist!
NY Representative and all around scumbag Daniel Goldman’s take is representative:
But of course Goldman is just one in a long line of Dems who have denied Antifa’s existence, and claimed that Antifa is merely an idea. These include Joe Biden, Jerold Nadler, and Christopher Wray among many others. (And yes, I definitely peg Wray as a Democrat).
Of course Antifa exists. It was on the streets of Eugene, Oregon yesterday:
There’s even a handy “handbook”:
(That by the way is another scumbag, Keith Ellison, Attorney General of the People’s Republic of Minnesota).
In the aftermath of Trump’s announcement, there has been much chin pulling over how it is possible to attack Antifa without violating rights of association. (Unasked is how people are associating in something that doesn’t exist). Or how it is even possible to attack an idea, something that does not have corporeal form.
This isn’t hard. Although the Democrats may hate the comparison, Antifa bears marked similarities to the Ku Klux Klan. Indeed, Antifa and the KKK are doppelgängers. The horseshoe of domestic terrorists.
The United States government aggressively attacked the KKK twice. If the USG can legally and Constitutionally dismantle the KKK, as it did, twice, it can dismantle Antifa.
There were basically three iterations of the KKK: during Reconstruction (“KKK 1.0”), during the 1910s-20s (“KKK 2.0”), and during the 1950s-60s (“KKK 3.0”). KKK 1.0 and 3.0 were identical to today’s Antifa in all relevant dimensions.
From Wikipedia (yes, I know, but this is accurate):
The Klan sought to overthrow Republican state governments in the South, especially by using voter intimidation and targeted violence against African-American leaders.The Klan was organized into numerous independent chapters across the Southern United States. Each chapter was autonomous and highly secretive about membership and plans. Members made their own, often colorful, costumes: robes, masks and pointed hats, designed to be terrifying and to hide their identities.
The only real difference is that Antifa “costumes” are rarely colorful. They are almost always black. But the two groups have “highly autonomous,” “secretive,” and “[hiding] identities” in common. Also common to them is “targeted violence” aimed at government overthrow.
You could say that KKK 1.0 was the reificaton of an idea–the idea of white supremacy and white control over state and local governments in the South. Antifa differs only in what idea it reifies–communist revolution, rather than white supremacy.
Klan 3.0 was very similar to its post-Civil War antecedent. Like KKK 1.0, it consisted of “local chapters with little or no central direction.” Like KKK 1.0, thse local chapters relied on secrecy and terror to commit local violence to achieve similar outcomes throughout the South.
And of course the US government targeted the Klan during Reconstruction. In 1871 a federal grand jury found that the Klan was a “terrorist organization” and handed down hundreds of indictments. President Ulysses S. Grant used the powers granted by the Civil Rights Act of 1871, commonly referred to as the “KKK Act,” to suppress Klan 1.0. Historian Eric Foner states: “By 1872, the federal government’s evident willingness to bring its legal and coercive authority to bear had broken the Klan’s back and produced a dramatic decline in violence throughout the South. So ended the Reconstruction career of the Ku Klux Klan.”
Although parts of the law allowing the Federal government to prosecute for murder and assault were found unconstitutional, other parts remain in effect and have been codified into US law. Moreover, the USG has legal means that allow criminal prosecution of the parts declared unconstitutional in 1872. For example murders or attempted murders of federal officials (like ICE agents), destruction of Federal property, and the like can be prosecuted under US law.
The US government used these powers to crush Klan 3.0. As a result of this aggressive campaign, it is a pathetic shadow of its former self.
What it comes down to is that the Federal government can prosecute individuals who commit violations of Federal law. It can focus its efforts on organizations or associations whose members commit such violations, or are highly likely to. It cannot prosecute members just for being members, but it can prosecute them for crimes they commit, and indeed, it can prosecute them under Federal conspiracy statutes. Such prosecutions can cast a wide net that catches many members of an organization.
Historically the Federal government has focused on the KKK, used myriad means to infiltrate its various autonomous entities, and prosecuted those who commit crimes under its banner. (NB: Antifa literally has a banner). It has twice, nearly a century apart, crushed the Klan.
It can do the same with Antifa–if it decides to. It can use the exact same playbooks it has employed against the Klan and other groups–if it decides to. All Trump is saying is–he has decided to.
What is striking is that previous administrations decided not to, and did so quite deliberately. And indeed, they claimed that there was nothing to go after, despite the evidence of Antifa’s existence and malignity that was in plain sight.
This raises the question of why, and the answer is most likely a disturbing one. And again, there are echoes with the Klan.
Foner wrote: “In effect, the Klan [1.0] was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired restoration of white supremacy.” The same was true of Klan 3.0. A colorable case can be made that today one can substitute “Antifa” for “the Klan,” and the statement holds with equal force today. Another way in which the Klan and Antifa are doppelgängers.
If you find this comparison over the top, then riddle me this: why is the Democratic Party so determined to shield Antifa from attack by Federal law enforcement, and so hell-bent on denying its very existence? Perhaps people like Daniel Goldman don’t actively conspire with Antifa, but their efforts to defend it strongly suggest that Antifa serves their interests. It is useful to have around, so they want to protect it.
An article in the Washington Examiner compared the Provisional IRA and Sinn Fein to Antifa and the Democratic Party, respectively. The comparison is an apt one. The Provisional IRA was a terrorist organization that shared political objectives with the political organization Sinn Fein.
I think the administration should play up the Antifa-Klan comparison. The similarity in methods and structure justify action against Antifa: if the threat posed by the Klan justified a concentrated Federal effort to destroy it, the similar threat posed by Antifa does the same. Further, making the Klan comparison is a simple way of demolishing the various objections that have been raised to the feasibility of targeting Antifa. And it puts the Democrats in the position of trying to deny that Antifa exists even in the face of the evidence that an aggressive campaign against it will inevitably produce.
But of course that is what they will do. Deny. Gaslight. Obfuscate. And let them. That will only cement in the public’s mind the connection between Antifa and the Democratic Party, just as their pathetic objections to more aggressive prosecution of crime cements the connection between them and criminality.
“KKK” is such a neat abbreviation. How about “AAA” = anti-American Antifa?
Comment by dearieme — September 25, 2025 @ 5:20 am
I would argue that Antifa’s uniforms are actually entirely appropriate: From my European perspective, Antifa’s actions look like those of literal, actual fascists, so a fully black uniform seems historically accurate.
That being said, the current US government has masked men who refuse to identify themselves enforcing orders which are not publicly revealed and which might not be legal (since there is no due process, we don’t get to find out). This is uncomfortably close to some of what Antifa is accused of. If I were an American, I’d be very worried about what might happen if these two groups start to face-off more aggressively.
Comment by HibernoFrog — September 25, 2025 @ 6:25 am
ICE in battle-gear is a direct response to violent Antifa and progressive opposition. ICE police would be in ordinary uniforms, otherwise. Also, they’re masked because Antifa doxes them and shows up at their homes, threatening their families.
Illegal aliens committed a crime in crossing the border. Due process is to escort them back. They’d have gotten due process had they presented themselves at a port-of-entry.
It’s likely the U.S. is in big trouble. Several millions came unvetted over the border during the Biden regime. Most of them were military-age men. Not needy families from Guatemala.
Among those were men from China and the middle east. Perhaps close to a million. Many of them came to do harm. Reports from the border said they comported themselves as though trained.
The U.S. may be facing coordinated armed disruptions within its borders. 100,000 trained men, infiltrated, armed, and organized, could cause mass deaths and destruction in 100 major cities simultaneously.
One would guess such groups would connect with Antifa and BLM, and their any actions will be conjoint.
If it happens, it may be when the country is distracted – perhaps during an election or on a major holiday.
One could expect China to take advantage of the opportunity presented by an America distracted by an armed internal siege. And perhaps Iran.
But no matter what, there are now present very large numbers of unvetted men hostile to the U.S. The future could get ugly.
Given all that, I can only support ICE in their effort to apprehend and deport the lot of them.
Comment by Pat Frank — September 27, 2025 @ 12:33 pm
“They’d have gotten due process had they presented themselves at a port-of-entry.”
This is verifiably false, since ICE has been picking up migrants as they enter and exist courthouses while engaging in that due process.
Comment by HibernoFrog — September 29, 2025 @ 3:56 am
They didn’t present themselves at a port-of-entry. They broke the law immediately upon illegal entry. They’re criminals. Due process is immediate deportation.
Comment by Pat Frank — September 29, 2025 @ 10:58 pm
“Due process is immediate deportation.”
Due process is, by definition, what a court orders it to be. Skipping straight to the end because you THINK you know what the outcome should be is tyranny.
Comment by HibernoFrog — September 30, 2025 @ 1:38 am
Due process is what legislation defines, within the scope of the Constitution.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45314
What I think has nothing to do with it. That their entry is illegal is an indisputable fact. Illegal entry is a crime. Immediate deportation is the consequence.
Comment by Pat Frank — September 30, 2025 @ 2:38 pm
Pat what are your sources for this alarming development? Causing mass death and destruction in 100 (HUNDRED!) cities simultaneously sounds very dangerous!
Comment by [email protected] — October 1, 2025 @ 8:59 pm
“Due process is what legislation defines”
Yes, and this is applied by the courts, not by random Proud-Boys in balaclavas.
“That their entry is illegal is an indisputable fact.”
Well then the court case would be very short. But by not having the case, the illegality remains, in fact, VERY much in dispute.
“Illegal entry is a crime. Immediate deportation is the consequence.”
That the courts are inviting people to come in and discuss would seem to contradict that – or do you know more about the law than the courts?
Comment by HibernoFrog — October 2, 2025 @ 3:26 am
The law is clear: https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-73000-immigrant-violations-passport-and-visa#9-73.500#9-73.500
9-73.520 – Immigration Violations—Deportation of Criminal Aliens
“All deportable criminal aliens should be deported unless extraordinary circumstances exist. Accordingly, absent such circumstances, Federal prosecutors should seek the deportation of deportable alien defendants in whatever manner is deemed most appropriate in a particular case“
Comment by Pat Frank — October 2, 2025 @ 11:51 am
Patrick, buddy — you were so close. You nearly stumbled onto the whole point (by mistake): extraordinary circumstances exist, which is exactly why we have due process. Ding ding ding! Rights and legal procedures aren’t decorations you dust off when it’s convenient — they’re what keeps government power from turning into, well, what you’re casually suggesting. So yes, Dumbo, you almost got it.
Comment by [email protected] — October 2, 2025 @ 6:40 pm
“Federal prosecutors should seek the deportation of deportable alien defendants”
Yes, and where do we find prosecutors? In court! Well done, you got there in the end.
Comment by HibernoFrog — October 3, 2025 @ 2:21 am
In the U.S. federal prosecutors are employees of the Department of Justice; part of the Executive. They are independent of the Judicial branch.
Comment by Pat Frank — October 3, 2025 @ 10:52 am
I can no longer resist noting that Keith Ellison, social justice Attorney General of the People’s Republic of Minnesota, converted to Islam.
This is priceless: “After graduating from Wayne State University with a degree in economics, Ellison converted to Islam, noting that “when I looked at my spiritual life, and I looked at what might inform social change, justice in society … I found Islam(!).(my emphasis)”
Islam, which claims a right for Muslims to take and own slaves. A rich irony for a guy who condemns America for the slave past inherited from its colonial times.
Keith Ellison, hater of slavery; seeker of justice, claims a right to take and own slaves. Including sex-slaves, of which Islam has the world’s most despicable history.
Keith Ellison, Muslim, Attorney General of Minnesota, also claims a right to rape 9-year-old girls, obtain castrated slave boys for use at his pleasure and, without legal proceedings, murder apostates from Islam, execute atheists, and kill anyone who questions Muhammad – a man of no objective historical documentation.
Keith Ellison: the mindless, delusional, virtue-posing, scoff-law, Constitution-rejecting Attorney General of Minnesota. What could go wrong?
Comment by Pat Frank — October 3, 2025 @ 12:00 pm
stick to the subject Pat, you have been schooled again 🙂
Comment by [email protected] — October 3, 2025 @ 7:13 pm
Really, my main interest is in seeing the title ‘Exalted Cyclops’ in the news again.
Perhaps we can persuade the MAGA press to adopt Klan titles for the Antifa poo-bahs.
‘Gerry Stein, Grand Wizard of the Portland chapter of Antifa, was arraigned today on charges of …’, etc.
Comment by Ex-Global Super-Regulator on Lunch Break — October 3, 2025 @ 9:46 pm
“In the U.S. federal prosecutors are employees of the Department of Justice; part of the Executive. They are independent of the Judicial branch.”
Since you’re apparently happy to keep spouting inaccurate arguments forever, let’s stop here with a re-statement of what you just said: Your position is that Federal Employees are free to enforce laws without court orders. Right.
Comment by HibernoFrog — October 6, 2025 @ 1:47 am
You must have missed this:
The law is clear:
9-73.520 – Immigration Violations—Deportation of Criminal Aliens
“All deportable criminal aliens should be deported unless extraordinary circumstances exist.
Accordingly, absent such circumstances, Federal prosecutors should seek the deportation of deportable alien defendants in whatever manner is deemed most appropriate in a particular case“
Further. under U.S. Code INA (8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I)):
“(iii) Removal without further review if no credible fear of persecution
(I) In general
“Subject to subclause (III), if the officer determines that an alien does not have a credible fear of persecution, the officer shall order the alien removed from the United States without further hearing or review.”
Other provisions under INS law allow an immigration officer to deport an illegal alien without further judicial hearing or review. An alien in fear of persecution is granted a hearing. But the millions of people who poured across the U.S. border 2020-2024 did not arrive with fear of persecution at home.
None of them were vetted for disease, for criminal history, or for association with groups hostile to the U.S. It was a total and deliberate FUBAR; one that requires prompt correction.
In other news, France is full of Islamists who hate France. You may want to see to them.
Comment by Pat Frank — October 6, 2025 @ 1:56 pm
“if the officer determines that an alien does not have a credible fear of persecution”
Sure – if somebody is picked up after hopping the border fence, send ’em straight back. No argument from me. But I’ve already pointed out that some of these aliens were literally granted such hearings by the courts when ICE deported them. No government employee should be allowed to summarily over-rule a court decision. This is a problem.
“In other news, France is full of Islamists who hate France. You may want to see to them.”
Irrelevant. They were mostly invited here by the government in the 50s and 60s and the Islamists who hate France are more often their children and grandchildren. This was and is a WHOLE different kind of mistake by the government.
Comment by HibernoFrog — October 7, 2025 @ 2:02 am
Do you mean this?
“SIX FEDERAL agents arrived at a Milwaukee courthouse on April 18th. They intended to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican man who had illegally re-entered the country after being deported. He was due in court that day to face domestic-violence charges. When Hannah Dugan, the judge in his case, heard the agents were after him she called off Mr Flores-Ruiz’s hearing and allegedly led him away through a jury door. After a foot chase, Mr Flores-Ruiz was taken into custody. He wasn’t the only one. On April 25th the FBI arrested Ms Dugan on two criminal charges: obstructing a federal proceeding and concealing an individual to prevent arrest. She could face up to six years in prison.”
France: probably the same mistake; made by French politicians suffering from the same Progressive mind-virus infecting other members of the Western political class. It just took hold a bit earlier in France.
As in the U.S. and elsewhere, every single devout Sunni Muslim necessarily lied when taking the oath of allegiance, whether explicitly on naturalization or implicitly as an adult after being born into citizenship. Repudiation of loyalty alone is sufficient (and necessary) grounds for deportation.
Comment by Pat Frank — October 10, 2025 @ 4:09 pm