Antifa: The Antifascist Handbook

ANTIFA

Copyright © 2017 by Mark Bray

First published by Melville House Publishing, September 2017

Melville House Publishing

46 John Street

Brooklyn, NY 11201

and

8 Blackstock Mews

Islington

London N4 2BT

mhpbooks.com

facebook.com/​mhpbooks

@melvillehouse

Photo of Dax graffiti mural courtesy of WolksWriterz

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Bray, Mark (Political activist), author.

Title: Antifa : the anti-fascist handbook / Mark Bray.

Description: Brooklyn, NY : Melville House, 2017. | Includes bibliographical references.

Identifiers: LCCN 2017032843 (print) | LCCN 2017040858 (ebook) | ISBN 9781612197043 (re flowable) | ISBN 9781612197036 (paperback)

Subjects: LCSH: Anti-fascist movements--History. | Anti-fascist movements--United States. | BISAC: POLITICAL SCIENCE / Political Ideologies / Fascism & Totalitarianism. | SOCIAL SCIENCE / Violence in Society. | HISTORY / Europe / Western.

Classification: LCC JC481 (ebook) | LCC JC481 .B695 2017 (print) | DDC 320.53/309--dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017032843

Ebook ISBN 9781612197043

eBook design adapted from printed book designed by Fritz Metsch

v4.1

a

To the Jews of Knyszyn, Poland

CONTENTS

Cover

Title Page

Copyright

Dedication

Epigraph

Introduction

One: ¡No Pasarán!: Anti-Fascism Through 1945

Two: Never Again: The Development of Modern Antifa, 1945–2003

Three: The Rise of Pinstripe Nazis and Anti-Fascism Today

Four: Five Historical Lessons for Anti-Fascists

Five: So Much for the Tolerant Left!: No Platform and Free Speech

Six: Strategy, (Non)Violence, and Everyday Anti-Fascism

Conclusion: Good Night White Pride (or Whiteness Is Indefensible)

Acknowledgments

Appendix A: Advice from the Anti-Fascists of the Past and Present to Those of the Future

Appendix B: Select Works on North American and European Anti-Fascism

Notes

About the Author

Fascism is not to be debated, it is to be destroyed!

—BUENAVENTURA DURRUTI

INTRODUCTION

Iwish there were no need for this book. But someone burned down the Victoria Islamic Center in Victoria, Texas, hours after the announcement of the Trump administration’s Muslim ban. And weeks after a flurry of more than a hundred proposed anti-LGBTQ laws in early 2017, a man smashed through the front door of Casa Ruby, a Washington, D.C., transgender advocacy center, and assaulted a trans woman as he shouted I’m gonna kill you, faggot! A day after Donald Trump’s election, Latino students at Royal Oak Middle School in Michigan were brought to tears by their classmates’ chants of Build that wall! And then in March, a white-supremacist army veteran who had taken a bus to New York to target black males stabbed a homeless black man named Timothy Caughman to death. That same month, a dozen tombstones were toppled and defaced in the Waad Hakolel Jewish cemetery in Rochester, New York. Among those resting in peace in Waad Hakolel is my grandmother’s cousin Ida Braiman, who was fatally shot by an employer months after she arrived in the United States from Ukraine as she stood on a picket line with other immigrant Jewish garment workers in 1913. The recent spate of Jewish cemetery desecrations in Brooklyn, Philadelphia, and elsewhere occurred under the Trump administration, whose statement on the Holocaust omitted any reference to Jews, whose press secretary denied that Hitler gassed anyone, and whose chief advisor was one of the most prominent figures of the notoriously anti-Semitic alt-right. As Walter Benjamin wrote at the apogee of interwar fascism, "even the dead will not be safe from the enemy if he wins." ¹

Despite a resurgence of white-supremacist and fascistic violence across Europe and the United States, most consider the dead and the living to be safe because they believe fascism to be safely dead—in their eyes, the fascist enemy lost definitively in 1945. But the dead were not so safe when Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi described spending time in Mussolini’s prison camps as a vacation in 2003 or the French Front National (National Front) politician Jean-Marie Le Pen called Nazi gas chambers a mere detail of history in 2015. Neo-Nazis who in recent years have littered the sites of former Jewish ghettoes in Warsaw, Bialystok, and other Polish cities with white-power graffiti know very well how their Celtic crosses target the dead as well as the living. The Haitian anthropologist Michel-Rolph Trouillot cautions us that …the past does not exist independently from the present…The past—or more accurately, pastness—is a position. Thus, in no way can we identify the past as past.²

This book takes seriously the transhistorical terror of fascism and the power of conjuring the dead when fighting back. It is an unabashedly partisan call to arms that aims to equip a new generation of anti-fascists with the history and theory necessary to defeat the resurgent Far Right. Based on sixty-one interviews with current and former anti-fascists from seventeen countries in North America and Europe, it expands our geographical and temporal outlook to contextualize opposition to Trump and the alt-right within a much wider and broader terrain of resistance. Antifa is the first transnational history of postwar anti-fascism in English and the most comprehensive in any language. It argues that militant anti-fascism is a reasonable, historically informed response to the fascist threat that persisted after 1945 and that has become especially menacing in recent years. You may not walk away from this book a convinced anti-fascist, but at least you will understand that anti-fascism is a legitimate political tradition growing out of a century of global struggle.

WHAT IS ANTI-FASCISM?

Before analyzing anti-fascism, we must first briefly examine fascism. More than perhaps any other mode of politics, fascism is notoriously difficult to pin down. The challenge of defining fascism stems from the fact that it began as a charismatic movement united by an experience of faith in direct opposition to rationality and the standard constraints of ideological precision.³ Mussolini explained that his movement did not feel tied to any particular doctrinal form.⁴ Our myth is the nation, he asserted, and to this myth, to this grandeur we subordinate all the rest.⁵ As historian Robert Paxton argued, fascists reject any universal value other than the success of chosen peoples in a Darwinian struggle for primacy.⁶ Even the party platforms that fascists put forward between the world wars were usually twisted or jettisoned entirely when the exigencies of the pursuit of power made those interwar fascists uneasy bedfellows with traditional conservatives. Left fascist rhetoric about defending the working class against the capitalist elite was often among the first of their values to be discarded. Postwar (after World War II) fascists have experimented with an even more dizzying array of positions by freely pilfering from Maoism, anarchism, Trotskyism, and other left-wing ideologies and cloaking themselves in respectable electoral guises on the model of France’s Front National and other parties.⁷

I agree with Angelo Tasca’s argument that to understand Fascism we must write its history.⁸ Yet, since that history will not be written here, a definition will have to suffice. Paxton defines fascism as:

…a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.⁹

When compared to the challenges of defining fascism, getting a handle on anti-fascism may seem like an easy task at first glance. After all, literally, it is simply opposition to fascism. Some historians have used this literal, minimalist definition to describe as anti-fascist a wide variety of historical actors, including liberals, conservatives, and others, who combated fascist regimes prior to 1945. Yet, the reduction of the term to a mere negation obscures an understanding of anti-fascism as a method of politics, a locus of individual and group self-identification, and a transnational movement that adapted preexisting socialist, anarchist, and communist currents to a sudden need to react to the fascist menace. This political interpretation transcends the flattening dynamics of reducing anti-fascism to the simple negation of fascism by highlighting the strategic, cultural, and ideological foundation from which socialists of all stripes have fought back. Yet, even within the Left, debates have raged between many socialist and communist parties, antiracist NGOs, and others who have advocated a legalistic pursuit of antiracist or anti-fascist legislation and those who have defended a confrontational, direct-action strategy of disrupting fascist organizing. These two perspectives have not always been mutually exclusive, and some anti-fascists have turned to the latter option after the failure of the former, but in general this strategic debate has divided leftist interpretations of anti-fascism.

This book explores the origins and evolution of a broad antifascist current that exists at the intersection of pan-socialist politics and direct-action strategy. This tendency is often called radical anti-fascism in France, autonomous anti-fascism in Germany, and militant anti-fascism in the United States, the U.K., and Italy, among today’s antifa (the shorthand for antifascist in many languages).¹⁰ At the heart of the anti-fascist outlook is a rejection of the classical liberal phrase incorrectly ascribed to Voltaire that I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.¹¹ After Auschwitz and Treblinka, anti-fascists committed themselves to fighting to the death the ability of organized Nazis to say anything.

Thus, anti-fascism is an illiberal politics of social revolutionism applied to fighting the Far Right, not only literal fascists. As we will see, anti-fascists have accomplished this goal in a wide variety of ways, from singing over fascist speeches, to occupying the sites of fascist meetings before they could set up, to sowing discord in their groups via infiltration, to breaking any veil of anonymity, to physically disrupting their newspaper sales, demonstrations, and other activities. Militant anti-fascists disagree with the pursuit of state bans against extremist politics because of their revolutionary, anti-state politics and because such bans are more often used against the Left than the Right.

Some antifa groups are more Marxist while others are more anarchist or antiauthoritarian. In the United States, most have been anarchist or antiauthoritarian since the emergence of modern antifa under the name Anti-Racist Action (ARA) in the late eighties. To some extent the predominance of one faction over the other can be discerned in a group’s flag logo: whether the red flag is in front of the black or vice versa (or whether both flags are black). In other cases, one of the two flags can be substituted with the flag of a national liberation movement or a black flag can be paired with a purple flag to represent feminist antifa or a pink flag for queer antifa, etc. Despite such differences, the antifa I interviewed agreed that such ideological differences are usually subsumed in a more general strategic agreement on how to combat the common enemy.

A range of tendencies exist within that broader strategic consensus, however. Some antifa focus on destroying fascist organizing, others focus on building popular community power and inoculating society to fascism through promoting their leftist political vision. Many formations fall somewhere in the middle of this spectrum. In Germany in the 1990s, a debate emerged in the autonomous anti-fascist movement over whether antifa was mainly a form of self-defense necessitated by attacks from the Far Right or a holistic politics, often called revolutionary anti-fascism, that could form the foundation of the broader revolutionary struggle.¹² Depending on local contexts and politics, antifa can variously be described as a kind of ideology, an identity, a tendency or milieu, or an activity of self-defense.

Despite the various shades of interpretation, antifa should not be understood as a single-issue movement. Instead, it is simply one of a number of manifestations of revolutionary socialist politics (broadly construed). Most of the anti-fascists I interviewed also spend a great deal of their time on other forms of politics (e.g., labor organizing, squatting, environmental activism, antiwar mobilization, or migrant solidarity work). In fact, the vast majority would rather devote their time to these productive activities than have to risk their safety and well-being to confront dangerous neo-Nazis and white supremacists. Antifa act out of collective self-defense.

The success or failure of militant anti-fascism often depends on whether it can mobilize broader society to confront fascists, as occurred so famously with London’s 1936 Battle of Cable Street, or tap into wider societal opposition to fascism to ostracize emerging groups and leaders.

At the core of this complex process of opinion-making is the construction of societal taboos against racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of oppression that constitute the bedrocks of fascism. These taboos are maintained through a dynamic that I call everyday anti-fascism (Chapter 6).

Finally, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that anti-fascism has always been just one facet of a larger struggle against white supremacy and authoritarianism. In his legendary 1950 essay Discourse on Colonialism, the Martiniquan writer and theorist Aimé Césaire argued convincingly that Hitlerism was abhorrent to Europeans because of its humiliation of the white man, and the fact that [Hitler] applied to Europe colonialist procedures which until then had been reserved exclusively for the Arabs of Algeria, the ‘coolies’ of India, and the ‘niggers’ of Africa.¹³ Without in any way diminishing the horror of the Holocaust, to a certain extent we can understand Nazism as European colonialism and imperialism brought home. The decimation of the indigenous populations of the Americas and Australia, the tens of millions who died of famine in India under British rule, the ten million killed by Belgian king Leopold’s Congo Free State, and the horrors of transatlantic slavery are but a sliver of the mass death and societal decimation wrought by European powers prior to the rise of Hitler. Early concentration camps (known as reservations) were set up by the American government to imprison indigenous populations, by the Spanish monarchy to contain Cuban revolutionaries in the 1890s, and by the British during the Boer War at the turn of the century. Well before the Holocaust, the German government had committed genocide against the Herero and Nama people of southwest Africa through the use of concentration camps and other methods between 1904 and 1907.¹⁴

For this reason, it is vital to understand anti-fascism as a solitary component of a larger legacy of resistance to white supremacy in all its forms. My focus on militant anti-fascism is in no way intended to minimize the importance of other forms of antiracist organizing that identify with anti-imperialism, black nationalism, or other traditions. Rather than imposing an anti-fascist framework on groups and movements that conceive of themselves differently, even if they are battling the same enemies using similar methods, I focus largely on groups that self-consciously situate themselves within the anti-fascist tradition.

—

Since World War II has become the emblematic moral drama of the Western world, historical anti-fascism has managed to accrue a certain degree of legitimacy despite being overshadowed by the definitive role of the Allied armies in defeating the Axis powers. Still, with the defeat of Hitler and Mussolini, anti-fascism’s raison d’être was widely thought to have evaporated. To some extent, this dismissal of anti-fascism grew out of the Western tendency to interpret fascism as an extreme form of evil to which anyone who let down their moral guard could be subject—as opposed to the similarly distorted Soviet bloc interpretation of fascism as the terroristic dictatorship of the most reactionary…elements of finance capital.¹⁵ After 1945 was enshrined as a terminal break with an aberrant period of barbarism, this individualistic, moral interpretation of fascism discounted the need for political movements to vigilantly oppose far-right organizing. In other words, once fascism was understood almost entirely in apolitical and moral terms, any semblance of continuity between far-right politics and opposition to it over time was rejected.

History is a complex tapestry stitched together by threads of continuity and discontinuity. Elements of continuity are emphasized when they serve established interests: The nation is eternal, gender is unchanging, hierarchy is natural. Yet, elements of discontinuity are emphasized in the popular memory of social struggle. Once social movements and their leading figures gain enough power to establish their legitimacy, their historical legacies are shorn of their radical tendencies and embalmed in an ahistorical, decontextualizing formaldehyde. For example, as an Occupy Wall Street organizer in New York, I found it a struggle to explain to journalists how the movement was just an extension of the politics and practices of the Global Justice Movement, feminist movement, antinuclear movement, and others. One of the most momentous achievements of Black Lives Matter has been the degree to which its organizers have succeeded in connecting their struggles to the movements for black liberation of the 1960s and ’70s. Of all recent social struggles, anti-fascism faces perhaps the most difficult road toward establishing itself as an extension of over a century of struggle against white supremacy, patriarchy, and authoritarianism.

Anti-fascism is many things, but perhaps most fundamentally it is an argument about the historical continuity between different eras of far-right violence and the many forms of collective self-defense that it has necessitated across the globe over the past century.

That is not to say, however, that the past century of antifascism has been uniform. Interwar anti-fascism differed in important ways from the antifa groups that developed decades later. As I explore in Chapter 1, given the magnitude of the fascist threat, interwar anti-fascism was far more popular. In part that stemmed from a stronger connection between militant anti-fascism and the institutional Left prior to 1945 as compared to the antagonism between the more countercultural antifa of the 1980s and ’90s and official governmental antifascism. As we will see, the strategies and tactics of postwar antifa (explored in Chapter 2) have been largely calibrated to potentially resurgent fascist organizing rather than ascendant mass parties. Cultural shifts and advances in communications technologies have altered how anti-fascists organize and how they present themselves to the world. On a material and cultural level, anti-fascism functioned and appeared differently in 1936 than it did in 1996. Yet, the anti-fascist commitment to stamp out fascism by any means necessary connects the Italian Arditi del Popolo of the early 1920s with the anarchist skinhead kickboxers of today.

This element of continuity sustains modern anti-fascism. Over the past decades, antifa have self-consciously adopted interwar anti-fascist symbols like the two flags of the Antifaschistische Aktion, the three arrows of the Iron Front, and the raised-fist salute. A young RASH (Red and Anarchist Skinhead) named Georg from Munich explained to me how he is constantly inspired by memories of resistance figures like Hans Beimler, Sophie Scholl, and Georg Elser that haunt his city’s streets.¹⁶ One cannot even pass by an antifa demonstration in Madrid without hearing the 1930s slogans "¡No Pasarán! (They shall not pass!) and Madrid will be the tomb of fascism! The Italian partisan organization ANPI reaffirmed this continuity when it included Davide Dax Cesare among its anti-fascist martyrs after he was killed by neo-Nazis in 2003. The slogan never again" requires us to recognize that if we are not vigilant it could happen again. Preventing that from happening, anti-fascists argue, requires us to break anti-fascism out of its historical cage so that its wings can spread out across time and space.

Historians have played their role in cementing the divide between the heroic anti-fascism of the interwar period and the trivial, marginal antifa groups of recent decades. Apart from a few works on British anti-fascism in the 1970s and ’80s, professional historians have written next to nothing in English on postwar developments.¹⁷ The overwhelming majority of studies on postwar anti-fascism has focused on questions of historical memory and commemoration, thereby implicitly reinforcing the tendency to relegate struggles against fascism to the past. While there is a relatively ample body of German-language literature on anti-fascism in postwar Germany, and a handful of national studies and academic theses on anti-fascism in France, Sweden, and Norway in their respective languages, to my knowledge the only other book on transnational postwar anti-fascism was published in Italian.¹⁸

Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook is therefore the first book to trace the broad contours of transnational postwar anti-fascism in English and the most comprehensive in its chronological range and scope of national examples in any language. Given the dearth of information on postwar anti-fascism, I have been forced to rely primarily on articles and accounts from the mainstream and anti-fascist press and interviews with current and former anti-fascists. One reason why such studies have not materialized in the past is the general reluctance of antifascists to risk exposing their identities publicly by speaking with journalists or academics. Most militant anti-fascists operate in various degrees of secrecy to protect themselves from fascist and police backlash. My ability to conduct interviews with North American and European anti-fascists was entirely reliant on the relationships I had established over more than fifteen years of organizing. My radical credentials allowed me to tap into anti-fascist networks to speak, often under conditions of anonymity, with sixty-one anti-fascists: twenty-six from sixteen U.S. states and thirty-five active in Canada, Spain, the U.K., France, Italy, the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Poland, Russia, Greece, Serbia, and Kurdistan. I also interviewed eight historians, activists, former football hooligans, and others from the United States and Europe about anti-fascism in their countries. All translations are my own unless otherwise noted.

Yet, I do not make any claims toward this being a comprehensive or definitive history of anti-fascism in general nor of the development of national movements in particular. To the degree that it is a history at all, it is an impressionistic history that aims to concisely trace broad themes and developments through weaving together vignettes from seventeen different countries over more than a century. This more modest goal was necessitated not only by the relative lack of sources and scholarly works, but by a tight deadline. This book was researched and written over a relatively short period in order to make its contributions available as soon as possible amid the tumultuous climate of the early Trump era. Therefore, this book is an example of history, politics, and theory on the run. It prioritizes the immediate need to make available the insights and experiences of current and former anti-fascists from two continents over waiting years for more expansive studies. Such works are, of course, vitally necessary and hopefully many will be written in the future that will greatly eclipse what this book has to offer.

Although historians usually attempt to preserve at least the facade of neutrality when analyzing their historical subjects, I agree with the historian Dave Renton that one cannot be balanced when writing about fascism, there is nothing positive to be said of it.¹⁹ We should be warier of those who are truly neutral toward fascism than those who honestly espouse their opposition to racism, genocide, and tyranny.

Because of time constraints, I had to limit the book to the United States, Canada, and Europe. It is important to emphasize that anti-fascism has played a crucial role in struggles around the world over the past century. Anti-fascists from around the world journeyed to Spain to fight