4 ms·

I just saw that president Trump is thinking about prescribing 'Antifa' as a terrorist organisation and saying that he's 'not sure' their 1st amendment rights sh

I just saw that president Trump is thinking about prescribing 'Antifa' as a terrorist organisation and saying that he's 'not sure' their 1st amendment rights should apply. I'd be a little more concerned about the state of US at this point.

gampleman 1y ago
We've already done that in the UK with a certain pro-palestine organization.
NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago
Trump is just one man and he won't last much longer. Also, declaring "Antifa" a terrorist organization might make sense. The U.K. is waaaaaaay further along in this direction. Wrongthink on a social media post? Jail. They arrest 30 people a day for this: https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/05/15/britains-police-are-restricting-speech-in-worrying-ways https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/05/15/britains-police... ( https://archive.is/vaCkJ https://archive.is/vaCkJ )
- NaomiLehman 1y ago
  Declaring "Antifa" a terrorist organization makes as much sense as declaring "MAGA" a terrorist organization
  - NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago
    I don't actually know what "Antifa" is, if it is in fact anything specific (rather than, e.g., a banner used by many and disparate groups--maybe that was your concern?). What I did mean is that declaring certain organizations to be terrorist organizations (HAMAS, Al-Qaeda, etc.) seems to be well within the remit of the executive branch.
    - NaomiLehman 1y ago
      Antifa is not an organization. It's an ideology. There are groups that call themselves anti-fascists, which have different views and methods, and there is no HQ they answer to. Just like MAGA. Another example: banning zionism/antizionism or banning racism. It can't work like that. The focus has to be on criminal acts committed by individuals, regardless of their ideological affiliation. Banning an ideology would be a direct and fundamental attack on the 1st amendment of the constitution. It would lead to "guilt by association." A concept the Supreme Court has found to be unconstitutional. (NAACP v. Alabama (1958), Scales v. United States (1961), Noto v. United States (1961), United States v. Robel (1967), etc.)

gampleman 1y ago

We've already done that in the UK with a certain pro-palestine organization.

NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago

Trump is just one man and he won't last much longer. Also, declaring "Antifa" a terrorist organization might make sense. The U.K. is waaaaaaay further along in this direction. Wrongthink on a social media post? Jail. They arrest 30 people a day for this: https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/05/15/britains-police-are-restricting-speech-in-worrying-ways https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/05/15/britains-police... ( https://archive.is/vaCkJ https://archive.is/vaCkJ )

NaomiLehman 1y ago
Declaring "Antifa" a terrorist organization makes as much sense as declaring "MAGA" a terrorist organization
- NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago
  I don't actually know what "Antifa" is, if it is in fact anything specific (rather than, e.g., a banner used by many and disparate groups--maybe that was your concern?). What I did mean is that declaring certain organizations to be terrorist organizations (HAMAS, Al-Qaeda, etc.) seems to be well within the remit of the executive branch.
  - NaomiLehman 1y ago
    Antifa is not an organization. It's an ideology. There are groups that call themselves anti-fascists, which have different views and methods, and there is no HQ they answer to. Just like MAGA. Another example: banning zionism/antizionism or banning racism. It can't work like that. The focus has to be on criminal acts committed by individuals, regardless of their ideological affiliation. Banning an ideology would be a direct and fundamental attack on the 1st amendment of the constitution. It would lead to "guilt by association." A concept the Supreme Court has found to be unconstitutional. (NAACP v. Alabama (1958), Scales v. United States (1961), Noto v. United States (1961), United States v. Robel (1967), etc.)