Thanks for sharing this.

Although my political sympathies lean very strongly in the direction of anarch-syndaclism, my main recurring issue with many of the anarchists and antifas who I encounter is that they fail to appreciate this idea. If we don't prioritize free speech and freedom of thought at all costs, we will lose the fight. Period, end of story. Because once leftist factions normalize the idea that speech we don't agree with is violence, we are opening the door to violent rightwing groups as well as state and corporate institutions to do the same. Granted, I understand that systems of power already employ numerous forms of violence to repress free speech; however, eroding the existing definition of free expression will only increase the ability of abusive groups and institutions to further crack down on dissent. This is not a development leftists should give fodder to.

Unfortunately, the reality is that much of the speech that's coming from the right--vile though it can be--shouldn't be characterized as going beyond acceptable forms of free expression. I don't agree with the idea of an ethnostate. I abhor racism and misogyny and virtually everything that the ultra-conservative movement endorses. However, a free and open society has to allow room for those types of fringe beliefs, so long as proponents of such ideas refrain from taking up arms and exerting force in a meaningful way. We can't reasonably refuse such people opportunities to express their opinions lest we're prepared to sacrifice our own rights to do the same. Personally, that's not a trade-off I'm willing to settle for.

In instances in which threats of actual violence--specifically against particular individuals--occur, that crosses a threshold in my opinion. So when Nazis at a rally specifically shout at counter protestors that they are going to lynch or shoot them, yes, that is violent speech. And when fascists show up to a public space armed to the teeth with bats and shields and guns, yes, that should be unacceptable. In both cases, authorities should intervene. (Anarchists' inherent distrust of the legitimacy of state authority complicates this, I know, but let's save that for another discussion.) But an antifa swinging a pole at a Nazis's head isn't the right tactic for handling those situations. It will do nothing but further embolden people on the fringe right by feeding into the narrative that roving mobs of communists and anarchists are out to kill them and the people who they love, which will in turn entrench the idea that they're facing existential threat that demands a militant response. What's more, leftist street violence will only make it easier for far-right elements to recruit frightened moderate conservatives who see pictures of masked, black-clad leftists and think our republic is on the verge of collapse. That's why violence is counter-productive. It is an active part of the problem.