Jump to content

Talk:Antifa (United States)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Friedbyrd (talk | contribs) at 22:16, 23 August 2024 (→Extremist organization: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Pacific Beach Events

Please don't re-open discussions that have been dead for a month. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 15:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Is the Pacific Beach "antifa trial" being covered anywhere on Wikipedia?

So many sources: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/03/17/san-diego-antifa-trial-also-scrutinizes-right-wing-media-andy-ngo/11482238002/ https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2024/mar/05/stringers-antifa-asks-for-names-of-embedded-cops-in-pacific-beach-violence/ https://www.kpbs.org/news/politics/2024/05/03/two-men-convicted-conspiracy-riot-violent-2021-pacific-beach-protest https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2024/04/02/antifa-trial-pacific-beach-proud-boys-rally/73184411007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2024/05/03/antifa-trial-in-san-diego/73563573007/ https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/story/2024-05-03/antifa-trial-verdict-san-diego https://www.kpbs.org/news/public-safety/2023/11/03/defense-attorney-asks-judge-to-remove-san-diego-district-attorney-from-antifa-conspiracy-case https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im6plFhjC_4 https://fox5sandiego.com/news/local-news/trial-begins-for-two-men-allegedly-involved-in-pacific-beach-protest-that-turned-violent/ https://www.courthousenews.com/jury-begins-deliberations-in-san-diego-antifa-conspiracy-case/ https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/story/2023-11-17/san-diego-district-attorney-stephans-antifa-conspiracy-disqualification-ruling Kire1975 (talk) 03:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully not. Wikipedia isn't a news site. Simonm223 (talk) 16:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. We can cover it after the buzz dies down a bit. Professor Penguino (talk) 05:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
how is that fair tho? It's an actual event that is happening 213.233.85.208 (talk) 22:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I said this back in May, it's June now. Has the content been added in the meantime? Professor Penguino (talk) 03:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 June 2024

An·ti·fa noun a political protest movement comprising autonomous groups affiliated by their militant opposition to fascism and other forms of extreme right-wing ideology. 2601:245:C480:2590:933:901C:70C2:C3D0 (talk) 23:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. Acroterion (talk) 23:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extremist organization

Antifa should have extremist in their description They took part in many violent atacks,from normal assaults to assaults with deadly weapons (the "bike lock incident") 213.233.85.208 (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be making a claim based on original research. It would be more compelling if you could point to reliable sources that use the terminology. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 22:43, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.berkeleyside.org/2018/08/08/eric-clanton-takes-3-year-probation-deal-in-berkeley-rally-bike-lock-assault-case
https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/professor-charged-berkeley-trump-protest-assault/ (a trusted wikipedia source btw)
youtube video linked by cbs news
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qKCl9NL1Cg&ab_channel=SHUTTERSHOT (the incident in question WARNING GRAPHIC CONTENT AHEAD)
should i provide more data on antifa's violent activities? 78.96.206.170 (talk) 09:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not interested in the YouTube as it's not an RS or someone random person's label, neither of the reliable sources mention Antifa, and believe it or not, you can be a violent anti-fascist and have nothing to do with Antifa. And of course one person's actions can't label everyone in a movement, that would be like calling the old civil rights movement because one person, or even a number of people, were very violent. Doug Weller talk 10:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just looked at your posts at Talk:White pride. Looks like you are on a bit of a mission. You seem to also be the IP who started that complaint. Doug Weller talk 10:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if you see any bias on my arguments please notify me of them so i can further learn from my mistakes
maybe i did a mistake when asking for a definition before stating its use by extremists groups but i didnt intend to justify discrimination in any way shape or form 78.96.206.170 (talk) 12:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's just as disingenuous however to omit violence that can be attributed to antifa. I agree the extremist prefix is a needed addition. The ADL sources already highlight that antifa violence is significant enough to be mentioned. Just because some antifa don't use violence doesn't mean the instances they do need exclusion from the article - harking back to the other discussion of a no true Scotsman fallacy, you know, the one where the editor lead the reader to the conclusion that violent antifa is not actually antifa. HoadRog (talk) 05:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Last year, police searched Clanton’s apartment and seized flags, pamphlets and other paraphernalia associated with Antifa and anarchist movements. He was arrested following the search, Berkleyside.com reported."
https://www.foxnews.com/us/ex-professor-accused-of-hitting-trump-supporters-with-bike-lock-at-free-speech-rally-in-berkeley-gets-probation.amp
His association with antifa is corroborated here. It's a high profile case. His use of Black bloc tactics and violence is also evidence of his affiliation with antifa. Neglecting to mention this high profile incident would be a serious issue for the writers & readers.
I would also add absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. antifa violence and black bloc in general is to make identification hard, so repeat violence is easier and consequence-free. HoadRog (talk) 06:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was it "high profile"? Maybe on right wing social media, but not outside of that. Reliable sources have mostly ignored that one event, six years ago. If reliable sources treat that one event as a specific example of why antifa is "extremist", then propose those sources. One brief news article which barely even mentions antifa and says nothing about antifa's ideology or politics is useless. Your WP:OR about black block is also useless. Grayfell (talk) 06:37, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That reply and source were specifically to highlight Eric clanton as both a political violence user and antifa member, as a pertinent example of antifa violence that editors have argued doesn't exist or is insignificant. You talked past that.
Honestly I am losing a lot of respect for a cabal that charades itself as an unbiased encyclopedia. I don't know why Ideological bias on Wikipedia and Media bias in the United States that is well documented both anecdotally and academically is coincidentally ignored when it comes to writing contemporary articles. Editors generally don't turn over stones they think will challenge their confirmation bias. I advise you not to reply to this second paragraph to prevent derailing and further strawmanning and deflecting.
https://www.csis.org/blogs/examining-extremism/examining-extremism-antifa
Extremist antifa exists
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2017/05/29/a-man-clobbered-trump-supporters-with-a-bike-lock-the-internet-went-looking-for-him/
WaPo covering the attacks
https://www.foxnews.com/us/ex-professor-accused-of-hitting-trump-supporters-with-bike-lock-at-free-speech-rally-in-berkeley-gets-probation.amp
Fox covering the attacks
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/sanfrancisco/news/professor-charged-berkeley-trump-protest-assault/
CBS covering the attacks
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/26/eric-clanton-former-calif-professor-arrested-in-vi/
Another source covering the attacks
https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Eric-Clanton-takes-3-year-probation-deal-in-13142123.php
California based news site covering the attacks and also verbatim says the assault(s) "drew widespread attention" so that quip about it being a big deal only on "right wing social media" is moot and kind of speaks to a potential lack of wanting to do sub-superficial research. HoadRog (talk) 07:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also think that source 5 also mentions that some antifa members do take violent actions, cited sources back my claim here 78.96.206.170 (talk) 07:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They don't care. There's a narrative the editors are playing into. You can't change the article to be unbiased but you are welcome to try and make an edit request through the proper channels. If you are up for it, you can submit a new article covering the bike lock attacks. HoadRog (talk) 23:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The lead says "Antifa political activism includes non-violent methods like involving poster and flyer campaigns, mutual aid, speeches, protest marches, and community organizing. Some who identify as antifa also use tactics involving digital activism, doxing, harassment, physical violence, and property damage."
What parts of that do you think are not true?
Your sources are also pretty old. The Eric Clanton one is from 2017, one individual anti-fascist person out of many thousands, Antifa has no members, the sources don't say he is even an Antifa supporter so far as I can see, just an anti-fascist. Even the right wing Washington Times says "went viral in the days following clashes between Trump supporters and so-called anti-fascists."
Our MAGA article doesn't even mention violence - but there are a lot of sources out there that show it is often violent. Do you think there's no violence involving MAGA supporters? Doug Weller talk 09:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So the lead supports the content and could use a tweek, seems to be what everyone is talking aboit so thsgs a nothing.
Old sources is a cop out and meaningless here, thats also about the age of most of the sources since Antifa kind of pettered out.
No true Scotsman is another tired argument, they have no members, everyone is a member, only a member if self identified, only a member of RS say very specific things, only if the RS says it and the person and their mother agrees, and so what worming around the point. But only if it's negatove.
Finally the broader article doesn't mention it but the article dedicated to the thing probably shoild. Again that is just an OtherStuff argument and means nothing for the content that should be here. PackMecEng (talk) 13:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PackMecEng So we don't need sources to show someone supports Antifa and isn't just an anti-fascist? Doug Weller talk 14:40, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who said that? The issue is your interpretation of sources. PackMecEng (talk) 19:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is often discussed if you look at the history of this specific article, but it perfectly illustrates the horrible left wing bias Wikipedia suffers from. Articles about politics from like 2015-now are the worse in my personal opinion. The issue is that the allowed sources on this site are voted on and they usually most any left leaning tabloid (stuff like Salon or Mother Jones or Daily Beast) while not even mainstream right wing publications, like Fox News. What this means is that most things get defined on here through a heavy left wing lenses and this article is a perfect example. Its just a naked propaganda puff piece for Antifa by describing them as moderate left wingers and erasing all negative press about them. Its not uncommon to find editors self identifying with this organization as well. I dont expect much change other than Wikipedia will lose more and more credibility, what little it has left. Friedbyrd (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question about bias from sources

I’m new to the rules here, so I wanted to ask a question. Mark Bray is cited quite a few times in this article, but he clearly displays bias towards the movement. However, the source is quite comprehensive. My question would be does this constitute a conflict of interest or would his bias be irrelevant to the information he has provided about the movement? SuperSodiumalreadytaken (talk) 04:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no conflict of interest, but there may be a bias due to his political leanings. If you think any of the sentences citing Bray's work may be affected by his own support for anti-fascism, make a case for it here. Yue🌙 05:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Antifa_(United_States)&oldid=1241919944"