Non-violence is always the place to start, but anti-fascists should not have their hands tied if more is necessary. The WWII resistance groups were more than justified.
The more complete argument is that extra-judicial action is justified when there is no other way - such as when the political process cannot effect change.
If there are no just elections, the only way to remove a ruler is revolution, almost by definition. In that case, “punch the Nazis” all you like.
No part of the post you’re replying to suggests they want to pursue or support tyranny. If some right-wing kooks justify revolution with demonstrably false statements, that does not justify their actions - falsehoods are never a foundation of justice.
perhaps anti-fascists see the fight for a just and equitable society to be more than that. the people i've worked with who organize for a better society don't tend to live lives like you see in a movie or comic. they're out there feeding the homeless, starting scholarship funds, and teaching people how to garden.
(BTW, I know people at a baptist church that many people would accuse of being “fascist” because of their religion who do all three of those things you say.)
The Nazis weren't totally against charitable works. They were against charitable works that benefitted "inferior" humans.
with things like civil asset forfeiture, qualified immunity, "thin blue line", use of decommissioned military equipment, "law and order" "america first" politics (I can go on)... it's not that big of a stretch to believe something like this despite not being entirely accurate... in many ways it quacks like a duck
"Police Chief Pat Flannelly said Officer Joseph Zacharek, hired in June, was called into the police station Friday night after claims started showing up on social media that he was linked to Iron March, a neo-Nazi forum disbanded in 2017 but that had its database exposed on the internet in late 2019."
Yay that he was fired, but how many haven't?
How do you define "appropriate" and how do you possibly justify initiating violence?
Tolerance is not the only other alternative. You can vehemently oppose extremist opinions through debate without resorting to physical assault.
Do you support people assaulting teachers advocating for transgenderism? Others see that as an assault on children and view themselves as defending kids. Is bombing abortion clinics ok? Is violence ok on both sides of the political spectrum or just one?
I'm a Jew, I just laugh when I see a crowd of 10 inbred people waving Nazi flags on the side of the road. Violence against those committing violence against me and mine is always justified. Words though are not violence. Modern day America is not 1930s Germany.
We have multiple law enforcement agencies and prosecutors eager to engage those actively planning physical attacks on minorities, we don't need vigilante thought police.