There is also an article on we will free us [1] if you want to dive deeper into that rabbit hole.
[1] https://www.wewillfreeus.org/the-server-called-paranoia-defe...
[1] https://www.wewillfreeus.org/the-server-called-paranoia-defe...
a) According to that article, what it seems they are about:
> Its manifesto describes the project in explicitly political terms. A/I is antifascist, anti-capitalist and antimilitarist. It promotes free software, encryption, pseudonymity and the independent circulation of knowledge and cultural work. It reserves its limited, volunteer-run resources for people and projects broadly compatible with those principles rather than businesses, political parties, organized religions or institutions already possessing the means to make themselves heard.
b) And the issue U.S. has with them:
> The United States alleges that A/I supplies specialized digital architecture, encrypted communications and hosting to antifascist groups and other radical movements, including organizations already designated by the United States.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/desi...
Claiming to be anti-fascist doesn't actually make them anti-fascist nor excuse them from breaking laws.
Is it:
1) Right wingers
2) People who hate Jews and glorify Hitler
3) Governments who make laws requiring corporations to cooperate with the state
At least one of these things is not like the others. Why are peaceful protests against "Cop City" (Atlanta's proposed police-training center) lumped in with violent attacks on infrastructure? This isn't the first time either - Samuel Tunick, the man who was charged with destruction of evidence for giving his duress pin to the CBP agents, was being investigated for his connection to the Cop City protests.[1]
And as others have said, what does it say about the current US admin that they are designating "anti-fascist" groups as terrorists? I will say, at least unlike Cop City protests afaik, Rose City Antifa seems willing to use violence to accomplish their goals.[2]
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/23/cop-city-pro...
[2]: https://rosecityantifa.org/articles/statment-on-strategy-and...
> on energy infrastructure
that's not violence
I get your point though. There's a strong push to characterize destruction of property as violence, as part of a push to delegitimize protest. To some people, the police can use physical violence against people to stop a protest and that's okay, whereas if the protestors so much as throw a brick through a window, they're violent extremists.