Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by MrGilbert | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

MrGilbert

> Currently we face three major types of terror groups:

> • Narcoterrorists and Transnational Gangs

> • Legacy Islamist Terrorists

> • Violent Left-Wing Extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascist

It's wild that we've hit a point where the existence of Right-Wing Extremists is simply denied.

From 2020:

> First, right-wing attacks and plots accounted for the majority of all terrorist incidents in the United States since 1994. In particular, they made up a large percentage of incidents in the 1990s and 2010s. Second, the total number of right-wing attacks and plots has grown substantially during the past six years.

Source: https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-u...

View on HN

Yes, anyone who has been paying attention knows that this administration has been designating people who disagree with them politically or socially, or in some cases groups like antifa that don't really exist, as terrorist groups. This substantially escalated with nspm7 as reported by Ken Klippenstein.

Antifa doesn't really exist? Please explain people waving antifa flags, wearing antifa badges / clothing, putting antifa in their social media profiles? With this kind of logic, no terrorist group really exists.

There was a pride festival recently during which people were wearing rainbow clothing and waving flags. Do you think all of those people are part of an organization with leaders and "cells" or whatever? Or, maybe, they were all just expressing the same sentiment and using flags and colors and badges to do it?

I think they mean it is not an "organization" in the sense that there is no structure or hierarchy, no boss, no headquarters etc.

They might as well be called "Anonymous".

Okay - but Antifa is still a thing, it exists. There are antifa telegram groups, there were people that identified as being antifa who came together and attacked immigration and customs enforcement officers and are in prison for it. The statement that antifa doesn't exist is not the same statement as antifa is not a hierarchal or centralized organization.

Also, just FYI, one of the more prominent early members of the hacker collective anonymous was a federal informant named Aubrey Cottle (aka Kirtaner) who was a long-time Something Awful forum member with a very sordid past. Anonymous really wasn't that anonymous - it was full of feds and essentially a psyop.

What you're missing is that while it's certainly true that there are plenty of small groups working from the antifacist position, the claim isn't simply that these groups exits- the claim (by the US gov) is that these groups are organized and funded in a top-down manner. Hence the "puppet master" style operations that they so hilariously failed at running against these groups.

The idea that they can find the folks organizing and funding these "cells" is a big part of the US gov's premise on how it is going to "fight" these "cells".

It's not stated as explicitly as that, so it's not surprising that folks don't pick up on that distinction between "distributed groups who agree on principle but don't have any material connections" and "top down, hierarchical structures funded by singlular sources".

But the folks running the US gov don't even see the folks who disagree with them as human, much less as having a legible and understandable grievance. So it's not surprising to me that they just project their own authoritarian and top-down organizational preferences onto other groups of humans doing stuff.

So sure, "antifa" exists. But it's categorically different than how the US government is trying to say it exists, and that's an important distinction.

Yes, when someone says something "doesn't exist", that doesn't automatically mean "in all conceivably possible ways". Different people have different perspectives and context in their mind when they say things like that, so we have to be careful in how we interpret their words as they don't always mean them as literally as others might assume... language is hard.

Sometimes it helps to ask clarifying questions like "what do you mean they don't exist?" instead of assuming their perspective is the same as yours, and then sending a reply that doesn't make sense... that's a very easy way to start an argument.

Or they could take the effort to communicate more clearly, and choose words that accurately articulate what they are attempting to convey.

Sure, they could, but not everyone feels the need, or has the foresight or intelligence, to be so careful and articulating in their speech with every sentence they speak.

But instead of unprofessional and rude comments like the equivalent of "people should just be smarter"... instead we can either educate people on how to communicate more clearly, or simply ask follow-up questions without resorting to attacks or assumptions.

I didn't attack anyone - I simply replied that if we follow their logic to its conclusion, no terrorist group really exists.

Trying to educate anyone in anything on this website is a hopeless cause. Typing anything that contradicts a popularly held belief, even when true, earns downvotes into oblivion. People on this platform don't want to learn anything - people want to prop up the status quo, control narratives and further enlarge their already giant egos.

“legacy” islamist terrorists?

as if a violent ideology that’s been around for centuries simply gets deprecated like IE6?

if only it were that easy.

"terrorism" is a racket. Also, it is nothing compared to what US and others did to other countries. Yes, scale matters. So please.

omg whataboutism is so fucking lame

Because the non-legacy Religious Terrorists get invited to the whitehouse. What makes them legacy is not sucking up to Trump.

Interesting how Jewish terrorists aren't mentioned, even though Israel has a long and storied history of engaging in terrorism. I guess it's such a legacy that it's not even brought up anymore?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_state-sponsored_ter...

Centuries? 1900's to 2000's or is there more? please elaborate and educate us.

It's also worth noting that the idea of Antifa as any sort of organization is 100% shitty fiction.

It's a fucking hashtag (and the spiritual predecessors of hastags like email label, etc for the years prior). Anyone organizing or "promoting" an event (demonstration, protest, whatever) would label it antifa if they felt that the people who were strongly opposed to fascism would find it worthwhile to support the cause.

Yes there are people out there who primarily focused on supporting anything that opposed fascism, and weirdly some of them know each other. (Strange things happen when people congregate, some of them talk to each other and even form friendships... shocking I know).

The idea that its anything other than people in a scene knowing each other is just as dumb as people saying OSS is a terrorist organization because Anonymous released loic under a public domain license.

Yes, and Isis is a bunch of independent cells held together by an ideology too.

Is Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness a bunch of independent cells held together by an ideology... or is it just an ideology?

I guess it depends on how you define ideology, but I suppose I mean a more killing-based belief. "Rich Jews are to blame for all of Germany's problems" or "Death to the West" or "From the river to the sea" are statements with murder as the goal, as is "Everyone I disagree with is a Nazi and also it's fine to kill a Nazi".

So is Christianity and the GOP. What's your point?

Antifacist, styled "antifa," and Republican are adjectives like Christian. Christianity and the GOP are massive, documented networks with representatives and hierarchies.

So without a hierarchy, things scare you to the point of declaring them terroists?

So why aren't you screaming about the horrors of OSS and family parties?

(BTW Christianity does not have a hierachy, not a universal one anyway, some groups do of course, like the Catholics... but the baptists, various orthodoxies, and many many more groups don't recognize that hierarchy).

The GOP isn't a bunch of independent cells. It's a single organisation with a strong hierarchy. Like the Democrats. Or most Western political parties.

CSIS has an updated report. While right wing extremism was more prevalent in the decade up to 2024, it dropped significantly in 2025 for unclear reasons.

https://www.csis.org/analysis/left-wing-terrorism-and-politi...

They all be working for ICE

Looking closelier at their data, it's only up to 7/25. It doesnt include two right wing attacks that took place shortly after that:

1. An anti-LGBTQ plot targeting a Texas pride parade

2. The attack on a Michigan Mormon congregation.

Also csis states "the fall in right-wing violence is likely temporary"

Ah. The old hn downvotearoo in response to objective facts that clarify a mystery.

I would read that as an endorsement by omission. Maybe too conspiratorial? I'll accept criticism, but it definitely smells like implication (especially given the hard right-turn ICE took in their choices of "apparel").

> the existence of Right-Wing Extremists is simply denied.

It is called "democracy" nowadays.

Also wild that they're willing to just put "Anti-Fascist" in there as the enemy - if you're anti-anti-fascist, that's kind of hiding in plain sight, as if they weren't already. Simply staggering to think that in such a short space of time a country can head off the rails quite so much, but it should be instructional - whenever you look at history, the collapse often happens slowly - and then all at once...

"Anti-Fascism" is not an objective terminology to describe a stance against fascism. There are a million ways in which you can oppose fascism, most of which follow democratic traditions of the social, classical liberal, or conservative flavor.

Antifascism is a self-designation of popcultural dimensions, similar to a Che Guevara shirt. It can be appropriated by anybody who's willing to sign off on the same vague image of an enemy. I have no idea if there are, indeed, terroristic cells in the US that appropriated the brand of Antifascism, but there are some in Germany[0][1].

But more interestingly, the brand hasn't always been free of ownership: it was first created by the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) in 1932 as a part of their internal and external stalinisation and their adoption of authoritarian structures and policies, which started from 1928 under the influence of the USSR. During that time, KPD proclaimed the main fascist adversary to be no other than the Social Democrats (SPD):

"Stalinisation of the KPD began under the leadership of Ernst Thälmann. Freedom of discussion and internal democracy were replaced piece by piece by (...) authoritarian leadership. (...) in 1929 Thälmann and Stalin agreed upon an ultra-left course against the SPD, concluding that the Social Democrats represented a form of 'social fascism'. (...) The theory of social fascism dictated that Nazis and Social Democrats were essentially two sides of the same coin. The primary enemy of the Communists was supposedly the Social Democrats" [2]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden_left-wing_extremism_tr...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Complex

[2] https://isj.org.uk/divided-they-fell-the-german-left-and-the...

Vigilantism [0,1] isn't ok in a modern democratic society but if the society tolerates neo-nazis and they get kicked ass it's the least of my problems and far from the terrorism definition.

Terrorism targets the mainstream population, not a bunch of radicals.

First they came for the Communists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me

And there was no one left

To speak out

- Martin Niemöller

> It's wild that we've hit a point where the existence of Right-Wing Extremists is simply denied.

It's not denied; it's just that anyone vaguely right wing who kills is classified as a right wing terror attack. Right wing terror is constantly talked about, so it may appear bigger than it is.

Whereas in terms of groups or common causes, the three listed are much bigger. Why is it healthcare CEOs, presidents and campus debaters all be shot at (and killed in 2 of those cases) and the shootings be celebrated by so many on the left, and well into the mainstream? There's no right wing equivalent any more.

"it may appear bigger than it is"

Except that it's by far the largest in the US based on the data.

Who have they assassinated in the last 10 years?

We have leftwing examples from Charlie Kirk for speech to the live-streamed execution of Antonio Mays Jr for joyriding on leftwing militia turf.

See table here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_terrorism#Additiona...

I don't think even most of the right in the US believe Tyler Robinson killed Charlie Kirk, based on the volume of conspiracy stuff I've seen.

I know he hasn't been convicted, and unless I'm wrong, federal investigators have found no confirmed ties to organised left wing groups.

Antonio Mays Jr's killing is still unsolved.

Check the data, it's not a secret.

https://ibb.co/R4b32CWy

The extreme right massively outperforms the left, which I'm sure is in part due to the right wing obsession with owning as much stuff as possible to kill people with as you can.

Antonio Mays Jr was killed on livestream by CHAZ security — and the crime scene tampered after to prevent conviction by CHAZ members.

Tyler Robinson is clearly leftwing, as evidenced by the message on the bullets and association with the leftwing trans militia his partner was a member of in Utah.

If you are going to present two people killed by left wing extremists - the extremists should be people actually found guilty based on the evidence presented in a court of law, whose motive was also established by the court.

What you have given is a bunch of claims about 2 crimes, only one of which even has a suspect. There have been numerous reports, and frankly, American news media is inherently partisan, a lot of it is inherently unreliable and it is not a credible basis upon which to claim facts.

Let me give you an decent (factual) example of people killed by extremism:

Joyce Fienberg, Richard Gottfried, Rose Mallinger, Jerry Rabinowitz, Cecil Rosenthal, David Rosenthal, Bernice Simon, Sylvan Simon, Daniel Stein, Melvin Wax, Irving Younger

Who were all killed by Robert Bowers. The attack was motivated by violent antisemitism, according to the evidence presented at trial.

The trial showed he espoused white-supremacist and antisemitic beliefs, promoted anti-immigrant conspiracy theories and opposed refugee resettlement.

His online activity included Holocaust-denial and pro-Nazi statements, according to evidence presented in his federal case.

In June 2023, a federal jury found Bowers guilty on all 63 federal counts, including hate-crime charges.

Imagine working this hard to defend child murder by your political allies, live-streamed on Twitch when they assassinated a black youth for joyriding on their turf.

So your example of left wing extremism is an unidentified black lives matter member that assassinated a black youth for joyriding, based on assumptions.

It's not exactly the most compelling example of a political motivated assassination, is it. Given I can pull out literally dozens of people killed by right wing extremists with overwhelming evidence and convicted in a court of law.

I'm a centrist, and I'm not even American. Your argument holds less weight than a wet paper bag.

There’s no assumptions.

We know he was killed by the John Brown Gun Club operating as “security” for CHAZ because they live streamed them shooting the vehicle, discovering he was still alive, and executing Antonio Mays Jr to the chilling words “Oh, you’re still alive?” before the gunshot that took his life.

Your argument we can’t count that as leftwing violence is as nonsense as saying we can’t count historic lynching as racial violence because the perpetrators weren’t convicted.

Those are largely domestic, though some have quiet foreign support. And there’s no law for designating domestic groups as terrorist. The FBI does a ton of work here though

Not sure I understand you correctly, but in the "United States Counterterrorism Strategy 2026", they are explicitly called out as being domestic:

> Additionally, we recognize that a new type of domestic terrorism has emerged, driven by violent extremists who have adopted ideologies antithetical to freedom and the American way of life.

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-U...

Although I certainly don't blame anyone for thinking of right-wing terrorism as primarily domestic, some degree of research will demonstrate the multi-national nature of the problem.

We can start with The Base, founded by Rinaldo Nazzaro in 2018, the year after he moved to Russia and obtained Russian citizenship. Nazzaro is a longtime advocate of Harold Covington's Northwest Front concept -- an all-white state in the Pacific Northwest. Nazzaro purchased properties in Washington state for training purposes. The Base was active in Canada, the US, and Europe -- members were arrested for planning a mass shooting in Virginia at a gun rights rally in 2020, for planning to vandalize synagogues in Wisconsin and Michigan, and the Ukranian Base cell claimed responsibility for assassinating an intelligence officer in Ukraine's Security Service. Nazzaro remains in Russia, safe from prosecution.

In 2020, Robert Rundo started the Active club network, which promotes mixed martial arts as preparation for a race war. Rundo also moved to Europe to avoid US prosecution. (He has since been extradited from Romania.) These clubs have absorbed a number of former Atomwaffen Division members. Active clubs have not gone as far into terrorism as The Base, but have played a role in a number of racially-motivated riots in the British Isles and there's some evidence of terrorist-flavored plotting among specific Active club instances.

(It's worth noting that these clubs are decentralized in a similar fashion to antifa groups; Rundo is not a central authority, although he's more of a central figure than anyone who considers themselves antifa. But I want to be consistent.)

Speaking of Atomwaffen -- I don't consider them as much of a threat as they were prior to 2020. However, since we're talking about foreign coordination and support, it's worth noting that they emerged from the Iron March website, which was run by Alisher Mukhitdinov, who is believed to be an Uzbek living in Russia. Mukhitdinov claims he was recruited by Aleksandr Dugin. In any case, Atomwaffen was tightly coordinating with Sonnenkrieg Division in the UK and Feuerkrieg Division in Europe. And as it faded, some members went to Europe, seeing the Ukraine (and the Azov Brigade) as a potential training ground/sanctuary.

The accelerationist white supremacist movement is fundamentally international.

The Trump admin infamously declared Antifa a domestic terrorist organization in September 2025.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/desi...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com