Antifa: The Antifascist Handbook is a 2017 book by Mark Bray that discusses the history and philosophy behind the anti-fascist movement.
Summary
Chapter One: ¡No Pasarán!: Anti-Fascism Through 1945
Fascism developed largely out of a mutation of nationalism (originally a left-wing concept) that developed in the anti-monarchical revolutions of 1848 which synthesized patriarchy, anti-semitism, militarism and disdain for the growing democratic and socialist movements in Europe. The early anti-fascist movements of France, USA, Italy
- France: In 1925, a gunfight occurred between the Jeunesses Patriotes and local communists, killing four fascists. This follows a tradition that goes back as far as the Dreyfus Affair, as anarchists and socialists broke into restaurants holding anti-semitic meetings and disrupted them.
- USA: Black groups and socialists formed armed self-defense groups and organized raids against the KKK and white lynchers in the late 1800s.
- Italy: The Arditi Del Popolo formed in 1921 to combat the recent problem of fascist gangs harassing socialists. But this fell apart due to left-wing infighting, and led to the establishment of the first fascist government. But several lone assassination attempts on Mussolini and key fascists were undertaken by anarchists, all of which failed due to many coincidences and luck for the fascists.
- Germany: During World War II and the Holocaust, numerous Jews and allies fought off deportations and attempted to liberate concentration camps.
Chapter Two: “Never Again”: The Development of Modern Antifa, 1945–2003
Fascism did not die with Nazi Germany, it instead began to mutate, forming street gangs, gentlemen clubs and in some cases popular attitudes. The new anti-fascists began to fight back against these developments in Britain
- Britain: Given that fascism was still fairly popular after the war, the 43 Group was formed by former Jewish Soldiers in the British Army. They infiltrated fascist groups led by Oswald Mosely and attacked their meetings throughout the 1940s, and disbanded in 1950 as the threat died off. In the 1950s, new white supremacists terrorized Caribbean immigrant communities, leading to self-defense squads armed with knives, guns and molotovs. Another resurgence in the 1960s (triggered in response to the Civil Rights Movement in the US and decolonisation in Africa) led to the formation of the 62 Group who violently attacked fascists.
- France:
- Italy:
- West Germany:
- Norway:
- Netherlands:
- USA:
- Canada:
Chapter Three: The Rise of “Pinstripe Nazis” and Anti-Fascism Today
- Germany:
- Denmark:
- Sweden:
- Netherlands:
- France:
- Greece:
- USA:
- Spain:
- Russia:
- Rojava:
Chapter Four: Five Historical Lessons for Anti-Fascists
This chapter draws on five key lessons that the anti-fascist movement must learn in order to become more effective. They are:
- Fascist revolutions have never succeeded. Fascists gained power legally.
- To varying degrees, many interwar anti-fascist leaders and theorists assumed that fascism was simply a variant of traditional counterrevolution politics. They did not take it seriously enough until it was too late.
- For ideological and organizational reasons, socialist and communist leadership was often slower to assess the threat of fascism, and slower to advocate militant anti-fascist responses, than their parties rank-and-file membership.
- Fascism steals from left ideology, strategy, imagery and culture.
- It doesn't take many fascists to make fascism.
Chapter Five: “So Much for the Tolerant Left!”: “No Platform” and Free Speech
This chapter answers the most common objections towards militant anti-fascism, ranging from the effectiveness of militant tactics to concerns about erasing the right to free speech.
- Erasure of free speech: Free Speech is only guaranteed from the US government, it doesn't protect you from violence from other citizens. Even then, the US government repeatedly breaks this promise by enforcing copyright laws, repression of left-wing activists (notably in the Red Scares, COINTELPRO and the Occupy movement), censorship during wartime, lack of rights for prisoners, criminalization of immigrants, the shooting of civilians in wars, supporting numerous dictatorships across the world, nondisclosure agreements. If it's okay to restrict speech in these areas, why shouldn't it be okay to restrict it to stop a resurgent fascist movements? And if it isn't okay to repress speech in these areas, why do these areas get no attention from self-described 'free speech' advocates? Not only that, but only using debate to fight fascists has been an unreliable strategy, costing millions of people their lives.
- Slippery Slope: The idea that anti-fascists will change the definitions of fascism to defeat other political enemies (like moderate conservatives) or that the existing of a militant group will promote or more violent political climate is not grounded in any historical fact. Once a fascist movement is defeated, anti-fascists quickly disband, as they tend to know what a fascist is better than other political groups.
- Government Restrictions: Anti-fascists are usually not in favour in state restrictions on speech, since they are often used against the left in the future. For example, the British Public Order act was used against the fascist National Front, but also against the miners’ strike of 1984–1985
- Shutting down fascism is fascist: Fascists are also known for being nationalists, starting wars, and building prisons, so does that mean anarchists can accuse liberals who share those qualities of also being fascists? Clearly you can’t define an ideology based only on a sole attribute.