Antifa and the Politics of Manufactured Meaning

Vice President JD Vance’s attempt last week to rally the international community around the “Antifa threat” may be the clearest illustration yet of how differently America sees the world compared with most democracies. Anti‑fascists, after all, are responding to one of the central political challenges of the twentieth century: fascism. In much of the democratic world, opposing fascism is not controversial. It is foundational.

But American political rhetoric has developed a peculiar habit. Words are repeated until their meanings detach from reality. “Antifa” becomes sinister. “Voter fraud,” “Hunter Biden,” “Hillary’s emails,” and “the Russia hoax” take on lives of their own, shaped less by evidence than by repetition and conviction.

The difficulty with attacking Antifa is that, as an organization, it does not meaningfully exist. When Trump‑era officials testified before Congress, they could not identify leaders, membership, or structure. The name was invoked, but the facts never followed. Saying a word does not make it real.

In some ways, it is helpful when the world sees this. Much like the reaction to the reflecting‑pool vandals, foreign observers do not engage with the issue as Americans do. They simply note the absence of factual grounding. It reminds them that the United States of Roosevelt, Wilson, and Eisenhower has given way to something different—more improvisational, more rhetorical, and more willing to weaponize language.

I have never met a member of Antifa. Many of my closest friends would say they are against fascism, but that is not the same thing. “Antifa,” as a term, has little stable meaning. No one wants to be labeled part of a terrorist group simply for opposing authoritarianism. So we are left with the simplest truth: we are against fascism.

And that should be enough.