Only fascist have an issue with antifascists.

What would be strange are hackers that are fascist. Fascism demands surrender to power and obedience, which is antithetical to the hacker sprit. Questioning systems, equalizing power imbalances is the hacker spirit.

Pay close attention to the political scene in Western countries, and you will soon figure out that only antifascists have an issue with fascists.

Antifascists have been parroting globalist Wall Street ideology for the past few decades, but this is coming to an end.

> It's a strange mix of very good tech talks and left-wing extremism.

That last polarisation and othering is odd, unnecessary, divisive and not generally representative of 39c3 talks nor the CCC.

Antifascism is a long tradition among humanists and European hackers and not related to "left-wing extremism".

Why do you find it necessary to discredit the message of that talk? What's the supposedly extremist message in there?

What an odd othering you have committed here.

There's plenty of European technologists who feel completely alienated from most stuff around c3 and hacker spaces because, believe it or not, most members there do tend to adhere to radical left-wing ideologies. This usually invites a whole grab bag of problems, if one has more right-wing beliefs and tries to engage.

I will concede to you that it did not used to be this bad. But it is now. Chalking this issue up to a 'long tradition' is like saying: "Community X has a long tradition of radicalization, so it's a-ok!"

So how is anti-fascism left-wing extremism?

Fighting fascism is required of every person who wants to keep a working democracy, regardless of your fiscal policy ideas or how egoistical you want your government to represent you.

Democracy is what allows you to remove bad leaders/parties without having to fight a bloody revolution. Fascism yearns to remove that possibility. Hence anti-fascism being needed.

That being said: Which part of the talk did you find especially extremist?

This "anti-fascism" talk sounds all nice and noble. But we all know that actual left-wing extremists have taken over the term now and most members are terrorist-adjacent. The irony is that antifa and other such "anti-fascists" are way more fascistic than their hypothetical and currently non-existent "fascists".

> The irony is that antifa and other such "anti-fascists" are way more fascistic than their hypothetical and currently non-existent "fascists".

Ah yes, the non-existent fascists that:

1. Marched openly as neo-Nazis in Charlottesville (2017), chanting "Jews will not replace us," resulting in the murder of Heather Heyer

2. Organize under explicitly fascist banners like Atomwaffen Division, The Base, Patriot Front, Blood Tribe, Golden Dawn, CasaPound, etc., all of which self-describe using fascist or Nazi ideology

3. Attempted to overturn a democratic election on Jan 6, 2021, including coordinated efforts by elected officials to submit fake electors and pressure state officials to "find" votes

4. Advocate ethno-states and mass deportations, including prominent figures calling for the removal of citizenship, voting rights, or legal protections from minorities (see CPAC speeches, "remigration" rhetoric in Europe, AfD platform language)

5. Celebrate or inspire political violence, from the Christchurch, El Paso, Buffalo, Halle, and Oslo attackers, all of whom explicitly cited fascist or white supremacist ideology in their manifestos

6. Promote leader-worship and elimination of dissent, e.g. calls to jail journalists, dissolve independent courts, criminalize opposition parties, or rule "by decree" (explicit in Hungary, echoed rhetorically elsewhere)

7. Attack independent media and academia as enemies of the nation, while advocating state control or punishment for ideological non-compliance

8. Receive normalization or support from sitting politicians, including endorsement, retweets, pardons, or refusal to condemn clearly fascist groups when given the opportunity

Calling this non-existent requires either ignoring explicit self-identification or redefining fascism so narrowly that only a 1930s uniform and a written and signed oath counts. But that definition isn't what any serious person would dare to bring to a discussion.

Meanwhile, "antifa" is not a party, not a centralized organization, has no manifesto, no leadership, no unified program, and no plausible path to state power. Are there idiots who claim the label antifa? Sure. But there are idiots in literally every subset of the population. Conflating street-level illiberal behavior with an actual authoritarian nationalist movement collapses basic political distinctions however.