Q&A: Antifa is not a single group. So what is it?

On 22 September, President Donald Trump signed an executive order designating “antifa” as a “domestic terror organization,” characterizing the movement as a “militarist, anarchist enterprise that explicitly calls for the overthrow of the United States Government.”¹ This move, which shortly followed the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, is not the first time the president has sought a terror group designation for antifa. He first stated this intention amid the initial spike in demonstrations related to the Black Lives Matter movement in May 2020, though nothing came of it.² This time, Trump has followed through, casting a wide net to target “any person claiming to act on behalf of Antifa, or for which Antifa or any person claiming to act on behalf of Antifa provided material support.”³ 

In light of this announcement, Kieran Doyle, ACLED’s North America Research Manager, examines how the label is used, the narratives that have grown around it, and the broader context of political violence across the country.

What does antifa mean? 

It’s short for anti-fascist or anti-fascism, and, at its most basic, is understood as simply that: opposition to fascism. 

Many who opposed the rise of fascism in pre-World War II Europe used this terminology to signal opposition to fascist leaders. Likewise, today, many who label Trump or other leaders as fascists may, as a way to show their opposition, identify as anti-fascists.

Just as there is no broad antifa organization, there isn’t necessarily a specific shared ideology among those who label themselves anti-fascists. While many associate the antifa label with socialists, communists, or anarchists, not all who use the term identify with any of these ideologies. Likewise, while some anti-fascists subscribe to more radical militant activities, the label has grown increasingly mainstream over the past decade and therefore cuts across a wider range of ideologies.

Some smaller groups, usually specific to a particular city, label themselves as “antifa” or “anti-fascists.” For instance, the group Rose City Antifa has been active in Portland, Oregon, since the early 2000s. More frequently, anti-fascists organize as a loose collective of individuals without formal leadership or membership, or participate in demonstrations, mutual aid, or more militant activities purely as individuals. ACLED reported on these forms of organizing during the 2020 election cycle.

Who are antifa?

Contrary to what some might imagine, it’s important to emphasize that there is no singular group in the United States or Europe named antifa, nor is there a national antifa group with a network of chapters. Indeed, the antifa label is used to refer to massively different things by people at opposite ends of the political spectrum. Former FBI Director Christopher Wray once described the notion of “antifa” as “an ideology, not an organization.”⁴

Anti-fascists sometimes use recognizable iconography, perhaps most famously black and red flags flown together. Anti-fascist symbols are often visible across a wide variety of demonstrations for progressive causes. The presence of anti-fascist symbols at a demonstration does not mean the whole demonstration or associated movement can be labeled anti-fascist. 

Some have associated “black blocs” — groups of demonstrators dressing in all black in an effort to conceal individuals’ identities — with “antifa.” Though many anti-fascists employ black bloc tactics at demonstrations, this strategy is neither specific nor exclusive to anti-fascists. 

Trump’s executive order seems to acknowledge some of these complexities, using language like “enterprise,” “campaign,” “organized effort,” and “pattern of political violence” rather than “group” to describe antifa. 

However, the order also claims that antifa employs “elaborate means and mechanisms to shield the identities of its operatives, conceal its funding sources and operations in an effort to frustrate law enforcement, and recruit additional members.”⁵ This characterization seems to insinuate that anti-fascists may not be genuinely decentralized, but instead skilled at obscuring organizational structures. The order’s reference to antifa’s “funding sources” and its directive to target “individuals associated with and acting on behalf of Antifa” appear to suggest a loose set of criteria for who can be designated as antifa. 

On 15 September, Vice President JD Vance said he would “go after the NGO network that foments, facilitates and engages in violence,” specifically naming the Open Society Foundations — a nonprofit founded by George Soros — as well as the Ford Foundation.⁶ 

The Trump administration claims antifa and “the radical left” are driving violence⁷ — what does political violence in the US actually look like?

Violence in the US most commonly breaks out around demonstration activity — ACLED records over 1,200 acts of rioting and excessive police force since 2020. Such events range from demonstrators throwing punches or engaging in relatively low-level property destruction, such as a single smashed window. Other incidents, such as the 6 January riot at the US Capitol, have seen a much higher level of violence. 

Extremist groups have been responsible for an outsized proportion of violence at demonstrations in the United States. During the 2020 election cycle, ACLED noted that demonstrations were far more likely to turn violent when an extremist group was present. Since extremist groups have been on the decline in recent years, both their presence in demonstrations and the frequency with which they employ violence have steadily fallen. 

Outside demonstrations, the majority of the violence ACLED tracks is carried out by individuals, most frequently in the form of violent hate crimes. We also record incidents of unjustified police violence and shootings in which victims were targeted at random or for explicit political motivations — including a large number of mass shootings. In recent years, lone actor violence targeting high-profile individuals has become a greater concern, following assassination attempts against President Trump, the assassination of Minnesota State Representative Melissa Hortman, and the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk, among other incidents.

What about anti-fascist violence?

During the 2020 election cycle, anti-fascists actively took to the streets as part of some Black Lives Matter demonstrations, as well as to oppose extremist groups like the Proud Boys. Most violence involving anti-fascists took place in these contexts: fighting with police or brawling with opposing groups of demonstrators. In recent years, this form of violence has become increasingly less common, mirroring a decline in the specific groups that anti-fascists would often mobilize to oppose.

Perhaps the most prominent incident of targeted violence was in August 2020, when a self-identified anti-fascist shot and killed a member of the extremist group Patriot Prayer in Portland. This anti-fascist was subsequently killed in a shootout with police five days later. Despite the presence of organized anti-fascist groups specific to Portland, this individual was unaffiliated with any wider group.

More recently, in July 2025, a self-identified anti-fascist, along with a larger group of anti-ICE supporters, shot fireworks outside an ICE detention facility in Alvarado, Texas. Authorities described the event as an “ambush,” as the man shot up to 30 rounds of ammunition at law enforcement when they came to investigate, wounding a police officer in the neck. Other members insisted the group was not planning to act violently and claimed the individual had carried out his violent actions alone. 

How is the move to label antifa a terrorist group connected to the assassination of Charlie Kirk?

President Trump renewed this push in the immediate aftermath of Kirk’s assassination, despite no conclusive evidence about the shooter’s political motivations.⁸ Figures like Kirk, who headed the conservative activist group Turning Point USA, have amplified the push to treat antifa as a terrorist threat. On social media, Kirk portrayed antifa as emblematic of leftist extremism tolerated by Democrats.

The precise motivations of Kirk’s shooter are not yet known. While multiple claims have been made linking the shooter to anti-fascist beliefs or to the Groypers, a fringe extremist group known for criticizing Kirk for not supporting their white nationalist and antisemitic beliefs. There has been no suggestion that he was a member of a larger group or network, nor is it clear that he identified as an anti-fascist.⁹ Recent media reports state that he did not vote in the previous two elections and was not a member of a political party. 

How should we understand references to "antifa" in ACLED's dataset?

References to antifa or anti-fascists are included only where they are explicitly cited in coverage of events or when anti-fascist symbology is clearly present at a demonstration. These references may therefore reflect the interpretation of a particular source or set of sources. 

Antifa does not constitute a formal organization with leadership or membership, but an ideological designation. For this reason, references to antifa should not be treated as representing a distinct organized group within the dataset. Rather, references to antifa should be understood as source-derived labels and not as evidence of a single-coherent organizational entity. 

Organized groups that espouse anti-fascist ideology are coded individually according to their specific group names or identities.