This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
If you don't want to use harv refs I'll format them, but please don't change the style used currently Darkness Shines ( talk) 18:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
I believe anarchist elements in Portland that later became Rose City Antifa played a key role in the WTO protests [1]. It would be good to have a section on the background and history of this group as well as a section on their current activities, IMO C. W. Gilmore ( talk) 15:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Might want to look at commons:Category:Patriot Prayer and counterprotest in Portland (9 December 2017). RCA was reported to have been at that event.
Also, I went to the Impeachment March today and took some photos ( commons:Category:March for Impeachment in Portland, Oregon (20 January 2018)) - a group called "Rose City Black Guards" was mentioned as part of that event but I'm not sure whether they are related. MB298 ( talk) 06:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Suggest: "Portland Antifa (Rose City) or some variation of it.
Rose City Antifa is merely a sub-set of the larger Antifa movement in Portland from what the sources seem to indicate with groups like the antifascist groups 'Oregon Students Empowered and Direct Action Alliance' and others that co-ordinate through websites like itsgoingdown.org/ and www.rosecityantifa.org/ to develop reactions to conservative and alt-right protests and marches. With a more general name of 'Portland Antifa' it will be far easier to expand the article and have 'Rose City' as a sub-section in the article. C. W. Gilmore ( talk) 03:08, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
The Portland Police Bureau said it later received reports of individuals throwing “milkshakes” with a substance mixed in that was similar to a quick-drying cement
- the Independent. The police said "they received reports," not that they have verified that such a thing actually happened. The source also does not say who was responsible or who was the target. You cannot simply make up and assume things not in sources.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 22:20, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Even Fox News qualifies the claim as "said to be", and DOES NOT SAY ANYTHING about who was claimed to throw them - it simply says "demonstrators" and notes that people on both sides were detained for violence. Some of the demonstrators turned violent, throwing milkshakes said to be mixed with quick-drying cement.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 22:30, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Arms & Hearts can you explain to me how it is not significant that RCA endorses property destruction? This seems clearly notable to me. Mbsyl ( talk) 01:23, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
The movement’s profile has surged since Antifa activists engaged in a wave of property destruction during Donald Trump’s Inauguration—when one masked figure famously punched the white supremacist Richard Spencer in the face—and ahead of a planned appearance, in February, by Milo Yiannopoulos at the University of California, Berkeley, which was cancelled.The phrase "during Donald Trump’s Inauguration" links to this article which doesn't mention antifa, but does state that it seemed clear on the day of the protest that
the vandalism and property damage were committed by a small number of peopleand describes the difficulties of attributing the violence to a group. In other words, the violence cannot be attributed directly to "antifa".
The movement’s profile has surged since Antifa activists engaged in a wave of property destruction during Donald Trump’s Inaugurationand then links to another article, that article provides the context for the statement, but doesn't mention antifa, all we have is: "Antifa activists engaged in a wave of property destruction during Donald Trump’s Inauguration". That's not a great quote to use. It certainly does not establish that RCA engages in property damage.
You also mentioned property destruction. Yeah, property destruction is certainly part of the repertoire of what some of these groups will do to achieve their goals. Some say it’s violence, some say it’s not because it’s not against human beings, that’s a matter of opinion.He wasn't talking about Rose City Antifa specifically, but about antifa more broadly. The question NBC asked referred to the Berkeley protests though, in which RCA had no involvement, as far as we know.
RCA's Own Website saying they support the tactic: they say
While we are not opposed to the tactic of property destruction, we would encourage other individuals and groups to seriously consider the strategic value of their chosen actions at this event.This is in accordance with the St. Paul principles. They're not supporting property destruction but applying the anarchist ethic of voluntary association and accountability. What they're saying is that militant tactics should not endanger people who did not consent to putting themselves at risk. Engaging in vandalism (their term) puts them at risk for mass arrests for very little tangible victory. They claim that vandalism has
little impact beyond the symbolic. So per their own statement, they think that engaging in vandalism is a strategy that has little benefit and puts people who chose not to engage in it at risk. If you want to write about what strategies RCA uses, then by all means do so, but focusing solely on property damage or vandalism as
a very important aspect of the movementis undue. You can't just pick one line from their strategy document and omit the context. Vexations ( talk) 13:10, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Putting ourselves at risk for mass arrests for very little tangible victory is not a sustainable modelIt that an endorsement of vandalism?
its nearly impossible to prove which strategies and tactics they employbut you would like to mention at least one specific tactic, property destruction (vandalism). Is that correct? Vexations ( talk) 21:46, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
If RCA is an organization, shall we add "WikiProject Organizations" and organization-related categories, such as Category:Organizations based in Portland, Oregon? --- Another Believer ( Talk) 14:06, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Rose City Antifa is a self-proclaimed “political organization” according to their self-made Facebook profile. Here is their Facebook “About” link: https://www.facebook.com/pg/sometimesantisocialalwaysantifascist/about/?ref=page_internal
It is vital that this be pointed out in any reference to Rose City Antifa due to the special significance in the fact that an Antifa “group” considered itself a “Political Organization”, which has dramatic ramifications related to accountability for left-wing violence perpetrated by Antifa in Portland.
Please add that Rose City Antifa is a “Political Organization”. This is not controversial, it is fact and it is the result of Rose City Antifa’s self-proclamation, not by the standards of anti-Antifa; Instead purely by Rose City Antifa’s own standards.
We are adults, and we deserve the truth. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:ab10:7ef0:ed52:be7a:158:39f1 ( talk) 16:16, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
One of the sources said the movement/ideology has been around for a long time, but the RCA was the first to use the tagline "antifa" in its name. Graywalls ( talk) 00:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC) "Historical Context Arguably, antifascism goes back to the origins of fascism in interwar Italy and Germany. American antiracist groups— such as Anti-Racist Action (ARA)—that took up the ideology in the late 1980s embraced the international movement’s provocative and occasionally criminal—even violent—tactics. In 2013, activists rebranded ARA into the Torch Network, a loose coalition of about a dozen antifa groups. Founded in 2007, The Rose City Antifa (RCA) in Portland, OR, is the oldest U.S. group to use “antifa” in its moniker. RCA joined the Torch Network in 2016. It had been part of ARA between 2007 and 2013." from https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10839/2 So what makes them the first is only the use of the tag "antifa". Graywalls ( talk) 01:07, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
There's an interesting interview with (one or more individuals associated with) Rose City Antifa on the website of the Brighton (UK) Antifascists, which goes into some depth on RCA's background, political principles, their understanding of the groups they oppose, etc. This isn't a reliable source and we shouldn't cite it in the article, but per WP:ELMAYBE "Sites that fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources" can sometimes be appropriate external links." I think it would be a useful addition to this article, but would be interested to know what others think. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 22:50, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
@ Bobfrombrockley:, I did notice "This user conducts antifa." icon within your user page. Do you have a potential conflict-of-interest with BrightonAntifascists? Graywalls ( talk) 06:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
In my view the sentences reading It is the oldest active antifa group in the United States. RCA is the oldest group in the United States to adopt the moniker 'antifa'.
say more or less say the same thing twice, and we should use one or the other rather than repeating ourselves. To all intents and purposes, being an antifa group and having antifa in the group's name are the same thing. It would be very surprising if the oldest antifa group didn't use the word in its name, or if the oldest group to use the word in its name weren't also the oldest antifa group. I
removed the second claim a few weeks ago;
Graywalls, you
restored it. Could you clarify why you think both claims are necessary? –
Arms & Hearts (
talk) 18:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Similar challenges faced what is currently the oldest existing antifa group in the United States: Rose City Antifa (RCA) in Portland, Oregon. Founded in 2007 out of an organizing drive against the neo-Nazi skinhead festival Hammerfest, RCA was heavily influenced by the high number of Europeans in their group, reflected in the fact that they were the first American group to name itself “antifa.”(There's a PDF on Libcom, though I probably shouldn't link to it.) The other sources aren't books, they're USA Today, which says
Some of the groups, such as the 13-year-old Rose City Antifa in Portland, Oregon, the oldest in the U.S., are particularly well-organized and active online and on Facebook, while its members are individually anonymousand the Congressional Research Service report, which says:
Founded in 2007, The Rose City Antifa in Portland, OR, is the oldest U.S. group to use “antifa” in its moniker.– Arms & Hearts ( talk) 12:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Rose City Antifa has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requests
Please change the second sentence under History in this article from, "According to one of its leaders, the group concentrates on 'outing' people whom they believe to be neo-Nazis" to "According to some antifa activists, the movement operates without any centralized leadership and its activists concentrate on 'outing' people whom they believe to be neo-Nazis."
Please edit the article to remove references to antifa as a group ororganization and make it clear that antifa has no centralized leadership and is a movement or ideology.
Explanation and Sources
The second sentence under History in this article reads, "According to one of its leaders, the group concentrates on 'outing' people whom they believe to be neo-Nazis." That sentence is in direct conflict with one of the cited sources and is unsupported by the other.
The cited CNN story begins its ninth paragraph with, "Antifa activists, who operate without any centralized leadership, told CNN that their goal is peace and inclusivity." The article therefore inaccurately says "According to one of its leaders" and explicitly contradicts the source by even implying that antifa has leaders.
The entire article is inaccurate in referring to antifa in general as a group and should make clear that any local collective of activists in Portland or any other city is not acting in the name of any kind of national organization. The currently appointed and confirmed Director of the FBI, Christopher Wray, testified to Congress that antifa is not an organization: "'It’s not a group or an organization. It’s a movement or an ideology.'" AP News, September 17,2020 Infinitelee ( talk) 22:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
If you don't want to use harv refs I'll format them, but please don't change the style used currently Darkness Shines ( talk) 18:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
I believe anarchist elements in Portland that later became Rose City Antifa played a key role in the WTO protests [1]. It would be good to have a section on the background and history of this group as well as a section on their current activities, IMO C. W. Gilmore ( talk) 15:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Might want to look at commons:Category:Patriot Prayer and counterprotest in Portland (9 December 2017). RCA was reported to have been at that event.
Also, I went to the Impeachment March today and took some photos ( commons:Category:March for Impeachment in Portland, Oregon (20 January 2018)) - a group called "Rose City Black Guards" was mentioned as part of that event but I'm not sure whether they are related. MB298 ( talk) 06:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Suggest: "Portland Antifa (Rose City) or some variation of it.
Rose City Antifa is merely a sub-set of the larger Antifa movement in Portland from what the sources seem to indicate with groups like the antifascist groups 'Oregon Students Empowered and Direct Action Alliance' and others that co-ordinate through websites like itsgoingdown.org/ and www.rosecityantifa.org/ to develop reactions to conservative and alt-right protests and marches. With a more general name of 'Portland Antifa' it will be far easier to expand the article and have 'Rose City' as a sub-section in the article. C. W. Gilmore ( talk) 03:08, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
The Portland Police Bureau said it later received reports of individuals throwing “milkshakes” with a substance mixed in that was similar to a quick-drying cement
- the Independent. The police said "they received reports," not that they have verified that such a thing actually happened. The source also does not say who was responsible or who was the target. You cannot simply make up and assume things not in sources.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 22:20, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Even Fox News qualifies the claim as "said to be", and DOES NOT SAY ANYTHING about who was claimed to throw them - it simply says "demonstrators" and notes that people on both sides were detained for violence. Some of the demonstrators turned violent, throwing milkshakes said to be mixed with quick-drying cement.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 22:30, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Arms & Hearts can you explain to me how it is not significant that RCA endorses property destruction? This seems clearly notable to me. Mbsyl ( talk) 01:23, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
The movement’s profile has surged since Antifa activists engaged in a wave of property destruction during Donald Trump’s Inauguration—when one masked figure famously punched the white supremacist Richard Spencer in the face—and ahead of a planned appearance, in February, by Milo Yiannopoulos at the University of California, Berkeley, which was cancelled.The phrase "during Donald Trump’s Inauguration" links to this article which doesn't mention antifa, but does state that it seemed clear on the day of the protest that
the vandalism and property damage were committed by a small number of peopleand describes the difficulties of attributing the violence to a group. In other words, the violence cannot be attributed directly to "antifa".
The movement’s profile has surged since Antifa activists engaged in a wave of property destruction during Donald Trump’s Inaugurationand then links to another article, that article provides the context for the statement, but doesn't mention antifa, all we have is: "Antifa activists engaged in a wave of property destruction during Donald Trump’s Inauguration". That's not a great quote to use. It certainly does not establish that RCA engages in property damage.
You also mentioned property destruction. Yeah, property destruction is certainly part of the repertoire of what some of these groups will do to achieve their goals. Some say it’s violence, some say it’s not because it’s not against human beings, that’s a matter of opinion.He wasn't talking about Rose City Antifa specifically, but about antifa more broadly. The question NBC asked referred to the Berkeley protests though, in which RCA had no involvement, as far as we know.
RCA's Own Website saying they support the tactic: they say
While we are not opposed to the tactic of property destruction, we would encourage other individuals and groups to seriously consider the strategic value of their chosen actions at this event.This is in accordance with the St. Paul principles. They're not supporting property destruction but applying the anarchist ethic of voluntary association and accountability. What they're saying is that militant tactics should not endanger people who did not consent to putting themselves at risk. Engaging in vandalism (their term) puts them at risk for mass arrests for very little tangible victory. They claim that vandalism has
little impact beyond the symbolic. So per their own statement, they think that engaging in vandalism is a strategy that has little benefit and puts people who chose not to engage in it at risk. If you want to write about what strategies RCA uses, then by all means do so, but focusing solely on property damage or vandalism as
a very important aspect of the movementis undue. You can't just pick one line from their strategy document and omit the context. Vexations ( talk) 13:10, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Putting ourselves at risk for mass arrests for very little tangible victory is not a sustainable modelIt that an endorsement of vandalism?
its nearly impossible to prove which strategies and tactics they employbut you would like to mention at least one specific tactic, property destruction (vandalism). Is that correct? Vexations ( talk) 21:46, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
If RCA is an organization, shall we add "WikiProject Organizations" and organization-related categories, such as Category:Organizations based in Portland, Oregon? --- Another Believer ( Talk) 14:06, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Rose City Antifa is a self-proclaimed “political organization” according to their self-made Facebook profile. Here is their Facebook “About” link: https://www.facebook.com/pg/sometimesantisocialalwaysantifascist/about/?ref=page_internal
It is vital that this be pointed out in any reference to Rose City Antifa due to the special significance in the fact that an Antifa “group” considered itself a “Political Organization”, which has dramatic ramifications related to accountability for left-wing violence perpetrated by Antifa in Portland.
Please add that Rose City Antifa is a “Political Organization”. This is not controversial, it is fact and it is the result of Rose City Antifa’s self-proclamation, not by the standards of anti-Antifa; Instead purely by Rose City Antifa’s own standards.
We are adults, and we deserve the truth. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:ab10:7ef0:ed52:be7a:158:39f1 ( talk) 16:16, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
One of the sources said the movement/ideology has been around for a long time, but the RCA was the first to use the tagline "antifa" in its name. Graywalls ( talk) 00:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC) "Historical Context Arguably, antifascism goes back to the origins of fascism in interwar Italy and Germany. American antiracist groups— such as Anti-Racist Action (ARA)—that took up the ideology in the late 1980s embraced the international movement’s provocative and occasionally criminal—even violent—tactics. In 2013, activists rebranded ARA into the Torch Network, a loose coalition of about a dozen antifa groups. Founded in 2007, The Rose City Antifa (RCA) in Portland, OR, is the oldest U.S. group to use “antifa” in its moniker. RCA joined the Torch Network in 2016. It had been part of ARA between 2007 and 2013." from https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10839/2 So what makes them the first is only the use of the tag "antifa". Graywalls ( talk) 01:07, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
There's an interesting interview with (one or more individuals associated with) Rose City Antifa on the website of the Brighton (UK) Antifascists, which goes into some depth on RCA's background, political principles, their understanding of the groups they oppose, etc. This isn't a reliable source and we shouldn't cite it in the article, but per WP:ELMAYBE "Sites that fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources" can sometimes be appropriate external links." I think it would be a useful addition to this article, but would be interested to know what others think. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 22:50, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
@ Bobfrombrockley:, I did notice "This user conducts antifa." icon within your user page. Do you have a potential conflict-of-interest with BrightonAntifascists? Graywalls ( talk) 06:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
In my view the sentences reading It is the oldest active antifa group in the United States. RCA is the oldest group in the United States to adopt the moniker 'antifa'.
say more or less say the same thing twice, and we should use one or the other rather than repeating ourselves. To all intents and purposes, being an antifa group and having antifa in the group's name are the same thing. It would be very surprising if the oldest antifa group didn't use the word in its name, or if the oldest group to use the word in its name weren't also the oldest antifa group. I
removed the second claim a few weeks ago;
Graywalls, you
restored it. Could you clarify why you think both claims are necessary? –
Arms & Hearts (
talk) 18:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Similar challenges faced what is currently the oldest existing antifa group in the United States: Rose City Antifa (RCA) in Portland, Oregon. Founded in 2007 out of an organizing drive against the neo-Nazi skinhead festival Hammerfest, RCA was heavily influenced by the high number of Europeans in their group, reflected in the fact that they were the first American group to name itself “antifa.”(There's a PDF on Libcom, though I probably shouldn't link to it.) The other sources aren't books, they're USA Today, which says
Some of the groups, such as the 13-year-old Rose City Antifa in Portland, Oregon, the oldest in the U.S., are particularly well-organized and active online and on Facebook, while its members are individually anonymousand the Congressional Research Service report, which says:
Founded in 2007, The Rose City Antifa in Portland, OR, is the oldest U.S. group to use “antifa” in its moniker.– Arms & Hearts ( talk) 12:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Rose City Antifa has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requests
Please change the second sentence under History in this article from, "According to one of its leaders, the group concentrates on 'outing' people whom they believe to be neo-Nazis" to "According to some antifa activists, the movement operates without any centralized leadership and its activists concentrate on 'outing' people whom they believe to be neo-Nazis."
Please edit the article to remove references to antifa as a group ororganization and make it clear that antifa has no centralized leadership and is a movement or ideology.
Explanation and Sources
The second sentence under History in this article reads, "According to one of its leaders, the group concentrates on 'outing' people whom they believe to be neo-Nazis." That sentence is in direct conflict with one of the cited sources and is unsupported by the other.
The cited CNN story begins its ninth paragraph with, "Antifa activists, who operate without any centralized leadership, told CNN that their goal is peace and inclusivity." The article therefore inaccurately says "According to one of its leaders" and explicitly contradicts the source by even implying that antifa has leaders.
The entire article is inaccurate in referring to antifa in general as a group and should make clear that any local collective of activists in Portland or any other city is not acting in the name of any kind of national organization. The currently appointed and confirmed Director of the FBI, Christopher Wray, testified to Congress that antifa is not an organization: "'It’s not a group or an organization. It’s a movement or an ideology.'" AP News, September 17,2020 Infinitelee ( talk) 22:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)