Antifa Is Not Anti-Fascism: It is a Communist Front that is Anti-Capitalism

Antifa is Orwellian double-speak for anti-capitalism. It is a communist front organization that goes back almost 100 years to the Bolshevik revolution in Russia. Antifa was first founded in Germany as a communist front organization representing and funded by the communist international in Moscow. Its first mission was to incite a communist revolution in Germany.

Both communism and fascism systems are based on collectivism and state-controlled economies. In both systems, the individual has no rights. The person’s rights were subsumed into the collective. The collective is then heavily controlled by a powerful state. Both systems have resulted in large-scale atrocities and genocide.

The 2016 annual report by Germany’s domestic intelligence service, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) reveals that from the viewpoint of the “left-wing extremist,” the label of “fascism” as pushed by Antifa often does not refer to actual fascism, but is merely a label assigned to “capitalism.”

Joshua Philipp reveals that “[w]hile leftist extremists claim to be fighting ‘fascism’ while launching their attacks on other groups, the report states the term ‘fascism’ has a double meaning under the extreme-left ideology, indicating the ‘fight against the capitalist system.”’

The Antifa title is merely a glyph that has the hidden (but real) meaning of anti-capitalism. Indeed, fascism is the political cousin to communism. Antifa would be all too happy to bring about fascism in the United States, just as they did in Germany and Italy prior to World War II. Indeed, a little known fact is that Benito Mussolini was a Marxist. Mussolini had no problem taking over Italy under the banner of fascism. Beware that Antifa will send people running into the arms of a fascist dictator who will save them from the ravages of Antifa. The thesis, antithesis, and ultimate synthesis (of fascism) is the age-old Satanic strategy of Marxist operatives. Politically, they will always settle for taking one step back as long as they are able to first take two steps forward.

Members of the far-left Antifa extremist organization give a clenched fist salute on Sept. 1, 1928. The group’s original intent was to bring out a communist dictatorship in Germany. (Fox Photos/Getty Images)

Indeed, the civil rights movement in the United States was riddled with communist agitators.

Martin Luther King Jr. Was a Communist Revolutionary

A little known fact is that Martin Luther King Jr. was a communist revolutionary. According to King’s biographer and sympathizer David J. Garrow, “King privately described himself as a Marxist.” 1 In his 1981 book, The FBI and Martin Luther King, Jr., Garrow quotes King as saying in SCLC staff meetings, “we have moved into a new era, which must be an era of revolution…. The whole structure of American life must be changed…. We are engaged in the class struggle.” 2 Dr. Don Boys, who is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives and has authored 15 books, explains that “those words [of King] are right out the Communist handbook.” 3 Dr. Boys further states: “Need I remind you that it was illegal to be a Communist in those days? The Communist Party was dedicated to overthrow our Constitution and way of life.” 4 Dr. Boys reveals little known inside information from Uriah Fields, who was Martin Luther King Jr.’s secretary early on in King’s communist agitation.

“The Rev. Uriah J. Fields, King’s secretary during the early stage of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, wrote in the March 1968 issue of American Challenger: ‘King helps to advance Communism. He is surrounded with communists. This is a major reason why I severed my relationship with him during the fifties. He is soft on Communism. I don’t believe that he is a Communist or a Christian, for that matter.’ There is no doubt that King was not a Christian, and he was not a ‘card-carrying’ Communist because Communists stopped carrying cards many years before that time. The question is not whether King belonged to the Communist Party, U.S.A. but was he a Communist?” 5

The circumstantial evidence certainly suggests that Martin Luther King Jr. was a communist. Jewish Communist Stanley Levison can best be described as King’s behind-the-scenes “handler.” Levison had for years been in charge of the secret Soviet funding of the Communist Party, USA. Levison was King’s mentor and was actually the brains behind King. It was Levison who edited King’s book, Stride Toward Freedom6 Levison controlled the fund-raising and agitation activities of the SCLC from behind the scenes. Levison wrote many of King’s speeches. King described Levison as one of his “closest friends.” 7

 Dr. Boys further reveals that Julia Brown, who worked undercover in the communist party on behalf of the FBI, testified before the U.S. Congress about Martin Luther King Jr.’s communist ties.

“While King may not have been an official member of the Communist Party, he was certainly supported by them because he supported their cause! Julia Brown was an undercover agent for the FBI in the Cleveland, Ohio area. She told a Congressional sub-committee that while she was a member of the Communist Party, ‘she knew Martin Luther King to be closely connected with the Communist Party. On the lecture circuit, she told audiences that King ‘was the hero of America’s Communists. The cells that I was associated with in Cleveland were continually being asked to raise funds for Martin Luther King’s activities.’ She also said, ‘Mr. King was one of the worst enemies my people ever had.’ Oh, by the way, Julia was black! How about a holiday for a real black hero? In June of 1979 she testified at a Senate Judiciary Committee and concluded her statement to the Committee: ‘If this measure is passed honoring Martin Luther King [with a national holiday], we may as well take down the stars and stripes that flies over this building and replace it with a red flag.” 8

The Martin Luther King Jr. national holiday was signed into law. Its symbolism acts to reinforce in the minds of the general population the need for the government to pass laws and use its force to grant privileges to a favored group. The result of the new laws is an erosion of the individual liberties of all. It is this method that has given rise to the government privilege of women to kill their children through abortion to supplant the unborn child’s God-given right to life. It can also be seen with the special government privileges granted to sodomites. Those special group privileges of the sodomites will be used as a lever to supplant that God-given individual rights of Christians.  Martin Luther King’s crowning achievement was to be the firebrand that worked the street agitators that resulted in the passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That act, which was publicly proclaimed to be a law to enhance civil rights. In fact, it replaced God-given constitutional rights with government-granted group privileges. Your rights were now government privileged defined by your group identity. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 made it illegal for employers to discriminate because of a person’s race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.

Overnight, the word sex in the civil rights law is no longer limited to the noun of male or female. Sex, in the civil rights statute, has now been interpreted to include verbs. It now includes acts of sexual perversion. If someone is a sexual pervert who likes to cross-dress and engage in sodomy, the force of government is now behind him, giving him special privileges and protections.

On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 to that the category of “sex” includes sexual orientation and transgender status. That means that sodomites are now protected against discrimination by a special government-granted privilege. The reality is that a person is a sexual pervert because that is what he does. It is not a status; it is an action.

Furthermore, giving special privileges to sodomites is is, in reality, not an enhancement of rights but rather a limitation on the God-given constitutional rights of Christian employers to follow their conscience and obey God. “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” Leviticus 18:22. Are peoples’ rights enhanced when they send their children to school to be taught and mentored by a sodomite teacher who cannot be fired for his sexual perversion because his depraved concupiscence is protected by the civil rights laws? You can give thanks to Martin Luther King Jr. when you celebrate him during his national holiday.


1Don Boys, Was MLK a Communist?, January 19, 2009,

2Don Boys, Was MLK a Communist?, January 19, 2009,

3Don Boys, Was MLK a Communist?, January 19, 2009,

4Don Boys, Was MLK a Communist?, January 19, 2009,

5Don Boys, Was MLK a Communist?, January 19, 2009,

8Don Boys, Was MLK a Communist?, January 19, 2009,

Communist Party USA Endorses MLK

It is not surprising, therefore, to find that to this day the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) heaps great praise and honor upon Martin Luther King Jr. The CPUSA states that “Dr. King understood that racial equality and economic injustice were incompatible, and that the fight for the rights of workers and the poor was a key part of building a movement for social transformation.” That social transformation advocated by both Dr. King and CPUSA is a communist social transformation, where a person’s individual God-given rights must give way to group rights.

Who is Really Behind the COVID-19 Scam-Demic, Antifa, and BLM?

Are These Antifa/BLM Riots A Jewish Coup?

8 thoughts on “Antifa Is Not Anti-Fascism: It is a Communist Front that is Anti-Capitalism

  1. And Communism is Judaism. And today’s Judaism is really Talmudism. As history shows, the vast majority of the Bolsheviks were “Jewish” i.e. Talmudists.

  2. Greetings Edward; I have a point which I would make about your claim that the people have “Constitutional Rights” ? This is an incorrect statement, the people’s rights are inherent – given to us by our Creator Yahweh, they are protected by the Constitution – not given by the Constitution. The people were not and are not a party to the Constitutional contract. Regards Dale-martin;

    • Thank you for that clarification, but it is unnecessary. You claim that I am incorrect, but it seems you came to that conclusion because you have misread what I wrote. I clearly stated in that blog article that we have “God-given constitutional rights.”

      Indeed, the Ninth Amendment makes it clear that the list of rights in the Bill of Rights is just that, a list (enumeration). The Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that “[t]he enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” U.S. Const. Amend. IX. Constitution rights are not a granting of rights. All other rights not listed are retained by the people. That means that all God-given rights to life, liberty, and property are retained by the people. Just because some important ones are specifically listed does not mean that the God-given rights that are not listed are unimportant or infringeable. That is what distinguishes the U.S. Constitution from all others.

      The Ten Commandments address, in part, commands to men on how they are to treat other men. God’s commandment against killing another implies that a man has a right (protected by God in his commandment) to life. See Exodus 20:13. The fact that man has a right to property is implied by the commandment of God that “thou shalt not steal.” Exodus 20:15. The commandments make no sense if a person does not own their property or have a right to life. If we have no God-given right to life and property what is the point of God’s commands to men not to steal from or murder other men?

      You are correct that God-given rights are inherent. But you are wrong that I have said otherwise. You seem to have misinterpreted what I clearly described as “God-given constitutional rights.” Indeed, the whole point of the blog article was to distinguish between government granted group privileges and God-given individual rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. It makes me wonder if you actually read the article.

Leave a Reply to Dale-martin; Cancel reply