Let’s call MAGA “Profa”

In recent weeks, Republicans in the White House and elsewhere have leveled increasingly deranged accusations: that Antifa is a unified, militant organization behind violence and assassinations. Republicans blamed “Antifa radicals” for the murder of Charlie Kirk, despite no credible evidence tying the shooter to any antifa network.

Yet antifa is precisely not a formal institution — it has no membership rolls, no central command, no headquarters, and no fundraising apparatus.

If Republicans insist on portraying anti-fascist protest as terrorism, while permitting or dismissing far-right violence, then the rhetorical pendulum must swing back.

That is why I propose calling Republicans “Profa” (pro-fascist).

It’s not a mere insult — it’s a name for a consistent pattern of defense for authoritarianism, militarized police,  and white supremacist ideology, paired with de-legitimization of their opposition.

The Myth of Antifa

Antifa is a tactic and orientation, not an organization. It refers broadly to networks and individuals who oppose fascism, white supremacy, and authoritarianism. The vast majority of these activists are self-consciously nonviolent. They even have trainings about nonviolence. They engage in protest, community organizing, documentation of hate groups, counter-rallies, and watchdog work. A fringe minority engages in confrontational or property-damage tactics — often in reaction to attacks by right-wing groups such as the Proud Boys — but conflating the small minority with the whole is rhetorical trickery.

Conservative media such as Fox News cherry picks videos of violent encounters to exaggerate the extent of left wing violence.

Trump signed an executive order declaring Antifa a “domestic terrorist organization,” directing agencies to “investigate, disrupt, and dismantle” purported networks. Presidential adviser Stephen Miller claims that left-wing political organizations constitute “a vast domestic terror movement,” and “We are going to use every resource we have … throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks and make America safe again.”

The 2025 executive order and Trump’s National Security Presidential Memorandum NSPM-7 authorize investigation not just of violent acts, but of “networks, funding streams, and organizations” accused of “organized political violence.”

First Amendment experts warn that the action and rhetoric pave the way to censor speech and punish groups whose views the regime dislikes.

These moves face legal issues — there is no mechanism under U.S. law to designate domestic ideologies as terrorist organizations. Yet the symbolism matters: it gives a “permission slip” for state actors to target dissent.

Moreover, given the conservative super-majority on the Supreme Court, we cannot count on the courts to restrain such autocratic actions of the Trump administration.

The Violence Asymmetry

• “Based on government and independent analyses, right-wing extremist violence has been responsible for the overwhelming majority of fatalities, amounting to approximately 75% to 80% of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001.” (source)
• In 2022, all extremist‐linked murders recorded by the Anti-Defamation League were carried out by right-wing individuals.
• Over the past decade, right-wing extremism accounts for around 75 % of extremist killings in the U.S.
• A broader U.S. congressional briefing showed that of 29 extremist murders in one period, 26 were by right-wing actors.
• Research comparing left-wing and right-wing political violence finds left-wing actors commit violence much less frequently.

Republicans rarely frame those right-wing killings or militia mobilizations as systemic threats. Instead they treat them as isolated, aberrant events (e.g. “lone wolves,” “deranged individuals”). Meanwhile, any protest or disruption by left-wing activists is swept under the “Antifa terrorism” narrative — even when no direct link exists. That double standard is not accident; it is strategic.

Why “Profa” Is the Right Name

Unlike Antifa — which is very disorganized and poorly funded — Profa is well-organized and funded:  ICE, DHS, and an array of right wing media, including Fox News.  Billionaires support the Profa movement.

When one side brands resistance as terrorism and shields the forces resisting it, you are not neutral: you are implicitly defending the aggressor. *Profa* names that inversion. It states: if you criminalize anti-fascism while excusing or enabling fascist projects, you are for fascism.

• It forces a refutation: Republicans must either reject their own framing or own its implications.
• It shifts the burden of proof: if you deny Profa, you must justify why dissent is the threat, not oppression.
• It reframes the moral terrain: calling someone Profa is not ad hominem, but the logical flip of the label they apply to antifascists.

Yes, not every Republican merits the label. But in key cases — those who champion the “Antifa terror” narrative, who support laws to suppress dissent, who refuse to condemn white supremacism, who support prosecuting Trump’s political opponents, who support sending the military to occupy Democratic cities — Profa is fair and precise.

A short song to accompany the idea is: Profa.

Republicans are Profa = Pro-Fascist

The Party of Small Government is oppressing the people.