NBC News Endorses Antifa Violence Against Conservatives, Whites – Update


This is an update to an NBC interview with Antifa-supporting Dartmouth professor Mark Bray.

A letter from 100 Dartmouth professors condemns the university president for criticizing Bray. President Philip Hanlon characterized Bray’s statements in TV interviews as “supporting violent protest.”

Bray did support violent protest. Listen to the interview below.

We now have 100 of these Dartmouth professors supporting crazy Bray and the president is under fire and defending himself. The communist Antifa-loving professor remains unscathed.

Professor Mark Bray, a historian and lecturer at Dartmouth, has written a book sympathetic to the violent anarcho-communists Antifa. His book, “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook,” details its rise and the author is an ally. He basically agrees with them that violence against whites and conservatives is acceptable.

How do you stick up for violence by Antifa but condemn the KKK?

Bray told Chuck Todd on NBC News ‘Meet the Press’ that the movement is an “activity of social revolutionary self defense” uniting communists, socialists and anarchists against the right. Their goal is to end neo-Nazi politics, he said.

He seems to think everything right is fascist and Nazi and shutting them down is okay: When anti-fascist groups successfully defeat the organizing of local neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and fascists, what usually happens is their group falls apart and individuals go back to being labor organizers or environmentalists or whatever kind of leftist. The lifecycles of anti-fascist organizing rise and fall with the organizing of the far right.

About violence, he excuses it: Even if a group does not intend for that to be the way to go about it, if you’re organizing against violent fascists, being able to defend yourselves can unfortunately come in handy.

In other words, if Antifa decides your group is a hate group, they can use violence against you and NBC News obviously endorses it.

Bray advocates Antifa violence as [faux] self-defense: What I’m trying to say is that the various differing ways anti-fascists go about resisting fascism are legitimate to be considered, that they are historically formed and ethically reasonable. I try not to wade too far into “What about this and what about this.” I like to leave it as general as “I support collective self-defense against fascism and Nazism.”

NBC is on a tear. No sooner has Chuck Todd approved violence against the right when Katy Tur went after free speech, read about that here.

Antifa violence came up on Tucker. This reporter, Tim Poole, is center left and he’s not safe.



  1. I hope this idiot, (over educated with crap but not a valid legal expert of course).
    I hope he gets in the crossfire between the Antifa and the Fed troops, he is a dope of the first order, and if I were a student in his class I would say so and then withdraw from his class and heckle him off of the campus
    and accidently spill hot coffee in his lap while he was basking in the rays of the innocent freshmen.

  2. When was the last time you sat down to watch the NBC evening news? Right, hardly anyone else has either. They are desperate for attention and viewers. They will eventually self-destruct like the Weekly World News supermarket tabloid.

    It’s all a big lie. The networks are not in the news or entertainment business as they’d like you to believe – they are really in the advertising business, always have been. Programming is created for one purpose only – to attract viewers and sell more ads, as many ads as viewers will tolerate. It’s the only reason they exist.

  3. Shouldn’t we do a deeper analysis of Antifa and the affiliated groups. The antics of Antifa are anarchistic in nature along with those who participate with them. What is the end-game with anarchy. Is it preferable to have a dystopian society instead of one which is beneficial to all.

    Those who attempt to equate Berkley with “free speech” are misguided. It wasn’t really about free speech. They were students who had a privileged life, without self-discipline, and were rebellious in nature. Regan knew how to handle these situations. As he told the media, ‘you should know better’. You cannot have people “choose” which laws they will obey. It was all predicated upon the land the University owned and the students stated if they didn’t get Their way they would tear the University down. Therefore, to equate “free speech” with Berkley is perverted.

Comments are closed.