The War On Antifa is even more hopeless than The War On Drugs. At least there are physical drugs. Antifa is a concept. What's more, by coming down hard on anyone who looks Antifa-like, you're going to look even more Fascist to be Anti-of by those who didn't see the point. See also The War On Terror. (Apparently
we're still bombing IS, but we can't be, because Trump already defeated them.)
But ignoring whether we go all 1984, Fahrenheut 451 or The Man Who Would Be Thursday, in the future, it's just a handy boogieman. Hyped like "the caravan" (apparently only happening when Trump needed it to happen), but differently a short-term 'solution'. Ditto, the concept of "Q" is conjured up as an ally to be associated with. With the added complication of it being self-reinforcing (that which isn't reinforced by bad actors coming in and stirring things up).
There are so many problems with proclaiming Antifa to be a terrorist organisation (never mind not proclaiming a number of right-wing ones to be under the same rules of behavioural tolerance). But it suits a particular narrative to try to be associated with "LAW AND ORDER" (IMO, more Flaw And Ordure) by inciting the issue.
As to the police, there's quite obviously more than a single bad apple in that apple-barrel. I wouldn't say the solution is to not pay for so many apples (again, I'm not someone who is geographically
or ethnically as liable to be a victim of police - though there was that traffic officer once who obviously had had a bad day and caused me hastle that he needn't have[1]) but I'm sure I'd be happy to fund any organisation that points out particularly bad barrelling policies and lobbies for much needed changes. How the changes can happen is anyone's guess, and above my pay-grade. "Funding Antifa" just isn't a thing on my radar, though, any more than tipping a waiter is going to help propogate mime artists.
I wasn't going to post a second time. But as I'm back I advise OP to move the thread over to (non-DF) General. I wouldn't be surprised if it got Mod-moved (or ROed or removed) but I imagine someone would say that's a sign of bias against some of the messages in this thread, so I call upon the good faith of OP to not make that an issue but to put it in a more appropriate place. IMO.[1] If you want to know:
Apparently I was drifting across the road. I maintain that I was pretty much on a consistent positiin within my half of the road, given it was an inside bend with cars parked part on the corner, and I took a precautionary line (further out than a 'racing' line, and no apex to it) in case of surprises like car doors opening on me, or reasonably anything with two or four legs darting out between them, so I was consistently close to the centre-line, doing less than the statutory limit on a road with no oncoming traffic (that would only have hit me if they were dangerously over the centre-line and going too fast so I couldn't react. I had a roadside breathaliser test (having answered, truthfully, that I had had a glass of wine at my parents', some hours before, for which the only positive result was my now having the 'souvenir' single-use breathing tube as keepsake, and no further follow-up... Maybe I had to take my insurance documents to a local station, as a formality, but I forget if that was then and/or a different spot-check under different circumstances that was a more legitimate and amicable (but equally soluble) check.