Fox News Op-Ed Warns Antifa Threat Grows as Online Radicalization Spreads

A Fox News opinion column argues that left-wing political violence in the United States is rising toward levels not seen since the early 1970s, driven in part by online radicalization that can place a potential attacker anywhere. The piece cites a sequence of incidents over the past year, including what it describes as the assassination of Charlie Kirk in Utah, two near misses for President Donald Trump, the killing of UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson in New York, a Minnesota church shooting in which a transgender suspect allegedly killed two children, and, most recently, the killing of two detainees at a Dallas ICE facility. The author ties these acts to Antifa and other left-wing groups, and argues that Democrats have dismissed the organization as either nonexistent or merely an “idea.”

According to the column, online radicalization plays a central role: individuals study ideologies in online forums and discrete chat groups, log off and then appear in real life. The author notes that while there are physical Antifa affiliates in places such as Portland and Seattle, the broader threat is the online fog that enables a person to be radicalized in isolation and then act locally. The piece draws a contrast with the Weather Underground of the late 1960s and early 1970s, which required people to physically join a movement, arguing that today’s online networks allow supporters anywhere in the country to be drawn into violence. The author cites a Dallas-area teacher, Cassandra, who described anxiety after the Kirk incident and said she worries about being harmed in public spaces.

There are actual, physical Antifa affiliates, especially in places like Portland and Seattle. We know this because they regularly set federal buildings on fire and beat up journalists. But they are not the biggest threat. Frankly, they could be taken care of quickly if anyone bothered to police them. No, the real threat—one that is getting people shot at and killed—is the foggy online presence of Antifa and related groups, not just in America but in Europe as well. It is an ideology of evil slowly festering with murderous results. One does not envy the situation that Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel find themselves in. It must feel like chasing ghosts, as servers and chat groups come into and go out of existence, digital tracks well covered. What would help them most is if Democrats stopped obstinately claiming that Antifa doesn’t exist, or is just “an idea,” or asking, “Who could be against ‘anti-fascism’?” Not only do radicals take this as tacit approval, it also prevents a united effort to eradicate this violence. We are nowhere close to the level of political violence that peaked in the 1970s, when bombings felt like weekly occurrences. But we are trending in that direction, and until Democrats are willing to take this threat seriously, it will be very hard for the Trump administration to stop what is coming.\n

The piece situates the online-fueled threat within a broader historical arc. It notes that the Weather Underground, active around 1969–1975, carried out numerous acts of political violence in major urban centers, a contrast the author makes to today’s more diffuse, internet-driven model of recruitment and operation. The column argues this shift makes the threat harder to detect and disrupt, since modern networks can exist in virtual space and vanish without a trace. The author also highlights the difficulty of countering such decentralized extremism while respecting civil liberties, a point the piece says is often obscured in public debate. The argument continues by emphasizing that online rituals, social media amplification, and chat-platforms create a pipeline from online belief to real-world violence, sometimes within days or weeks of radicalization.

In a vignetting of personal impact, the author recounts meeting Cassandra, a Dallas-area fifth-grade teacher in her early 30s, who described the anxiety she felt in daily life after hearing about attacks tied to left-wing extremism. “It gives me anxiety,” she said. “Like, I sit in my car and worry someone is going to slam into me, or I’m going to get shot.” The column uses such anecdotes to illustrate the fear that accompanies perceived threats and to underscore the argument that online radicalization can translate into tangible danger for ordinary people.

The piece emphasizes that there are actual, physical Antifa affiliates, particularly in the Pacific Northwest, and argues that the bigger danger is the online ecosystem that can normalize violence and recruit new adherents. It describes law-enforcement challenges as investigators chase digital leads across servers and chat groups that appear and disappear with relative ease. The author asserts that the absence of a formal organizational structure in the United States does not diminish the reality or harm of the threat, and he contends that declining public acknowledgment of Antifa’s existence poses a strategic obstacle to preventing violence.

The columnist also casts the U.S. political debate in stark terms, urging elected officials to confront the threat openly. He contends that treating Antifa as merely an abstract “idea” or denying its existence hampers a coordinated response among federal, state, and local authorities. In concluding, the op-ed cautions that while current levels of violence do not yet match the peak of the 1970s, the trajectory is moving in that direction if the threat is ignored. It calls for a reality-based assessment of the risks, a strengthened focus on online networks, and a more explicit acknowledgment of Antifa as a threat so that necessary resources and policies can be marshaled to prevent future violence.