Not Fascism:
- Self-ownership of body;
- Private property via original appropriation;
- Non-Aggression;
- Anti-statism;
- Freedom of association;
- Decentralization;
- Secession;
- Exclusion as a right (discrimination)
In other words, liberty defined as freedom from coercion and invasion of natural rights.
It is when one deviates from these principles of liberty that one is closer on the spectrum to fascism, what is a statist-collectivist concept.
That is, social democrats are infinitely closer to becoming a contender for the label of "fascism" than a libertarian. Of course, "Antifa" finds an alliance in democratic socialists (softcore communists) and Marxists more so than the libertarians they dox and consider equally their enemy, when libertarianism is poles apart from fascism despite what the liberty-adverse think.
In fact, though i'd contest the idea of "state capitalism", i'd contend it's democratic socialists who are essentially the "crony capitalists" they hate, having given corporatists the political means of monopolization and cartelization they have achieved today under the belief that it was to protect the people.
This is because Antifa are unprincipled, politically correct communists (or, anti-capitalists) on a "social justice" (whatever that means) crusade, who are "antifascists" only insofar as nationalist socialism presents a challenger to international socialism (Communism), which offends them. The old war between left- and right-socialists conveniently leaves the libertarians out of the equation.
"Fascism", for them, has simply become a word to hurl around to silence speech. Labels are used as a substitute for discourse, so that they don't have to argue their ideas. They simply shout "Nazi!" and that's apparently sufficient. The Leftist goal is to censor anyone who has ideas outside of their own.
They wish to be seen as the sole virtuous people out there whom everyone should look to for ideas. Who would want to consider themselves a fascist, right? Remember, "if you oppose Antifa, which means antifascist, you're literally a fascist!" As if not supporting Antifa, a specific organization, means one endorses fascism.
Antifa equates "racism" (which doesn't necessitate violence) with "fascism" more so than opposing the state. More than you'll ever hear them speak out against the state (where were they under Obama?), leftist anarchists, if we can ever call them anarchists, despise the ideas of liberty as conceived of by libertarians. They're first and foremost anti-capitalists, in which they believe the present system is capitalism. That, or they fail to make any distinction from free-market capitalism and the crony statism we have today.
The idea of property rights and exclusion totally offends them. The way I see it, so long as a "white nationalist" isn't a statist that wishes to forcibly eradicate other races, and genuinely wishes to achieve a homogeneous community that doesn't admit entry to non-whites, then this is compatible with libertarianism. But, as Leftists rallying cry is inclusion, the idea of exclusion horrifies them.
As ones who believe in positive rights, the idea that rights are to have things not be done to you (negative rights) rather than an obligation to do things for other people, are considered bad. It would seem everything but aggression is a aggression to these types, or a "micro-aggression" as they like to call it.
While I never saw any interest in white nationalism or learning where they're coming from, it would seem to me that "white pride" is much more of a negative concept than their communist fantasies of expropriating private business owners. The libertarian is much more concerned with a just and moral use of violence than in someone's character (a guy who doesn't like blacks).
If violence is the measure, then Antifa is certainly more fascist than libertarians, and probably even most of the people who might consider themselves "white nationalists", but whom Antifa considers Nazis. Indeed, replace the word "white" coming from the political-left (publications, their own words) with "Jew" and they'd quickly be exposed as the racists-fascists they pretend to oppose.
If they weren't so silly, or, if they weren't just communists, they might find a real anti-state ally in anarcho-capitalists. But no less they have shunned us and conveniently grouped us in with the so-called "alt-right", which seems to me to have arose as a reaction to the onslaught of leftist political correctness that brands them with unsavory titles. If any libertarians thought they could have an alliance with these radical leftists, they're wrong. They want nothing to do with us.
They're ultimately for arbitrary violence, which surely puts them closer on the scale to being a fascist than adherents of the non-aggression principle who advocate all human interactions be voluntary.