Antifa, Atheism, and the New War on Free Thought

The U.S. government is testing the limits of the First Amendment. In one week, Pam Bondi promised prosecutions for “hate speech,” the FCC threatened ABC over Jimmy Kimmel’s jokes, and Trump labeled Antifa a terrorist organization.

In this Mike Drop, I argue why labeling ideas as terrorism is a dangerous precedent. We explore the irony of targeting antifascists, the hypocrisy around January 6, and why both liberals and conservatives should resist this slide. Speech is the foundation of every other freedom, and defending it is not optional.

💬 Viewer Question

Do you think the government should ever be able to label an idea or philosophy as terrorism? Why or why not?

📑 Chapter Headings

1.                     Intro: When Ideas Become Threats

2.                     From Pam Bondi to the FCC

3.                     Antifa Declared Terrorist – The Historical Irony

4.                     What Terrorism Actually Requires

5.                     The First Tread on Free Speech

6.                     Why Everyone Should Care

7.                     What We Do Next

📚 Suggested Reading List

1.                     Nadine Strossen – HATE: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship https://amzn.to/3VIzE8d

2.                     Timothy Garton Ash's "Free Speech: Ten Principles for A Connected World" https://amzn.to/3KsjPzO

Mary Anne Franks' "Fearless Speech: Breaking Free from the First Amendment" https://amzn.to/3KarHpB 

Visit us at www.Atheistville.com for more content from Mike Smithgall and the Atheistville team

📺 Subscribe on YouTube: youtube.com/@atheistville

💬 Want to be a guest or submit a question? Drop us a note at CONTACT

Check us out at: https://atheistville.buzzsprout.com

🔥 New episodes weekly from Atheistville — Mike Drop with Mike Smithgall, Ask an Atheist, and The Unholy Roundtable

© 2025 Atheistville Media

Transcript

SPEAKER_01: 0:00

And now, making his way to the studio, still waiting for God to smite him, it's Mike Smithgall. Thanks for tuning in. I'm Mike Smithgall, the unelected mayor of Atheistville, and this is today's Mic Drop.

UNKNOWN: 0:19

Mic Drop

SPEAKER_01: 0:20

I don't normally do two mic drops in one week, but this week is different. On Monday, Donald Trump said he would consider labeling Antifa a domestic terrorist group. That statement didn't come out of nowhere. It's part of a broader plan that his advisors are drawing up in the wake of Charlie Kirk's killing. A plan to crack down on what they call radical left-wing groups. They floated racketeering charges, stripping non-profits of tax status, even criminal charges for groups or individuals they say are targeting conservatives. And here's why that matters here in Atheistville. This channel is about atheism, free thought and open discussion. If the government starts branding ideologies it dislikes as terrorism, then atheism, already stigmatized as un-American or immoral, is only a step away from the same treatment. So when I hear Trump and Pam Bondi talking about targeting speech, targeting groups, and putting people in cuffs, I take that personally. If anti-fascism can be terrorism, then atheism can be terrorism. And once you normalize criminalizing thought, no worldview is safe. Now this week, in the span of a few days, we saw three examples of government overreach targeting speech. Let's start with Pam Bondi. She said hate speech is separate from free speech, and the Justice Department would go after people for it.

SPEAKER_00: 1:46

There's free speech, and then there's hate speech. And there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie in our society. We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech, anything. And that's across the aisle.

SPEAKER_01: 2:05

Here's the problem. In the United States, hateful speech is generally protected unless it crosses narrow lines like true threats or incitement to imminent violence. Courts have been crystal clear on this for decades. Bondi's framing is wrong and worse, it's reckless. I made a video about this very subject. At the time, I thought, this is outrageous, and I said so. But I needed only wait a short time before her statements became actions. This wasn't random government overreach. Bondi's targeting of hate speech was part of the broader crackdown that Trump announced on Monday. Hours after her statement, the FCC, a government agency made up of appointed officials, not elected representatives, leaned on ABC over Jimmy Kimmel's remarks about Trump and Charlie Kirk. The threat was clear. Remove the content or risk your broadcast license. And here's what happened next. Jimmy Kimmel was suspended by ABC. Now, ABC is a private company. They can do that. But they're bowing to the pressure of the FCC. So now we have to ask, will ABC need to run their news copy by the government before going to air? Because that's what this pressure creates, a de facto ministry of truth. And I urge you to go read exactly what Kimmel said. Tell me if that really rises to the level of offensive, let alone worthy of government coming down on his company. Which leads us to an even scarier possibility. Will the FCC restrict truth itself? Now, let's talk about what doesn't get government pressure. On September 10th, Fox News host Brian Kilmeade said mentally ill homeless people should get involuntary lethal injections and added, just kill them.

SPEAKER_04: 3:53

Either you take the resources that we're going to give you or you decide that you're going to be locked up in jail. That's the way it has to be now. Or involuntary lethal injection or something. Just kill them.

SPEAKER_01: 4:05

That's not hyperbole or satire. That's advocating the murder of vulnerable people on national television. Kilmeade eventually apologized after the clip went viral, but here's what didn't happen. No FCC pressure, no Justice Department threats, no licensing concerns. His co-hosts didn't even blink. They just kept talking. And in fact, during his apology, Fox News was running a chyron promoting his show. It's as if suggesting the murder of homeless people is simply business as usual at Fox. So let's be clear about the Jimmy Kimmel makes a joke about the right taking great pains to distance themselves from yet another white guy with a gun, and Trump giving no thought to Charlie Kirk as he brushes his memory aside to instead talk about a ballroom. The government threatens ABC's license. Brian Kilmeade advocates killing homeless people, and what do we get? Beep, beep, beep. That's right, crickets from Washington. Nothing. That's not about protecting speech or public decency. That's about protecting power. The government only cares about harmful speech when it's speech that harms them. But the week isn't over. Then came the third strike. Trump's announcement about Antifa wasn't just another press line. It was the centerpiece of this broader crackdown that his advisors are openly discussing. They're using Charlie Kirk's murder, a tragedy with no proven link to Antifa as the pretext to go after dissent. And here's the historical irony. Antifa means anti-fascist. The original anti-fascistist Aktion formed in Germany in 1932 to resist the Nazis. So a banner born to push back against a tyrannical regime 90 years ago is again under government attack for what it represents. But here's where atheists need to pay attention. If Trump and his team can label anti-fascism Then why not atheism? Think about how often atheists are already painted as immoral or un-American. If this labeling becomes normal, atheism fits neatly on that list. And unlike churches or conservative groups, we don't have national lobbies or defense funds. Most of us are individuals, which means the process itself, the stigma, and the legal costs, the harassment, could silence us completely. Here's the practical risk. There is no Antifa national office with lobbyists or pooled defense funds. That means every person who gets caught under the terrorist label fights alone. Most will not have the money or the time to fight back. Even if they're innocent, the process itself becomes the punishment. That chills everyone else. This is how you silence dissent without outlawing dissent. You don't need to ban a newspaper if you can threaten its publisher. You don't need to outlaw a philosophy if you can bankrupt anyone that holds it. And for those of us here at Atheistville, which is atheists, free thinkers, people who challenge religious orthodoxy, this should terrify you. If the government normalizes branding ideas as terrorism, your speech and ideology are under threat. And let's be clear about what the law actually says. In U.S. law, the State Department designates foreign terrorist organizations, which triggers material support crimes. But there is is no parallel domestic list for homegrown ideology. The FBI defines domestic terrorism by conduct tried to criminal acts, not by mere belief or loose affinity. There's a reason for that gap. It's a constitutional guardrail. So what would actually meet the definition of terrorist organization? You need leadership or an enterprise that calls for violence.

SPEAKER_02: 7:55

But I said something's wrong here. Something's really wrong. Can't have happened. And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.

SPEAKER_01: 8:06

And followers who act on those calls. That chain of events, leadership calling for a fight, and followers acting violently on that call, is what actually fits the definition of domestic terror action. So ask yourself this, if Antifa is terrorism without leaders, without a central structure, without incitement from the top, then what do we call MAGA actions on January 6th? Because if the label is applied honestly, January 6th looked a lot more like organized terrorism than anything Antifa has done, as a loose-eyed ideology. Yet Antifa gets the terrorist label, while January 6th participants get campaign rallies and book deals and pardons. This isn't about consistency. It's about power. It's about using that power to silence ideas the government doesn't like. Now let's talk about those Gadsden flags, the one that says, don't tread on me. You see them plastered on trucks and flying in front yard and stitched into hats and on t-shirts. And the idea is noble. Resist government tyranny. It's an idea that I actually support as a concept. But I have to ask, when the government starts telling you what words you can say, what jokes you can make, and what ideas you can hold, who do you think is doing the treading? If your speech is threatened with prosecution, if your ideas are branded terrorism, that's not simply the first tread. That's a stomp, and it's landing directly on your First Amendment rights. And the irony is painful. Many of the same voices cheering this move would scream about tear And let's be clear about what real government tyranny looks like. When Christians face actual government actions, like being denied permits for religious gatherings or having their tax exemptions threatened, they rightfully call that persecution. But when the government starts branding secular worldviews is dangerous, when it threatens broadcasters for challenging authority, that's the same tyranny. The difference is Christians have constitutional protection that are well established and defended. Atheists? We're still fighting for basic recognition. The most basic right, the foundation of every other freedom, is speech. That's the tread you should fear. And this isn't about left versus right. This is constitution. Liberals and atheists, you are the one Trump and his advisors are openly targeting in the wake of Kirk's killing. They aren't hiding it. They're saying the quiet part quite out loud. And if Antifa is the test case, atheists and free thought are one step behind. Now, I can't prove atheism will be next on the list, but I can show you the pattern. Look at how this works. First, you normalize the idea that certain ideologies are inherently dangerous. Then you expand the definition. We've seen this before. McCarthyism started with the actual communists, then expanded to include anyone with un-American ideas. I'm putting quotes about that. Un-American ideas. Atheism already fits the profile they're building. We're seen as undermining traditional values. We're a minority without strong institutional protection. And we challenge beliefs that many consider foundational to American identity. If this framework becomes normal, we don't have to guess whether we'll be included. Logic demands it. But conservatives should care too. Today, it Trump is in charge. Tomorrow, someone else will be. Picture this. It's 2028, and AOC just won the presidency. She's holding a press conference about targeting hate groups that undermine American values, such as MAGA, to name just one. She's using the exact same legal framework you're cheering today. How does that feel? Because that's exactly what you're building when you support criminalizing ideology. The tool you create for Trump becomes the weapon used against you. No matter who who you voted for, you should be terrified when the government criminalizes ideas because the moment you let them start, you've already lost the right to stop them. Even with heated rhetoric, your rights still remain, for now. Peaceful speech and assembly are protected. Courts can check excess. These are real guardrails, but they act after arrests or threats begin. That's why public pushback matters before the chill sets in. We have to defend the principles You don't have to like Antifa. You don't have to agree with Jimmy Kimmel. But you do have to defend their right to speak, because defending their speech is defending your own. That means paying attention, speaking up. Support civil liberty groups like the ACLU. Learn your protest rights. If you organize or attend demonstrations, keep the advocacy clear of any planning for violence. Keep receipts, plans, de-escalation notes in writing that preserves legal protection if a Authorities get it wrong. Get legal observers. And if you want to dig deep into how government threatens free speech, pick up Nadine Stosson's Hate and Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship. It's the perfect antidote to Pam Bondi's dangerous rhetoric. Timothy Garton's Ash, Free Speech, 10 Principles for a Connected World, will show you exactly how the government corporate pressure we see with ABC happens worldwide. And if you really want to challenge yourself, read Marianne Frank's Even if you disagree with her, she'll make you think harder about what free speech really means. I'll put a link to these in the show notes. Most importantly, refuse to give a free pass when the government crosses the line. Because this week we saw three lines crossed. A top official promising prosecution for speech. A regulatory body threatening a license for satire. A president labeling ideology terrorism. Each one chips away at the First Amendment. Together, they're a hammer strike. Alright, that's my two cents. Unblessed and unfiltered. Agree or disagree, that's what I got for you. This was a clear warning shot. If Antifa can be terrorism today, then atheism can be tomorrow. If Jimmy Kimmel can be silence today, then you can tomorrow. And if speech without gods is treating as terror, then freedom of conscience itself is under attack. Don't wait until the hammer falls on you to care about free speech. Use your voice while you still have it. Share Share this mic drop. Push your friends to think about who is really doing the treading and defend the First Amendment because it's the only thing standing between your thoughts and the government's disapproval. I'm Mike Smithgall, and I'll catch you on the next one.