The Fascists literally modeled themselves after the Romans, so your confusion here is actually pretty interesting. We might say:
- Fascists = Romans
- Rich Men = Sadducees
- Antifa = Zealots/Pharisees
You are one of the Pharisees, who like Saul of Tarsus looks around and laments the evils of his countrymen, thinking that this evil stands in the way of his country's greatness. On the Fourth of July you stand up and call everyone to account for their evil racism, Nazism, avarice, et al., demonizing and castigating those you have identified as "the enemy." You leave the non-Jewish Fascists to the Zealots, who deal with them directly.
When Jesus came the Zealots and Pharisees initially thought, "Oh great, this guy is on our side! Jesus Christ is also Antifa." They turned out to be wrong as Jesus constantly dashed their expectations. So Saul, doing his Antifa-thing, had to start stoning Christians in order to cleanse the land (and Dylan writes about St. Stephen's martyrdom in his song, "Everybody Must Get Stoned"). On the road to Damascus Jesus calls him
out of Antifa, and Paul ends up writing:
"For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places." (Eph 6:12)
The problem with you analogy is that, for one, it conflates the Zealots and Pharisees as though they were the same thing. They weren't. The Pharisees were certainly not fans of the Roman occupation. But they weren't the same thing. As you might recall from the Gospels, it was a secret coalition of Pharisees and Sadducees (who would never ordinarily work together) who offered Jesus up to the Romans. You may also, recall, that Jesus' rebukes toward the Pharisees had to do with self-righteousness and hypocrisy. According to the Synoptic Gospels, the straw that seemed to break the camel's back was His political protest at the Temple, calling out the religious corruption at the Temple, knocking over the money changers tables and chasing the animals out from the Temple grounds--disrupting the abuse toward the poor. Which led to the act of conspiracy which had Jesus arrested and handed over to Pilate.
And the whole reason Jesus was crucified was, from the Roman POV, political. You don't crucify a common criminal--you crucify people who you wanted to make an example of. Which is why the formal charge posted was "King of the Jews"--intended not only to mock Jesus, but to make the Jewish people, to remind them, "This is what we do to your so-called "kings"".
Jesus was, of course, a revolutionary. He just wasn't a revolutionary of the Maccabean variety--because the kingdom He preached was a different sort of kingdom. It's why He was never going to march into Jerusalem with an army to overthrow Pilate--let alone march into Rome and dethrone Caesar. But pretending that what He was saying and doing wasn't revolutionary would be refusing to have eyes to see and ears to hear.
The foundation of the Christian faith is the declaration that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah and Lord. The Romans didn't care about people having their own religious ideas. They did, however, care about people being subservient to Caesar. They may have, at least for a time, tolerated Judaism because it was old (though
tolerate is doing a lot of heavy lifting, considering the cruelties of Rome toward the Jews); Christians however were going around preaching a
Gospel about a
kingdom and a
King. They were saying "Jesus is Lord". They were going into cities and saying "your gods are fake". So when the Roman establishment persecuted Christians, what were the formal charges brought against them? What was St. Polycarp charged of? He was accused of being an "atheist" and "tempting" others to be the same. Christians were called "haters of mankind" because we didn't bow down and offer incense to Caesar or his image, we refused to partake in the state cult, we refused to participate in war. St. Hippolytus in his Apostolic Tradition wrote that a man who refused to throw off his military belt couldn't even be baptized. Tertullian wrote that a Christian shouldn't even be a magistrate. Now, just to be clear, I'm not saying Christians can't participate in politics--but let's be clear about what the ancient witness of the fathers was here.
In this analogy: The Zealots weren't Antifa--the Zealots were nationalist rebels. The Pharisees weren't Antifa, the Pharisees are the religious teachers and preachers who are more interested in looking righteous than acting righteous.
The closest thing to "Antifa" we're going to find, using this analogy, is the Christian Church. Who refused to bow and worship Caesar, who gave aid to widows and orphans, who insisted on the biblical teaching of justice for the poor. Who refused xenophobic and ethnocentric ideas--by insisting that people, regardless of social status, gender, or ethnic background were part of a universal brotherhood of mankind created in God's image, who, in Adam had fallen; and in Christ were redeemed--and lived out that peace by coming together, eating together, praying together, and living together.
Re-read your New Testament.