Nick Mamatas endorses no-platforming of "fascists" while defending the continued inclusion of Communists and socialists;
1. No-platforming. This has become widely misunderstood as militant liberals have generalized a particular radical practice—the demand to keep fascists from having a public platform at events and within organizations. One can and should no-platform fascists for the simple reason that fascism is a totalizing and universally negating political philosophy—it cannot prosper without the destruction of all points of view via political violence. Even Stalinist and Maoist Communism, say all the horrifying and accurate things about it you can, is self-protective—that is, it can adapt to diplomatic needs, introduce or quash markets internally etc. There is still a core of "dialectic"—a philosophy based on change. (Thus China going from economic backwater to central driver of the world economic system in a generation while still putatively remaining "communist".) Fascism is based on achieving a certain transhistorical perfection, which is impossible and inherently anti-rational, and thus it not only can broke no diplomacy/debate, it cannot even keep itself stable. It destroys everything, including ultimately itself (and takes plenty of people with it when it collapses). THAT is why it must be kept from growing.
See event HWA No Platforming of David Riley