Fair enough, call it "resurrected" instead of "created." Still it was created, *in its modern form*, by someone other than the German communist party of Weimar. Again, if the Whigs were resurrected, *even if they used the same logo* which wouldn't be surprising since they're paying homage to the history of the party, you would say the new Whig party was created by the person who created the new shit. All the more pertinent if the Whig party was created in another country. You should certainly acknowledge the history, but Antifaschistische Aktion died >80 years ago. This new Antifa is a.) American-born (even if it is Jewish created), and b.) was born ~80 years later. The two, despite looking the same, have some important distinctions, namely temporal and spatial. And, realistically, the names are even different. You're being overly pedantic to the point of torturing the language. The article is discussing Antifa. You are discussing Antifaschistische Aktion. Yes modern Antifa was inspired by AA, but AA was/is dead. This isn't a continuation so much as a rebirth. Like if the KKK died out completely, then in 100 years some pro-white group called "The Klan" was born with all the throwbacks of the KKK. You could still say (and be understood) that someone other than, idk, Nathan Bedford Forrest (?) created "The Klan," despite all the homage being paid to the KKK.