Noticing almost no one is actually discussing the content of their claims. I'm mostly seeing a fixation on and knee-jerk reactions to the terms being used in the article's headline. The article which comes from a site openly displaying both [trans panic and science denialist propaganda]( on that same page. Both the bias and the intention are clear here: use exaggerative wording to get a big reaction, specifically to get people more upset at the author's political enemies.

The actual arguments being made here, if anyone wants to genuinely approach them, are that:

1. Daniel Defense flew an ad featuring someone with a Valknut tattoo, which like many Norse, Germanic, and Celtic symbols, has been to some degree co-opted by White supremacists, who are obsessed with "White" cultural aesthetics.
2. Four months after White supremacists marched in Charlottesville, with antifa pushback, two groups ran a joint ad at a booth at SHOT Show 2018, which promoted the use of firearms as deterrents against less-armed antifa groups.