You must log in or register to comment.

CaptainACAB wrote

I would feel sad and afraid; not because of random people dying or the anarcho-terrorist uptick, but because the state's response would be even worse and I'm pretty sure right-wing vigilantism would increase, which would, at best, be just as bloody.

I'd foresee a lot of draconian law enforcement, state surveillance, and centrist handwringing against political extremism and violence.


__0 wrote

A little off topic... but a takeaway from the aftermath of 9/11 for me was - yes the destruction of the world trade center was a tragic loss of life, and a very traumatic (and dramatic) moment to a lot of people who were there. However I think objectively what really had a much more negative affect was the 20 years of political chaos, war etc that Followed...

I would say that Americas reaction to something like the destruction would turn America into an absolute hell hole of a country, and likely destabilize world politics in a way that I can't even imagine.

Although it would be a dramatic statement, I don't think that it would really do anything other than push America into a level of fascism that most people living there couldn't imagine right now.

I don't think it would result in any sort of state collapse, more just extreme state violence...

There are some very big issues with the way America is structured politically, as in there is no easy way for states to exit from the union even if the union was to be entirely disfunctional,

Furthermore I think that the amount of money put into the United States military would create an incredibly dangerous situation if we were ever faced with state collapse,

For instance what would we do with all those nuclear weapons? Also How much of the American military would be auctioned off?


moonlune wrote

Agreed. Everyone who believes in mainstream politics would be so thankful for an excuse to increase the state's strength.


CircleA wrote

The secret service has to investigate any and all talk of killing the big man. I'd edit the title if I were you.


lettuceLeafer OP wrote

thanks /u/captainACAB /u/__0 /u/moonlune and /u/kinshavo for the answers

I usually respond so people feel like they didn't respond just for me to ignore but mostly u all said similar things which makes sense. So I only really would say thanks good point.


gone_to_croatan wrote

I have a very firm position the violence alienates the average person form whatever goal or propaganda you are trying to reach.

But then this is only true for a certain privileged position (where I and 99% of the userbase is probably included). If you ask Palestinian in the Gaza strip that lost family members and are in a state of deep human misery they wouldn feel like this. In many poor countries if you give a malnourished teen a gun to rob for themselves they will not think twice before explode the head of a possible target.

My point being, for the intended audience of the act and for the people engaging in the violence the alienation from the political aspect is certain, even if we reach these already deep alienated people the dynamics of how the act will be interpreted will be different.

If you sacrifice your soul to achieve an objective, you lost everything imho. The end don't justify the means


lettuceLeafer OP wrote

I would laugh at libs seething over the horrors of .ass murderers being killed. But as a tactic I'm not a bit fan of killing people especially innocent people so it wouldn't be a change I would view as better


moonlune wrote

This kinda happened(ish) in the beginning of the 20th century. The only positive outcome was cool songs about anarchist martyrs.


MHC wrote

Ir the moon were made of green cheese and the cow jumped over it, your wish list ain't gonna happen!