Not one civil right in this country was gained through goodwill; they will be reversed via the same medium.

losthighway wrote: Sun Dec 08, 2024 11:18 am
Right. Like if we normalized this how long would it be before they start coming for our people? My folks have talked about what it was like when Kennedy and MLK were picked off by psychos and the list goes longer than that. It's not a game you win.

As opposed to what, the mass shooters of the 21st century? All violence is political.
But the popular notion of the political violence of the 60s and 70s is a much different thing than is happening now. It’s fairly well known by now that a lot of the assassinations were carried out as part of a coup by the security state as part of the Cold War, which was essentially a clandestine World War III. There’s not one speck of any part of the MLK/JFK/RFK assassinations that wasn’t planned and carried out by crazy right wingers with a lot of power, which is as much part of the government as the Social Security office, “public accountability” or not.
Carry on to post WWII Europe and the whole world and it’s the same thing. Strategy of tension at work.
This is particular situation different because a) the likelihood of anyone willing to give up an extremely powerful CEO to a lone assassin is low, and without historical precedent, and b) the gleeful reactions to horrible events happening to people we don’t like, which obviously means something politically, though who knows what. That someone struck back isn’t that surprising as the fact that they didn’t do it to a school full of children this time.

Bernardo wrote:

OrthodoxEaster wrote: Sun Dec 08, 2024 10:21 am Fuck all that. It's very easy to live like so and opt out. Always has been. (Granted, it's more complicated w/healthcare, but hear me out...)

If people did this en masse, it would make way, way more of a point than just shooting Musk or Bezos. Their enterprises would crumble.

I'm sorry, I sympathize with the point you're making, but I think it's completely absurd, based on how people ACTUALLY BEHAVE, as demonstrated by where we have ended up so far. The scales are tipped to an extreme, and the average person (see: election results) is not acting any wiser about it. You have LESS chance of getting change happening over people's habits than over an election, and I'd say far, far less. People will vote BETTER than they will act in a day to day basis. Not going to happen, and if it's not going to happen, let's just lose? Because?

It's all totally crazy to me. I don't really hope to change anyone's mind on this, it's just depressing to witness.

It seems like plenty of people already think like you do. Which is part of what I find somewhat disturbing.

Public assassinations will somehow make us wiser? Have you seen some of the memes people have posted about this? I don't think so.

I appreciate that you sympathize. But when murder becomes a more viable option for most people than, I dunno, not using an online shopping site, I'd say we're far more fucked than we already are. Oh, but the public just can't give up the convenience, I guess.

All I can say is if this keeps up, good luck fighting off Elon Musk's or (or whoever's) private army of security mercenaries, who will be far better funded, trained, and equipped than you and your friends will be.

As others have pointed out, the 1960s and 1970s—particularly on the West Coast—were full of this mentality. From the NWLF to the SLA to Manson. Didn't accomplish shit.

numberthirty wrote: Sun Dec 08, 2024 12:53 am It will be after I am finished with an eternities worth of coal because I spent money on any of number of things(cell phones/computers/televisions/you get it...) that were built with practically slave labor.

Also wanted to highlight this. To think that you can opt out of the insane rivers of blood propping up every comfort granted to the modern professional is patently absurd. And by not using Amazon or Twitter!

People are not going to boycott billionaires out of existence. It's not about getting wiser.

Btw, I don't buy at Amazon, I think it's fucking gross. I also don't think it makes a difference. A difference is needed. Right now

rsmurphy wrote: Sun Dec 08, 2024 11:54 am Not one civil right in this country was gained through goodwill; they will be reversed via the same medium.

Nobody can deny this.

A_Man_Who_Tries wrote:

rsmurphy wrote: Sun Dec 08, 2024 11:54 am Not one civil right in this country was gained through goodwill; they will be reversed via the same medium.

Nobody can deny this.

Unfortunately, very few were also gained thru vigilante public assassination. (See the failed examples of the '60s and '70s leftist terrorist groups I mentioned.) I'm not saying everything should be totally civilized and peaceful. But the solution is a whole lot more complicated than kill-them-or-blow-it up. Almost never works. There is often an economic element to change, this being America, the world's largest casino.

Next thing you know, people are gonna start saying that 9/11 was this great statement on US foreign policy and economics. B/c hey, Cantor Fitzgerald! Israel!

What you ended up w/ was a whole lot of innocent collateral damage, the Afghan War, the Iraq War, W's second term, the Department of Homeland Security, even more militarized cops, and even longer lines at the airport. Seriously, thanks.

Cue the sneering Negative Trend classics "Groovy Terrorist" and "NWLF," written in fucking 1978.

What you ended up w/ was a whole lot of innocent collateral damage, the Afghan War, the Iraq War, W's second term, the Department of Homeland Security, even more militarized cops, and even longer lines at the airport. Seriously, thanks.

So, the US didn't need a reason to invade. It just waited for one and then made shit up from there. You're describing a consequence and assigning it an action that didn't really precede it because it makes your argument better.

The truth is, these things would have wound up happening in some way, somewhere else, under different pretenses. These are not linear causal reactions to specific events, they're just part of a cycle of state violence that hasn't ended with our current efforts.

Frankie99 wrote:

What you ended up w/ was a whole lot of innocent collateral damage, the Afghan War, the Iraq War, W's second term, the Department of Homeland Security, even more militarized cops, and even longer lines at the airport. Seriously, thanks.

So, the US didn't need a reason to invade. It just waited for one and then made shit up from there. You're describing a consequence and assigning it an action that didn't really precede it because it makes your argument better.

The truth is, these things would have wound up happening in some way, somewhere else, under different pretenses. These are not linear causal reactions to specific events, they're just part of a cycle of state violence that hasn't ended with our current efforts.

The US invaded Afghanistan b/c it refused to hand over Bin Landen. That's an established fact.

You don't think the so-called War on Terror (which included Iraq, go look up some Bush speeches) was a consequence of 9/11? Nor the Dept. of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act? Nor my bag-search in the subway a few weeks after it happened? Nor the wave of Islamophobia that swept the country?

At worst, you can say it supplied an excellent excuse.

More realistically, about the only one of those things that might have happened anyway was Iraq.

I'm saying the actions that preceded the state violence don't matter. You're looking at this from a strict historical "a preceded b preceded c therefore x" and that's not what I'm challenging. I'm saying the path would have been taken no matter what. It was there all along, just waiting for an event. 9/11 happened to be that event.