If you can't even get allies to stand behind you, how do you expect strangers to stand behind it?
I don't. Lacking allies puts a person in a bad position, but it doesn't turn them into a powerless worm. Without allies, you basically must embrace terrorism. You act alone knowing you'll die alone and possibly get used as an example of what happens to dissidents.
I should specify that the "terrorism" where you take a paintball gun to the movie theater and bruise a crowd is useless. Making Bob down the street scared does nothing; making your governor scared might do something. "The people responsible have names and addresses", etc, I'm sure you've heard it before.
If this sounds unappealing, I understand. It's far more attractive to protect what you care about than be struggling to harass your enemies guerilla-style. If you can form a team, you might even protect a whole town. By yourself, you'll have a hard time just protecting your own family. I'd wager that changes the equation for a lot of men - having to weigh not only their principles but the safety of their children.
I hope you do manage to find allies.
I'm also assuming peaceful correction is not an option. I know how asinine it sounds to hear someone suggest voting or whatever, but I consider it part of the process. If a government refuses to permit peaceful change, they don't simply gain total control, they invite immediate violence from the citizenry.
I could ask what is, but there's no point in answering if you think I'm a bad faith actor. The conversation is basically over anyway, since you've withdrawn your effort.
The only reason I "glowed" is because the alternative is to perform the very dull back-and-forth that I can find on 4/pol/. It creates an unsubtle argument vacuum, with many baits like "why doesn't anything happen" and "no one will do anything" (designed to make lurkers consider violence while being too afraid to speak of it). I have no intention of allowing this space to fall into such a mire.
I don't. Lacking allies puts a person in a bad position, but it doesn't turn them into a powerless worm. Without allies, you basically must embrace terrorism. You act alone knowing you'll die alone and possibly get used as an example of what happens to dissidents.
I should specify that the "terrorism" where you take a paintball gun to the movie theater and bruise a crowd is useless. Making Bob down the street scared does nothing; making your governor scared might do something. "The people responsible have names and addresses", etc, I'm sure you've heard it before.
If this sounds unappealing, I understand. It's far more attractive to protect what you care about than be struggling to harass your enemies guerilla-style. If you can form a team, you might even protect a whole town. By yourself, you'll have a hard time just protecting your own family. I'd wager that changes the equation for a lot of men - having to weigh not only their principles but the safety of their children.
I hope you do manage to find allies.
I'm also assuming peaceful correction is not an option. I know how asinine it sounds to hear someone suggest voting or whatever, but I consider it part of the process. If a government refuses to permit peaceful change, they don't simply gain total control, they invite immediate violence from the citizenry.
Ringing hollow now.
I could ask what is, but there's no point in answering if you think I'm a bad faith actor. The conversation is basically over anyway, since you've withdrawn your effort.
The only reason I "glowed" is because the alternative is to perform the very dull back-and-forth that I can find on 4/pol/. It creates an unsubtle argument vacuum, with many baits like "why doesn't anything happen" and "no one will do anything" (designed to make lurkers consider violence while being too afraid to speak of it). I have no intention of allowing this space to fall into such a mire.