How would you feel if it was the government trampling on your rights yesterday, instead of the victims being people like me?
But nobody did nothin' to me yesterday.
Could the entire support base of the regime's bullshit really rest on retards with an IQ just too low to understand oppression as a conditional hypothetical? Since "nuthin' bad happened to me yesterday" is that why they excuse all this shit? Because they literally can't understand that it could happen to them later?
Yeah only about 10% of the population needs to actually fight back in order to actually upset things like in the American Revolution. I've heard that the projections are that if the US goes into full civil war at least 30% of the population would end up fighting back.
Normies will always lean towards whatever makes them feel comfortable. It takes quite a lot to tip them from "Do nothing" towards drastic action, or at least supporting people who are willing to take drastic action.
The entire legal system is compromised and I think it's naive to pretend otherwise, but ok.
We need to wait until they will force the migrant to live in your bedroom. But more serious is completely screwed on a state level in the USA?
All communists look at what Stalin did and somehow think they would be Stalin and not against the wall with the other useful idiots.
The one that rises to the top is almost never the one that lead the revolution.
it doesn't take much at all for normies to support people who will take drastic action. all you have to do is bombard them with outrage bait, it doesn't matter if it's justified or crafted.
but you are right in saying that it takes an awful lot for no means themselves to get off their butts and do something.
Furthermore, I'm not allowing any of my neighbors to be loaded onto box cars.
Forgive the whole WW2 angle but this explains the normie behaviour:
I've seen this successfully translated to relate to communist regimes especially the Soviet Union and Cambodia, the persecution of White farmers in South Africa, targeting of Christians in Middle East etc
The point is, a LOT of people don't see the boulder slowly gain speed towards them till it hits their toes. They ignore the warning signs until THEY are now affected.
Real life example, early 2020 I saw the warning signs of lockdowns and not just gathered supplies for myself and family but also warned friends and colleagues at the time to do the same. Some thought I was overreacting till barely a month later, proven completely right.
I know people love to quote that but the author at the last line should really be thinking: "they" are 4/4 so far. Maybe I am a problem.
Exactly. If someone is next in line after commies, socialists, unionists, and jews, they are the ones I am going to be side eyeing rather than the people coming after them.
I have always hated that quote.
I prefer the version I mentioned when they do this but for white farmers in Zimbabwe, REALLY scarily relevant to shit happening now..
I never trust anyone who gets "redpilled" but is still talking as though they know shit.
Her "revelation" is something we've all known, explored, dissected, and debated for over a decade while she and hers were calling us incel racists and refusing to engage at all.
She needs to, as the Left loves to say, "stop talking and listen to the marginalized voices".
Meh, #GamerGate did the same to plenty of gamers who leaned left by default and now we're here on a containment board for those who escaped the previous containment board.
I intend to be good on supplies before Election Day this year. I have no proof of any kind of imminent chaos, but I'll sleep a little more soundly.
Some of it, maybe, but my issue with this line of thought (and with the poem quoted by u/SoctaticMethod1 ) is that they both work from an assumption that the government picks its targets with a dartboard. That it oppresses for the sake of oppressing, that it has no favored classes or people with motivations steering the ship.
Sometimes, that may be true, but in this case, you have to remember that you’re applying it as “hey, black guy, you know those other black people telling you you’re noble, whites are evil, and they’re gonna take everything from whites and give it to you? Imagine if they turned on you!” (And you can substitute “gays/straights,” “trans/cis,” or any such pairing here). The argument that “it could be turned on you!” entirely misses the friend/enemy distinction. The goal is to give these powers to your friends to use against your enemies so that your enemies can’t create similar powers to use against you.
Truthfully, I find myself more aligned with the more authoritarian forms of the right for exactly this reason. I don’t agree with the normiecons and the lolberts going “but if we use the power of government against them, what if it turns on us?” That philosophy of surrendering power is exactly what got us where we are today, and I have no desire for my side’s end goal to be “take out the current crop of bad guys, set us back to 1990, and say ‘pretty please, ideology that ruthlessly infiltrates, subverts, and seizes power, don’t do that this time around!’” It is necessary to crush communism, and no moralizing poems about “what if the people that crush communism turn on you" will change my mind. Likewise for the black supremacists or the LGBT identitarians or whatever—it is necessary for them to seize power out of the hands of their opponents, they’ve been doing a bang up job of it thus far, and of course they aren’t going to say “but what if my enemies use this power against me,” because they are killing their enemies. Their enemies will be dead.
The entire crux is here. Are we using the government, or is the government a self-perpetuating system that acts in it's own interest?.
Good luck with that lol. As soon as you have violent powerful governance you engage in power plays within your own camp, even if the ideology seems cohesive. Who's gonna lead this campaign? What happens when their peers disagree? You just get coup after coup
The logic that that is inevitable would preclude any group with power from ever ruling anything, which is retarded on its face.
No, you're advocating a government with less checks and balances to enable them to 'deal with' enemies of the state as they see fit.
Again, who's gonna lead it? What happens if their peers label the leader as an enemy of the state? Can you name a single authoritarian society that hasn't descended into a coup?
Considering that this would include all monarchies and chiefdoms and similar, I would have to say “the majority of governments throughout human history.”
You are playing some very nice “what if” games that fail to interact with reality as it is. Our “representative republic” has been almost entirely captured, such that it is an oligarchy with a thin veneer of freedom over it. Almost every institution that wields power—the educational, the media, the financial, the megacorporation—has become captured by this same ideology. By which means would you fix this overwhelming ideological imbalance that does not include, at minimum, a governmental equivalent firing key people across the board and instituting different people who would neither continue their predecessors abuses of power, nor—crucially—allow their own predecessors to simply resume the same evil game?
Cut government by like 90%. Remove the levers of power that these money laundering scum abuse
Not to mention there are people out there who get that knocking on their door and think they deserved it.
I won't forget the story of the entrepreneur who posted pro-BLM stuff on his store windows because he supported them. Then BLM burned it down during a riot. Then the owner reacted by claiming he just didn't support them hard enough and that he would do better.
Which would explain why the government likes to make sure we stay stupid.
It's not IQ, it's the path of least resistance. Even if it could happen to them later, why bring regime wrath down on themselves now?
Except they all protest and advocate for "the oppressed". They do stand up to "the system" when the correct group is being oppressed, but they literally don't think that certain groups even could be oppressed, cause they're racist, sexist, istophobes.
Don't make the mistake in thinking these people are stupid, they aren't. There are many high-IQ folx who have been convinced of this nonsense by an appeal to their vanity; they're so inherently good that they're responsible for all the stupid browns who can't advocate for themselves and, while we're at it, let's put ourselves into positions where we can force our will on the bad people as well.
It's arrogance, pure and simple.
Those "oppressed" group with government backing, NGOs, national holidays, and widespread social media support? Those are The System, not some outcast lot which are forever being trampled upon like many claims suggest, at least never in the places said support exists. Elsewhere in the world sure it can and will happen but then neither The System or the ones supporting it care enough to actually bother about other places or do anything about it, in part because letting those issues persist helps maintain the grift.
Don't make the mistake of believing that they actually advocate for 'the oppressed'. The reason BLM was so successful is because the regime was already on its side. The people who advocated for BLM were just doing the regime's bidding. That's why they were allowed to torch cities and loot stores.