Discussion about this post

User's avatar
IGOR's avatar

Insignificant goals, such as : "the struggle for rights ; for higher wages ; all sorts of solidarity with someone and somewhere ..." - cannot justify violence .This is too little to make sense in destroying the "enemies", no matter how bloodthirsty sadists they are. Such a "solution to the problem" will be similar to "banal" terror - targeted, local, ... useless, scaring potential supporters away from you and attracting various nihilistic sociopaths. A change in the social order in the state (in its own!) , according to a pronounced and understandable program, brings violence into a legitimate field , as a result of inevitability , gives it meaningfulness . The ghostly "rights" (handouts) negotiated from the state by the first generation will be emasculated and then taken away from the next generation. There must be a Goal , with a capital letter !

Expand full comment
sistersmith's avatar

I agree with this, but... I also feel like this almost a moot point. I see no possible application of violence with a liberatory character for me to enact. Even if I were a single trained elite soldier - I'm most definitely not, but even if I were - I wouldn't know where to start. Even being a trained soldier willing to die does not mean there is a particularly useful place to apply violence as a Western dissident, is there? I mean, there have been trained soldiers and spies in the West who decided they hate this system and now they're doing podcasts... or are dead, as we well know.

I almost feel that if there were a useful place for us Western dissidents to apply violence, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts