its okay i trust the FBI to do that. ewiz has made me a lot more sympathetic towards the FBI and NSA.
1 Like
To be a total jerk about it I don't think the people in the streets even know what to seize or how to do it
Congrats on burning your local businesses. Now you will have nowhere to buy food. But I guess that doesn't matter to many of you because you came in from out of town/out of state
If you're talking about otherization it's actually:
- You assume X causes Y.
- The only argument provided is that Z causes Y.
- Your assertion X causes Y is unfounded and must be justified.
Ewiz is pretty close to working for/with the FBI/NSA
How does this justify nondescript violence? Specifically, what mechanism does the violence take and against which group?
realistically if you march to google and start burning offices they will restructure their operations so people are working at home. then i guess you go burn the data centers? i think google might be able to justifying building deadly automated defenses to kill anyone who tries to attack the datacenters. i mean, its counterterrorism, really.
haha this is an amusing endgame
what i theorized: violence against people who do not support the revolution because it does not otherwise benefit them (by deplatforming them, destroying their property, or lynching them)
do you rule this out?
This is what I've been asking you throughout the thread
This is because you're an actual fascist lmao. "I don't care what happens to other people as long as I'm okay."
1 Like
Great. We have found a fascist on our website. What sort of violent acts would you recommend against him?
This has been repeatedly debunked by the arrest records, which are public
well he has declared the means of production as the Enemy worth destroying/seizing. you further are commenting on violence against dissenters, which ewiz has not spoken to.
does he rule it out? 
It's been repeatedly confirmed by the arrest records, which are public
I've spoken to it multiple times. He repeatedly asks me (and you have too), and I've responded every time. If he opposes it and does nothing, nothing happens. If he acts against it, the same actions will be taken against him
It's clear from his posts and attitudes (long history here) that he does not rule it out, but the rhetorical trick is that he first Otherizes (capital O - looking forward to the philosophy texts) the target - so when asked about bystanders/proportional responses in this thread, he can say no, he doesn't believe in that.
But before long you will learn: Words are violence, silence is violence, we all live in an intrinsically patriarchical and white supremacist system, fascists need to be stopped, and anybody who doesn't disagree with me is a fascist.
yes. actively thwarting acts of destruction is in the FBI and NSA's job descriptions. so it makes sense that if you advocate for violence, the FBI and NSA have theoretical justification to prevent violence. as opposed to, say "they are just collecting your data for no reason and adding innocents to watchlists"
i do not know about the overall scale of violent revolutionaries and whether the FBI/NSA's activities are proportionate or not, though.
Not sure what you are responding to here but I think you misunderstood what was said
Bzzt wrongo
And I explained mine. The destruction of property. What's yours?