591
Charlie Kirk fucking dies; an Anarchist Perspective (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
132 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Fuck all this "let's not celebrate the gruesome murder of a political opponent" bullshit, the man was a stochastic terrorist. Let's dunk on the douchebag and piss on his grave together. I hope more fascists like him get it through the neck

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 year ago (9 children)

If that's the route you want to go you're going to need a lot more than just range toys.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    People always say this but whoever got Charlie didn't need more than that so I disagree. You're not facing down the Air Force directly, you're taking out leadership as you get the opportunity.

    Besides, the implication of your argument is that we shouldn't try because it will be hard and I think that's some bullshit. Of course it will be hard but resistance is also necessary in the case where our very lives are being threatened. If you have to resist it's better to do so with even a poor tool than it is to be empty handed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (6 children)

    but whoever got Charlie didn’t need more than that so I disagree.

    If assassinations could win wars we'd already be living in an anarchist utopia - that's what anarchists used to be famous for, remember?

    the implication of your argument is that we shouldn’t try

    Not at all... but it's going to require a lot of "back-to-the-drawing-board" thinking.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What is guerilla war if not a series of well-planned assassinations by a much worse armed force. The USA showed the whole world how effective that tactic is at winning wars, by losing to it again and again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    What is guerilla war if not a series of well-planned assassinations by a much worse armed force.

    That is absolutely not what insurgencies are. Assassination is a tactic - not a strategy - and it is most definitely not some "lens" through which to flatten and simplify what insurgency actually is. It's that very kind of superficial thinking that is the whole reason the US military establishment cannot fathom why they can't seem to win at this kind of warfare.

    Just remember this... even dodgy tankie outfits like the Weather Underground and the RAF understood that assassination could only get them so far before it began backfiring on them in a big way - and, with hindsight, it's easy to see that they were still being way too optimistic about it.

    Sure you want to hold onto this idea?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    What is warfare if not assassinations on a large scale?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    What is warfare if not assassinations slaughter on a large scale?

    FTFY.

    That is certainly how colonisers view warfare - they do have the propaganda machines to explain it all away, after all.

    Are you sure YOU do?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Assassination and slaughter are both describing the same thing. The only real difference is scale. Either way you've got one group of people deciding to achieve their goals via targeted violence against their enemies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Assassination and slaughter are both describing the same thing. The only real difference is scale

    No, and no - the difference is vast.

    I have to admit - I'm quite disturbed that people who are discussing the use of force against one of the most violent empires in human history doesn't seem to understand the concept of force all that well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent