• itistime@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    We all may feel some impulse to act, even violently, but have a great feeling of uncertainty because there are no leaders. We need direction based off of game theory, or something. We need strategies that are surgical, because be real — we are outgunned. Yes, there are gun owners on the left, but come on, you know who has the lion’s share. Not only that, but we are different in that we hesitate to harm, because it’s the last thing we want. My dad kills animals for pleasure, but I do not. Also, if you aren’t armed now, you better do so immediately, because the gun nuts are not going to blink an eye when we are inevitably denied access.

    We need real strategy. Daggers in a select few hearts may be enough to shift things.

    Are there organizations or groups that do this? They would have to do it in secret, so how could we know? So it seems we’d have to assume we couldn’t know and form our own? Honestly, please clue me in!

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      Daggers in a select few hearts may be enough to shift things.

      If you’re proposing what I think you are, it’s sounds like something we tried in the late 1800s/early 1900s. Our lesson was that this tactic won’t solve a systemic problem, at least in isolation. Action without a surrounding social movement is lost. Just ask Luigi - despite the widespread bipartisan approval of their action, there weren’t many copycats nor long-term changes in our conditions. And, if you saw much of other Lemmy instances at the time of that event, you may have seen various people denouncing it as ‘adventurism’, despite how cathartic it was.

      So, many of the socialist organizations aim to develop the surrounding movement needed to cause systemic change.