In a historical context, has terrorism been an effective tool for social or political change? Are there examples when terrorist tactics have led to positive outcomes or positive change in a societal context? What about in a political context? Has the use of terrorism throughout history been effective in obtaining the change or goals the perpetrators or groups sought?
Is it a morally acceptable tactic if in the end the outcomes are positive for a given society? Why or why not?
Other urls found in this thread:
gwern.net
gwern.net
twitter.com
Oh boy howdy , is it?!! Yes yes it is
Hate we can't even discuss this kind of shit now without fats screaming about glownigger or whatever. OP is asking in a historical manner, no one here is advocating for terrorist attacks.
To answer your question, Judeo-Bolsheviks used assassinations and other terrorist acts to overthrow the Tsar snd takr over Russia. Probably one of the most effective examples of its use, unfortunately
I don't know much about the Bolsheviks or what they exactly did, but I thought the terrorism and assassinations were more the doing of the Russian nihilists and anarchists, like Sergey Nechayev. Correct me if I'm wrong.
just report FEDposting
You're not wrong but the Judeo-Bolsheviks carried out their own fair share of terroristic acts
Can you stop being a faggot please? OP asked if it has been effective as a tool of change in a historical context, no where is there support or advocation for illegal acts. Hell, depending on the answer to his questions it could be the exact opposite (I.e. these things don't ever accomplish anything and should not be done)
Also, to answer that last question and bump the thread, of course it's morally acceptable. Especially in the situation we're in, white genocide and all, we have to do whatever is needed to save our race, including griefing minecraft servers if it be necessary.
False flag terrorism has been one of (((their))) most effective tools.
terror is not a tool for change. its a trap to get you fucked. kill and kill secretly. its not about political change. its about numbers. kill as many of them as you can before you get caught. be a hero
Given that Hitler actually said the early attempts to use violence to achieve the goals of the NSDAP were a mistake - yeah, there's a strong case to be made that terrorism really isn't terribly effective in all cases. The Right for example has rarely come to power through terrorism, it's more of a Leftist & mudslime thing.
Yes OP. Terrorism has often been effective. One example is the whole "War on Terror" and the Islamist terrorism that inspired it. Regardless of (((who))) really masterminded 9/11 (and other attacks) or not, countless normies, companies & governments not only still love Muslims, they go out of their way to justify attacks, falling for every piece of Jihadi propaganda out there. "People back the strong horse" as Osama bin Laden said.
Terrorism is for niggers and desperate gooks. Suicide attacks are hallmarks of military failure: They have never been successfully utilized to achieve victory. ISIS niggers were destroyed, Taliban niggers are in negotiations for peace (victory). IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE SHIT YOU NEED TO HIT HARD TARGETS, which requires being a hard motherfucker, which is difficult to do, which is why niggerfaggot rag heads and noodle armed suburban faggot white kids cling to terrorism: It's easy, ineffective, feels good for the moment, and gets media attention.
History has shown that it works in certain situations when accompanied by other strategies but there is usually a better option. Random attacks against soft targets are useless unless there are a huge number of people acting. Assassinations and more carefully planned attacks tend to be more useful.
Islamic terrorism hasn't achieved or even appreciably advanced any of its stated goals though. Al-Qaeda's general strategy was to remove foreign influence from the middle east by making it too hot to handle, then once they were secure from interference they would use political and military means to gain control of middle eastern governments, establish a caliph, and lead the now-united Islamic world to conquer its enemies. They actually thought that bombing the WTC would get the USA to LEAVE the middle east. Instead the kebabs are even more beholden to foreign powers than ever, the ummah is an even weaker and more war-torn shithole, and Al-Qaeda themselves are splintered into ten million different factions that fight each other as much as they fight us. The only way it can be said to be a success is that it at least managed to accomplish (((someone else's))) objectives.
...
How much ya wanna bet that this user believes that everything that happens is a false flag.
IRA. Final winning strategy was to hit finance centers and keep casualties low. A bit like ELF. They figured (((they))) controlled the government of Britain, so hitting the shekel centers was the way to wreck them.
Attacks in Ireland were ignored. Attacks on innocent people pissed off and alienated supporters (and were ignored by the kikes running britain).
There were regular assassinations of journalists, pols,etc. Eg Guinness book guy got whacked for being anti fenian. Not clear how important that was.
But if you threaten to hurt Shlomo's P&L he gets on the phone and tells the shabbos goyim with titles like "PM" to cut a deal and give away part of the country (good friday agreement).
bullshit. Sinn Fein is bolshevik mass-immigration party. IRA were never nationalists.
Most IRA attacks were cover for intel targeted killings.
Consider Airey Neave, "killed by IRA", using car bomb as he LEFT the Parliament parking lot. So supposedly, the car bomb was on his car IN the parliament parking lot, but rather than explode the bomb IN the parliament parking lot, the IRA waited until he LEFT the parliament parking lot.
Oh yes and he was planning to reform MI6.
It's all just fucking fronts for establishment terror.
By the way this is not even alex-jones-level stuff this is known by some very mainstream figures.
Terrorism happens when regular citizens take the liberty to do what the government does everyday.
die you fucking niggers
the US federal government uses terrorism to enact social and political change all the time. look at 9/11. those absolute bastards killed 3000 people to pass the Patriot act, build the TSA, go to wars against Israel's enemies etc.
or maybe how the ATF blew up the OKC building to try and frame "White Nationalists" as domestic terrorists
or Waco or Ruby Ridge to demonize people who falsely think they are free.
isnt that right federal faggots?
Censoring yourself is way worse cuckholdry than being censored. If you can't handle free debate about anything and everything because some pozzed journo could say bad words about you on his dildoblog, then I think Reddit would be a better choice for you.
Optics cucks are the worst moral and intellectual syphilis.
You know it's Summer when…
How do you think Israel came into being ffs? How do you think WWI started?
The 10K (reported figure, NY Post) cancer from the asbestos dust easily outweighs that initial 3K
Could have been 100x that if hurricane Erin hadn't been just offshore sucking the asbestos dust out to sea.
Zig Forums is a board of peace
In the last 50 years, the IRA and the ANC, both gained political power through sustained terrorist action. When you start damaging the ability of those in power to make money or threaten them directly, conciliation soon follows. Whether the outcomes were positive depends on your standpoint
It’s almost impossible to use terrorism to advance worthy causes. It’s not literally impossible, but most worthy causes lie in the direction of peace.
Exactly. OP is a faggot.
...
...
The problem with doing it today is that it only galvanizes other against us. This is because of the media, it’ll be the first thing most normalfags see, and it won’t be in your favor. We need to hurt them in the wallet, they understand that too. Just because they make millions and billions doesn’t mean they can’t be hurt in the wallet. It costs millions to run mega-corporations
Did Brenton turn anyone against us? Anyone who could've helped?
All I saw was people openly praising him (people still do) in YT comments, and media sperging as per usual.
The War on Terror is over. Terror won.
Every white man can help user (unless they’re some cripple of course) The question is whether they can dehumanize themselves and face to bloodshed. I know plenty of people who hate Muslims but still claimed to not agree with Tarrant, and a lot of people don’t even know about Tarrant because they don’t pay attention to the fucking news. Seeing how his trial plays out and the response to it will be a better litmus test of how it has effected the normalfag consciousness.
But I will not advocate for violence unless it’s in Minecraft. I will advocate for attempts to hurt their wallets though whether it be by boycotting, attempting to get people fired (like we tried with the creator of Pedo & Morty until Adult Swim literally apologized for his pedo bullshit), or by protesting say movies we don’t agree with. It’s something that can be done everyday anyday
>Accomplished (((someone else's))) objectives
No disagreement there - my point is that the public reaction was exactly what they sought - belligerent overreaction by cuckservatives, and misplaced sympathy by liberals.
None of that is true though. Most normies went "well, it was extreme cos muh dead children, but it's not like it's unexpected". The Zogbots I know privately all said "what the fuck is the difference between raiding a ISIS mosque in Syria and one in NZ?" and I imagine most of the glowies watching Zig Forumsprobably think the same as well when their masters aren't looking. Nobody gives a shit except the media & degenerate SJW types - the same way nobody gives a shit when Muslims openly call for" death to the West" and toss acid in people's faces or do a truck of peace. It's a total myth that terrorism drives people away - that's not to say it'll be specifically helpful in reaching your goals, but it doesn't "hurt the cause" or anything. It's far more of a problem because you're often wasting useful people on one-shot efforts against soft targets.
It’s not just the SJW’s though, it’s also the middle-aged sportsball fans and the used-up mothers, or they don’t actually care one way or the other and side with the muzzies rather than side with our lad.
((( )))
>Osama did (((9/11)))
How is hurting their wallet preferable to removing them and similar groups who contribute to white genocide, when they'll still control the narrative through media?
Lol remove them? Please tell me how you’re going to remove anything without at least 100 men strong. This ain’t Game of Thrones so don’t give me that 10 good men horseshit. You couldn’t even put a dent in Tel Aviv.
I’m not trying to blackpill you, but be realistic
I wasn't saying anyone could go for them directly, that'd just be retarded to suggest. I mean targeting mosques, synagogues and political elites ( such as utoya) scares them to their core at the thought that they could be next.
They're still sperging at the thought of civic nationalism even. (controlled opposition I know, but kike controlled media certainly doesn't treat them like it.)
Well… on this board the most obvious argument is that the Jews did 9/11 and now not only is there a lot less Muslims alive, but they're countries have been destabilized and they're flooding to the west, getting rid of that white majority problem … does that count?
First off, I don’t condone any kind of violence. That and be careful what you say, because if any of those people do get hurt, you might find yourself unjustly pursued. That being said, it’d be extremely difficult to take out any kind of elite without being taken yourself and quick too. The lone-wolf attacks just happen to infrequently to create any real power-vacuum. Even in the early days of the Soviet Union when people were dying left and right it didn’t create a real gap in power (where real damage can be done). That and martial law would be a nightmare, imagine it never ending because ”muh assassins though”. But for any real damage to be done realistically, it’d have to be coordinated, with at least 50 men.
Like to me a pure insanity scenario would be 1 user in every state.
Any tactic is moraly acceptable to achieve victory. Violence always works. Kill your enemies. Kill the jews, leftists, niggers and faggots. Terrorize or kill anyone else that side with any of them.
Victory and stability can't cohexist with tolerance. It is impossible. Never tolerate those who aren't from the white race, or those who side with non-whites.
I don't think our conversation will lead to any conclusions, I forget sometimes that the state of my country (being filled with niggers, brutal overton window shift in Gen z) is not very comparable to the U.S.
All the replies between us have have had a very different context (in terms of the state of the country we reside in), and my country could possibly be affected in the same way Breivik affected Norway (they are actually regulating their immigration).
we get unjustly pursued for being white, this is a shitty point man.
I think Brenton said it best, as I do not believe there can be any victory for the preservation of the European ethnicity and culture without taking action.
How could they possibly be positive as outcomes? After all the bodies have piled up and you create the society your materialist heart desires, your authority is illegitimate. You set the precedent for violent revolution that will never end.
I suspect that you are an ADL shill paid to sabotage discussions.
This is my reasoning
1. You did not address user's points at all. Thus demonstrating your lack of knowledge in the subject.
made a clear and articulate point about the winning strategy of the IRA which you promptly ignored and instead engaged in pilpol and misdirection.
2. You claim things which are not only utterly false, but your position is that of a literal moron. This is not an insult, this is an objective fact. Claiming that an ethnic-based nationalist organization was not a nationalist organization because you don't like them is so childish that I do not believe that you in fact believe it yourself. It is like claiming that the NSDAP were not nationalists because you dislike them.
3. You claim that the IRA were in fact (like everything else) a false-flag organization.
People who claim this about everything are either morons or feds seeking to create a false image of an omniscient and omnipotent CIA/FBI/Mossad/etc that controls everything all the time.
However, anyone with an IQ higher than 70 understands that the Irish had every single reason in the world to despise the London government. The Irish were nationalists (which you claim is not real nationalism because you're a retard).
Anyway, now that I have pointed you out, I will now filter you so you'll need to switch IPs if you want me to notice your subversion. Just letting you know that your bullshit is obvious to those of us with brains.
K, tell us where and when then because otherwise you might as well jerk off.
Terrorism is a tool used to destabilize governments, to compel an enemy group to change their behavior, or to coerce businesses and/or governments to negotiate a peace settlement favourable to you or your ideology.
the third rational is the most common for terrorist organizations
That is what OP is talking about.
As a means of overthrowing a government, terrorism doesn't have a very positive track record. Instead, Revolutionaries who employ terrorism do so with the intent to destabilize a government knowing that once it is destabilized, then further organization can take place.
The dream of all terrorists is to become a guerrilla. The dream of all guerrillas is to become a conventional army.
In minecraft with due process terrorism seems to work more often than not, but it also has a habit of backfiring horrendously.
A good example is the IRA and their many terrorists attacks. Some worked, but sometimes one had the power of undoing years of effort and lose of popularity among the constituency.
In a long time
Terror works because the average Joe is a status quo seeking coward.
The only way to keep democracy viable in the west is when the leaders fear the people more than the invaders
Also, I do not condone any acts of terror and support the Independent state of Isreal.
Stop being such a fucking pussy jesus christ… You faggots are literally becoming Reddit tier with this self censorship of anything even remotely spicy because of MUH FEDS and MUH JOURNOS. Use VPNs. Don't fucking post obviously illegal shit and stop being a fucking faggot. You're making it so we can't fucking discuss anything anymore. This thread is about the effectiveness or lack there of of terrorism as a tool for political or societal change in HISTORY. Its not asking "WANNA SHOOT UP A SYNAGOGUE KID?" Its not even glorifying terrorism, its literally just asking if it has ever been successful at all and if its morally acceptable if it brought positive societal change… Fuck me you niggers are killing me with this constant muh glownigger sperging lately
You tell me. Our government sure seemed to get a lot of the stuff their (((paymasters))) wanted with 9/11
terror depends on the target
it boils down to justness of law and effectiveness of law enforcement resulting in targeting and punishment of the innocent or the guilty
whoever's targeted with punishment lives in terror
in a country with:
effective enforcement + just laws = guilty targeted, live in terror and punished
ineffective enforcement + just laws= guilty not targeted, innocents live in terror and are punished
effective enforcement + unjust laws = innocents targeted, live in terror and are punished
kebabnigger terrorism scares people, not just because it's mass murder, but because it targets innocents
gang on gang bullshit scares no one because it doesn't target innocents, and only scares innocents when gangs are ineffectively enforcing their gang laws and innocents get killed
people don't care if a vigilante kills a convicted child rapist because it's effective enforcement of a just law
if you want legitimacy, have a just law and have effective enforcement
also, read van creveld on counter-insurgency
This is the second shill referring to car bombing I've seen on here today.
Nervous, you kikes? You think you have the resources to, well, buy a NEET a car to plant the bomb in? LOL
You're chattel to them on a balance sheet. Sheep at least get sheared and humane slaughter.
Israel is the MI6 gang clubhouse. Think of them like Hells Angels that drive BMWs instead of Harleys. They're identical.
Somebody should remake the poster where above the gun instead of political terror it says "Enforcing the laws the state won't" and the gun instead fires the message "Death To Pedophiles". Implying and showing that a NSLF would be both a right and just state of law that competes.
I just wanted to share two links with you guys:
gwern.net
gwern.net
In it a very autistic guy analyzes details about how, when, and why terrorism works, or doesn't work. They're a very good read, if you like applied math and logic.
Yet another JIDF thread.
Depends on your definition of the word. Were American patriots terrorists when they shot on British soldiers at the Battles of Concord and Lexington? Was it terrorism when the French killed their king? Was the Night of Broken Glass terrorism? Is illegal violence in general considered terrorism? If so then yes. Violence always scares people into doing what you want them to, just make sure your ideals aren't batshit retarded.
Yeah, I don't think so.
That would make false-flagging enemy governments priority #1. I never understood you people that don't take things to their logical conclusion. Is your brain broken?
No.
Diaspora Judea, their Golem and Israel are capital T Terrorists; and they get whatever they want and more without any judgement or consequences. It would be an interesting Minecraft exercise to discover if Crow-Magnum man could do full terrorism better than kikes, et.al.