They’re not trying to win the popularity contest. They’re trying to win the “do what we say or maybe one of our violent followers will try to kill you” contest. That’s what Hannity means by “think twice.”
They abandoned the pretense of nonviolence and freedom of speech for their enemies quite a while ago.
They could still bomb one of her concerts, or drive a car into fans waiting in line, or some other type of stochastic terrorism. Like a lot terrorism, it’s not necessary to do enough to actually endanger a real high percentage of people, just enough to make anyone who won’t toe the line a little fearful about their safety because of it. A little bit’s enough.
Yeah, maybe so. I hadn’t really realized it before you said this, but historically the violence that helps usher in a fascist takeover is either police violence or big, public, mob-style events – not this sneaking around planting pipe bombs nonsense. I think you may well be right that stochastic terrorism ultimately inspires more resistance then obedience.
The only analogs I can even think of where a successful fascist takeover was accompanied by terrorism in secret, are the Reichstag fire and the false-flags from Putin’s early days – and both of those inspired a strong reaction against the party that, supposedly, was the one that had perpetrated them.
although getting a lot of people who are apolitical but have progressive values to pay attention by bombing their favorite pop star isn’t going to have a favorable outcome for the bombers
They’re not trying to win the popularity contest. They’re trying to win the “do what we say or maybe one of our violent followers will try to kill you” contest. That’s what Hannity means by “think twice.”
They abandoned the pretense of nonviolence and freedom of speech for their enemies quite a while ago.
I guarantee you Taylor Swift has some of the best security in the world, so I’m guessing that doesn’t worry her much.
They could still bomb one of her concerts, or drive a car into fans waiting in line, or some other type of stochastic terrorism. Like a lot terrorism, it’s not necessary to do enough to actually endanger a real high percentage of people, just enough to make anyone who won’t toe the line a little fearful about their safety because of it. A little bit’s enough.
That usually backfires though.
Yeah, maybe so. I hadn’t really realized it before you said this, but historically the violence that helps usher in a fascist takeover is either police violence or big, public, mob-style events – not this sneaking around planting pipe bombs nonsense. I think you may well be right that stochastic terrorism ultimately inspires more resistance then obedience.
The only analogs I can even think of where a successful fascist takeover was accompanied by terrorism in secret, are the Reichstag fire and the false-flags from Putin’s early days – and both of those inspired a strong reaction against the party that, supposedly, was the one that had perpetrated them.
although getting a lot of people who are apolitical but have progressive values to pay attention by bombing their favorite pop star isn’t going to have a favorable outcome for the bombers
Maybe, but I don’t see how that would end up helping Republicans, so if that does happen, it will be some lone crazy. That’s always a risk.
That’s a bit extreme, isn’t it? I mean, they’re just music fans.
I see you’re not familiar with their work
I was making a joke about Swifties. ;)
Ah got it
We’re talking US politics, no jokes, only dread and unhappiness allowed here
🙂