\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThese white nationalist shooters and friends make a point of how the media is portraying them incorrectly but I\u2019m not quite sure what that means.\u00a0 Is it just \u201cnot as heroes\u201c or is it something else?
They think they\u2019re retaliatory violence in an ongoing ethnic conflict.
\nBut their murders are just so stupendously, spectacularly, profoundly useless that it somehow makes the murders even more infuriating.
\nI understand if you don\u2019t want to give anyone ideas by elaborating, but nevertheless this makes it look as though you have a theory of murders that would be useful in the said ethnic conflict.
\nAnyone could come up with a better strategy than that.\u00a0\u00a0
\nIs that unfair?\u00a0 Am I overestimating the potential of other human beings, even those who have filled their hearts with cruelty?
\n
Probably no individual actor achieves their envisioned aims, but on the whole the tension meter increases while opponents are frenzied and less likely to choose strategies in accordance with likelihood of success
“Institute people’s rule by killing sitting sovereigns” was absurd as an anarchist platform cause someone else would just inherit; the King is dead long live the King.
The assassination of Franz Ferdinand led to the end of feudal rule in Europe.
The Punisher-ass 80s dream of cleaning up the cities through vigilante violence was absurd.
In 1984 Bernhard Goetz shot 4 imposing black teenagers on the New York subway and in the aftermath, the fact the public took his side changed the political calculus
"}