nuclearspaceheater:

argumate:

I love the carefully intertwined urban legends in which antifa are dangerous radicals coming to shoot your livestock and trash your community but also limp wristed colorful haired gender nonconforming soyboys and girls who couldn’t possibly pose a physical threat and they’re funded by Soros in cash and drugs but he also doesn’t pay them because he’s sneaky and they’re suckers and they’re black but they’re also white and they’re poor but actually they’re spoiled rich kids and they’re hot then they’re cold they’re yes then they’re no they’re in and they’re out they’re up and they’re down

The first part, at least, is no contradiction. A person or group can be both pathetic and dangerous. School shooters, for example. But if the police refused to respond to a school shooting, it would both be true that “this is a significant physical threat” and “this threat could be immediately solved by the government simply deciding to do so”.

Like, in an insurrection where conservative outlying areas are seeing increasingly large musters of irregulars to defend against X, the central government needs to show credible signs of acting against X or the rural areas will secede and start purging themselves of X, or what they take to be X or X-adjacent.