Is direct action ever worthwhile?
No.9328
Anonymous
2026-04-19 21:33:56
The elites are terrified of not one thing more than direct action.
Direct action only makes sense when there's a plan. Contemporary grassroots movements are all decentralized and direct-democratic, and so mass planning is made impossible. Most "direct action" you see today, from gaza encampments to Charlie Kirk, is meaningless flailing at best and random terrorism at worst.
The political priorities of the direct actioneer are easily swayed by their instagram reels algorithm, and will swap their preferred target from an ICE detention center to a data center without even realizing that a shift has occurred. They will make no demands, pursue no scaffolding. They will not conduct fact-finding operations or public relations. They will throw their life away for no impact on the world around them.
The political priorities of the direct actioneer are easily swayed by their instagram reels algorithm, and will swap their preferred target from an ICE detention center to a data center without even realizing that a shift has occurred. They will make no demands, pursue no scaffolding. They will not conduct fact-finding operations or public relations. They will throw their life away for no impact on the world around them.
Adventurism bad. The celestial bureaucracy is too powerful for individual or even a small cadre.
Tempo good. If one-off actions contribute to an intensifying tempo, then people will notice that the heavenly bureaucracy can't maintain the stability and regularity that it promises. The Summer of George was so psychically damaging because it proved that the people on top can't protect you from partial stack-collapse. That's enough to take away the mandate of heaven.
A lot of lefties think that this means you have to organize, which is not necessarily true. Granted, anything that's more complicated than a trip to the beach means that you need more than a few buddies, you need to actually train, actually practice, and actually build multiple pathways to success using redundant, modular resources and fault-containment. All usual operational best-practices apply. Nevertheless you can have a distributed network with no communication that is coordinated by the environment.
Realistically, people should just watch open-channel communications and they'll be able to pick up on enough context clues.
Tempo good. If one-off actions contribute to an intensifying tempo, then people will notice that the heavenly bureaucracy can't maintain the stability and regularity that it promises. The Summer of George was so psychically damaging because it proved that the people on top can't protect you from partial stack-collapse. That's enough to take away the mandate of heaven.
A lot of lefties think that this means you have to organize, which is not necessarily true. Granted, anything that's more complicated than a trip to the beach means that you need more than a few buddies, you need to actually train, actually practice, and actually build multiple pathways to success using redundant, modular resources and fault-containment. All usual operational best-practices apply. Nevertheless you can have a distributed network with no communication that is coordinated by the environment.
Realistically, people should just watch open-channel communications and they'll be able to pick up on enough context clues.
>>9339
I hear this often, but I'm not sure what it means.
>>9341
So, what happened to plans?
>>9343
Your use of tempo is interesting, can you say more?
>people should just watch open-channel communications and they'll be able to pick up on enough context clues.
As in, will someone rid me of this troublesome priest?
Actually, I've been thinking of reading the OG propaganda of the deed anarchists because they seem to be unintentionally describing a sort of political mindset which the West, especially Americans, have stumbled onto unconsciously.
I hear this often, but I'm not sure what it means.
>>9341
So, what happened to plans?
>>9343
Your use of tempo is interesting, can you say more?
>people should just watch open-channel communications and they'll be able to pick up on enough context clues.
As in, will someone rid me of this troublesome priest?
Actually, I've been thinking of reading the OG propaganda of the deed anarchists because they seem to be unintentionally describing a sort of political mindset which the West, especially Americans, have stumbled onto unconsciously.
>>9358
In all honesty it's just my vibe-based reading of how people observe change in the west today. I think that people on the whole are willing to make way for the next big thing, but they have to be convinced that it's the next big thing. People have to get through their days, and to achieve that I think that they do a lot of interpretation based on whether something is still gaining strength. If a new issue is still accelerating its pace, or intensifying its impact, then people basically pay attention. If an issue is holding steady or flagging, then people are safe to wait it out or write it off.
"Tempo" is a key term in the US military's discussion strategy and operations. It's derived from the work of John Boyd. The shorthand for this is an "OODA loop." Boyd began thinking about this because of his experience teaching dogfighting in jets. Essentially, when one fighter could move at least one iota faster than another, the faster one could dictate terms and conditions to the slower one. The benefit should be obvious: the cowboy who can draw faster gets to shoot when the other cowboy is still reaching for his holster; the team that changes the game can run up the score while the other teams are still playing by the old rules. Boyd spent a lot of time analyzing this, and ultimately he describes human action in four general stages (observation, orientation, decision, action) that altogether loop back to the beginning. A person or group with superior tempo is able to act when the enemy is deciding, is able to decide when the enemy is observing, etc. One thing to note about "tempo" is that it's not just tactically relevant (as my examples would imply). An operation that can sustain a higher tempo tactics has to have higher-tempo operations, and higher-tempo operations also rely on higher-tempo strategic thinking. So if you want to have a revolt against the heavenly bureaucracy, then your supply lines have to be nimbler than the celestial bureaucracy's response, and your strategic re-evaluation has to be sprightlier than the heavenly emperor's strategists.
There are ten million defense intelligence guys who snort powder and then rave about this stuff, or how it applies to space or applying Clausewitz to infosec or whatever.
In all honesty it's just my vibe-based reading of how people observe change in the west today. I think that people on the whole are willing to make way for the next big thing, but they have to be convinced that it's the next big thing. People have to get through their days, and to achieve that I think that they do a lot of interpretation based on whether something is still gaining strength. If a new issue is still accelerating its pace, or intensifying its impact, then people basically pay attention. If an issue is holding steady or flagging, then people are safe to wait it out or write it off.
"Tempo" is a key term in the US military's discussion strategy and operations. It's derived from the work of John Boyd. The shorthand for this is an "OODA loop." Boyd began thinking about this because of his experience teaching dogfighting in jets. Essentially, when one fighter could move at least one iota faster than another, the faster one could dictate terms and conditions to the slower one. The benefit should be obvious: the cowboy who can draw faster gets to shoot when the other cowboy is still reaching for his holster; the team that changes the game can run up the score while the other teams are still playing by the old rules. Boyd spent a lot of time analyzing this, and ultimately he describes human action in four general stages (observation, orientation, decision, action) that altogether loop back to the beginning. A person or group with superior tempo is able to act when the enemy is deciding, is able to decide when the enemy is observing, etc. One thing to note about "tempo" is that it's not just tactically relevant (as my examples would imply). An operation that can sustain a higher tempo tactics has to have higher-tempo operations, and higher-tempo operations also rely on higher-tempo strategic thinking. So if you want to have a revolt against the heavenly bureaucracy, then your supply lines have to be nimbler than the celestial bureaucracy's response, and your strategic re-evaluation has to be sprightlier than the heavenly emperor's strategists.
There are ten million defense intelligence guys who snort powder and then rave about this stuff, or how it applies to space or applying Clausewitz to infosec or whatever.
No.9376
Anonymous
2026-04-21 23:53:31
>>9368
>I think that people on the whole are willing to make way for the next big thing, but they have to be convinced that it's the next big thing.
It's all a matter of loop-based persuasion?
I actually do like this concept of tempo. It fills an analytical niche. But it's very based in hindsight.
>I think that people on the whole are willing to make way for the next big thing, but they have to be convinced that it's the next big thing.
It's all a matter of loop-based persuasion?
I actually do like this concept of tempo. It fills an analytical niche. But it's very based in hindsight.
No.
>>9343
Stop me if I'm misinterpreting, but it seems like you're gesturing towards "the big one", a mass revolutionary action that will topple the tyranny of our current age.
Most people think of revolutions as a kind of recurring historical weather, like recessions, but this is not necessarily the case. If you look at historically successful popular revolutions, the regimes were in uniquely vulnerable positions. Let's take the French and Russian revolutions as examples. France in 1789 was bankrupt from decades of war, food prices skyrocketing, and ruled by a retarded, vacillating monarch who'd just summoned the Estates-General. Seriously, if you read about the French revolution up until the storming of the Tuileries, Louis 16 makes an unbroken string of unforced blunders for 4 years straight. Russia was 3 years into a war with millions dead on the front line, mass mutinies, an a missing monarch. Even then, there was a 5 year civil war.
If there's any lesson to learn from the Arab Spring, it's that revolutions only work if the regime allows it. Whether from moral fatigue or entryism.
Stop me if I'm misinterpreting, but it seems like you're gesturing towards "the big one", a mass revolutionary action that will topple the tyranny of our current age.
Most people think of revolutions as a kind of recurring historical weather, like recessions, but this is not necessarily the case. If you look at historically successful popular revolutions, the regimes were in uniquely vulnerable positions. Let's take the French and Russian revolutions as examples. France in 1789 was bankrupt from decades of war, food prices skyrocketing, and ruled by a retarded, vacillating monarch who'd just summoned the Estates-General. Seriously, if you read about the French revolution up until the storming of the Tuileries, Louis 16 makes an unbroken string of unforced blunders for 4 years straight. Russia was 3 years into a war with millions dead on the front line, mass mutinies, an a missing monarch. Even then, there was a 5 year civil war.
If there's any lesson to learn from the Arab Spring, it's that revolutions only work if the regime allows it. Whether from moral fatigue or entryism.
>>9390
I think humanity is permanently past the revolution "phase" in the same way we're permanently past catastrophic multi-civilizational collapses like the Bronze Age Collapse (inb4 reddit-tier "but what if an asteroid hits us???"). It's a bygone paradigm that we need to get over in our current mental model. It's like people who keep bringing up Marxist understandings of class when in the west there is no group of people who work in manufacturing and agricultural labor is a much smaller percent of the population.
I think humanity is permanently past the revolution "phase" in the same way we're permanently past catastrophic multi-civilizational collapses like the Bronze Age Collapse (inb4 reddit-tier "but what if an asteroid hits us???"). It's a bygone paradigm that we need to get over in our current mental model. It's like people who keep bringing up Marxist understandings of class when in the west there is no group of people who work in manufacturing and agricultural labor is a much smaller percent of the population.
No.9403
Anonymous
2026-04-22 12:34:31
>>9393
A Marxist understanding of class is still useful.
A Marxist understanding of class is still useful.
>>9390
I will admit that I don't really see the purpose for direct action independent of a larger escalation pathway, and in most cases this leads to discussions of "the big one." If an independent direct action doesn't parlay into a larger strategy, then it just seems obvious to me that it simply evaporates. If Green Hat Video Game guy is a one-off, then his action is basically null. It's almost hard to recall all the stochastic headline-grabbing events that have happened in the past 10 years that have simply lost all consequence -- EG remember the Nashville Christmas thingie of 2020?
If we're not prepping for "the big one," I don't think that's the be-all and end-all. To my weird brain, I think the alternative to "the big one" is something like anarcho-mutualist gradualism in the gradual direction of a kind of neo-medievalism. If that doesn't make any sense, I would say that my ideal would be that various institutions (realistically) and later organizations will start making one-off side-arrangements to facilitate things like finance, market access, etc. independently of the Leviathan. Long-term, I also have confidence that people can make institutions and organizations more inclusive, more responsive, and have more and more participatory deliberative structures. And as these layers of one-off arrangements increase, and as institutions become more and more participatory, we move away from the nightmare of Leviathans fighting an apocalypse war and more towards something that resembles medieval Europe, in the sense of a knotty lattice-work of inter-dependent dispensations and responsibilities.
I will admit that I don't really see the purpose for direct action independent of a larger escalation pathway, and in most cases this leads to discussions of "the big one." If an independent direct action doesn't parlay into a larger strategy, then it just seems obvious to me that it simply evaporates. If Green Hat Video Game guy is a one-off, then his action is basically null. It's almost hard to recall all the stochastic headline-grabbing events that have happened in the past 10 years that have simply lost all consequence -- EG remember the Nashville Christmas thingie of 2020?
If we're not prepping for "the big one," I don't think that's the be-all and end-all. To my weird brain, I think the alternative to "the big one" is something like anarcho-mutualist gradualism in the gradual direction of a kind of neo-medievalism. If that doesn't make any sense, I would say that my ideal would be that various institutions (realistically) and later organizations will start making one-off side-arrangements to facilitate things like finance, market access, etc. independently of the Leviathan. Long-term, I also have confidence that people can make institutions and organizations more inclusive, more responsive, and have more and more participatory deliberative structures. And as these layers of one-off arrangements increase, and as institutions become more and more participatory, we move away from the nightmare of Leviathans fighting an apocalypse war and more towards something that resembles medieval Europe, in the sense of a knotty lattice-work of inter-dependent dispensations and responsibilities.
No.9416
Anonymous
2026-04-22 18:32:08
>>9379
Is this a no because it is pointless or no because it's best not to leave things to the masses?
Is this a no because it is pointless or no because it's best not to leave things to the masses?
I made the OP mainly out of interest in environmentalist direct action, not necessarily "total socialist revolution", though I think they are topics which go hand in hand so I didn't mind that much.
However, I have been thinking again about the environmental, its degradation, and what is to be done about it. Environmentalism always feels like an ideology I falter in adhering to intellectually, but cannot help but sympathize with. Ecological change /is/ always occurring and humans /are/ apart of the biological world. So, why feel so strongly about climate change, biome change, species extinction, etc? I mean, I think probably naturally (i.e., without direct or indirect human causes) species will go extinct, lands will become desert, and the world might very well become warmer, so why care about environmentalist causes?
The imagery of replacing thriving, complex systems with smog and sludge makes me think otherwise. Really it's the only thing, other than normal economical woes, which has made me ever want to dip my toes into politics, a world I would rather avoid entirely. I don't know if I'd ever tie myself to a tree, but I do think it's a shame that, in requiring endless growth, we destroy beauty and worlds that I think should thrive.
Sometimes I do buy into the doom though and think it's all pointless.
However, I have been thinking again about the environmental, its degradation, and what is to be done about it. Environmentalism always feels like an ideology I falter in adhering to intellectually, but cannot help but sympathize with. Ecological change /is/ always occurring and humans /are/ apart of the biological world. So, why feel so strongly about climate change, biome change, species extinction, etc? I mean, I think probably naturally (i.e., without direct or indirect human causes) species will go extinct, lands will become desert, and the world might very well become warmer, so why care about environmentalist causes?
The imagery of replacing thriving, complex systems with smog and sludge makes me think otherwise. Really it's the only thing, other than normal economical woes, which has made me ever want to dip my toes into politics, a world I would rather avoid entirely. I don't know if I'd ever tie myself to a tree, but I do think it's a shame that, in requiring endless growth, we destroy beauty and worlds that I think should thrive.
Sometimes I do buy into the doom though and think it's all pointless.
No.9986
Anonymous
2026-05-14 23:59:15
>>>998
There's an obvious utilitarian argument behind environmentalism, in that we rely much more on our environment than we realise, and destroying it or altering it (too quickly) will either deprive us of a vital resource (e.g., pollinators) or put us into a precarious situation (e.g., disrupted weather patterns). And because ecosystems are complex, knocking out one part can cause a cascade of issues. Ultimately a species can get fat on its way to extinction.
There's an obvious utilitarian argument behind environmentalism, in that we rely much more on our environment than we realise, and destroying it or altering it (too quickly) will either deprive us of a vital resource (e.g., pollinators) or put us into a precarious situation (e.g., disrupted weather patterns). And because ecosystems are complex, knocking out one part can cause a cascade of issues. Ultimately a species can get fat on its way to extinction.
No.9987
Anonymous
2026-05-15 01:07:00
>>9984
Do you have any interest in Deep Ecology? I'm often relatively skeptical towards environmentalism in its contemporary forms but DE I have a lot of respect for
Do you have any interest in Deep Ecology? I'm often relatively skeptical towards environmentalism in its contemporary forms but DE I have a lot of respect for
Shocker the NRx zoomer doesn't care about environmentalism (the entire fucking reason for deep ecology) unless it's packaged up for him in the context of racism and ethnic conflict. NPC
No.10014
Anonymous
2026-05-15 08:01:08
No.10019
Anonymous
2026-05-15 11:29:41
>>10008
who r u responding to
who r u responding to
No.10025
Anonymous
2026-05-15 12:22:08
>>9997
I'm interested, but know nothing seriously about it.
I'm interested, but know nothing seriously about it.
>>10048
I'm not >>9997, but start by reading "The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. A summary" (which is only a few pages and easily available).
I think the split between (purely) "climate" issues on the one side and preservation of Nature on the other (green on green conflict) is the biggest hurdle to overcome to facilitate real change, and DE is the way to go imo. Hard to achieve, though, because of technology's (fake) promise of salvation — we are a part of Nature, and need to start living like it again…
I'm not >>9997, but start by reading "The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. A summary" (which is only a few pages and easily available).
I think the split between (purely) "climate" issues on the one side and preservation of Nature on the other (green on green conflict) is the biggest hurdle to overcome to facilitate real change, and DE is the way to go imo. Hard to achieve, though, because of technology's (fake) promise of salvation — we are a part of Nature, and need to start living like it again…
No.10064
Anonymous
2026-05-17 10:16:14
>>10063
thanks. Yeah, I've become pessimistic about the state of green politics, mainly due to the influence of technology and the urge to utilize it in pursuit of consumption and expansion (eg, we need green energy so that we can continue mass production, not less energy in general).
thanks. Yeah, I've become pessimistic about the state of green politics, mainly due to the influence of technology and the urge to utilize it in pursuit of consumption and expansion (eg, we need green energy so that we can continue mass production, not less energy in general).
No.10295
Anonymous
2026-05-31 23:38:56
>natural body hair
The hambeast who posted this would hate the real version of this person irl
The hambeast who posted this would hate the real version of this person irl
No.10296
Anonymous
2026-05-31 23:42:40
Have you read marx?
No.10341
Anonymous
2026-06-01 19:07:40
Read "Ecology Without Nature" then read "Desert" by Anonymous.
Troons ruined every left-wing org and movement.
No.10347
Anonymous
2026-06-02 05:28:07
>>10344
The trans? Wow. I didn't know that. You're telling me now for the first time
The trans? Wow. I didn't know that. You're telling me now for the first time
No.10349
Anonymous
2026-06-02 06:31:24
>>10345
Every fucking time a campaign started after 2016, it would get wrecked by random trannies OFFline. Like every tranny in a 50-mile radius would descend on it like the fucking Flood from Halo and derail it with their tranny friends. They're more annoying IRL.
Every fucking time a campaign started after 2016, it would get wrecked by random trannies OFFline. Like every tranny in a 50-mile radius would descend on it like the fucking Flood from Halo and derail it with their tranny friends. They're more annoying IRL.
No.10382
Anonymous
2026-06-03 10:33:00
I feel that the philosophical and moral framework of ecological conversation is not fleshed out enough in discourse. I'm not religious per se, but I feel that we have a moral/ethical obligation to try and protect all creatures and biomes as much as feasible (which obviously is a debate onto itself and can be picked apart.)
To allow species and biomes to disappear in a century after billions of years of adaptation, solely due to human capital development is reprehensible. Obviously extinction is a given on long enough timescales, but we are speedrunning eradication of beautiful and blessed life at an unprecedented rate. I cringe slightly seeing such a focus on animals in childrens media when most animals represented are at serious risk of disappearing from the natural landscape; at best being propped up in zoos or by breeding programs.
To allow species and biomes to disappear in a century after billions of years of adaptation, solely due to human capital development is reprehensible. Obviously extinction is a given on long enough timescales, but we are speedrunning eradication of beautiful and blessed life at an unprecedented rate. I cringe slightly seeing such a focus on animals in childrens media when most animals represented are at serious risk of disappearing from the natural landscape; at best being propped up in zoos or by breeding programs.
No.10386
Anonymous
2026-06-03 12:38:21
>>10344 is right, actually.
Read Eric Hoffer. The troon is the exemplary True Believer of our age. The troon is a man who feels a desparate, suicidal need to escape from his own failed self, and so he is willing to use the whole world as an instrument in his war against his self-knowledge that he has failed at life.
>It is a truism that many who join a rising revolutionary movement are attracted by the prospect of sudden and spectacular change in their conditions of life. A revolutionary movement is a conspicuous instrument of change.
>There is in us a tendency to locate the shaping forces of our existence outside ourselves. Success and failure are unavoidably related in our minds with the state of things around us. Hence it is that people with a sense of fulfillment think it a good world and would like to conserve it as it is, while the frustrated favor radical change. The tendency to look for all causes outside ourselves persists even when it is clear that our state of being is the product of personal qualities such as ability, character, appearance, health and so on.
>It is understandable that those who fail should incline to blame the world for their failure.
>For men to plunge headlong into an undertaking of vast change, they must be intensely discontented yet not destitute, and they must have the feeling that by the possession of some potent doctrine, infallible leader or some new technique they have access to a source of irresistible power. They must also have an extravagant conception of the prospects and potentialities of the future. Finally, they must be wholly ignorant of the difficulties involved in their vast undertaking. Experience is a handicap. The men who started the French Revolution were wholly without political experience. The same is true of the Bolsheviks, Nazis and the revolutionaries in Asia. The experienced man of affairs is a latecomer. He enters the movement when it is already a going concern. It is perhaps the Englishman’s political experience that keeps him shy of mass movements.
>There is a fundamental difference between the appeal of a mass movement and the appeal of a practical organization. The practical organization offers opportunities for self-advancement, and its appeal is mainly to self-interest. On the other hand, a mass movement, particularly in its active, revivalist phase, appeals not to those intent on bolstering and advancing a cherished self, but to those who crave to be rid of an unwanted self. A mass movement attracts and holds a following not because it can satisfy the desire for self-advancement, but because it can satisfy the passion for self-renunciation.
Read Eric Hoffer. The troon is the exemplary True Believer of our age. The troon is a man who feels a desparate, suicidal need to escape from his own failed self, and so he is willing to use the whole world as an instrument in his war against his self-knowledge that he has failed at life.
>It is a truism that many who join a rising revolutionary movement are attracted by the prospect of sudden and spectacular change in their conditions of life. A revolutionary movement is a conspicuous instrument of change.
>There is in us a tendency to locate the shaping forces of our existence outside ourselves. Success and failure are unavoidably related in our minds with the state of things around us. Hence it is that people with a sense of fulfillment think it a good world and would like to conserve it as it is, while the frustrated favor radical change. The tendency to look for all causes outside ourselves persists even when it is clear that our state of being is the product of personal qualities such as ability, character, appearance, health and so on.
>It is understandable that those who fail should incline to blame the world for their failure.
>For men to plunge headlong into an undertaking of vast change, they must be intensely discontented yet not destitute, and they must have the feeling that by the possession of some potent doctrine, infallible leader or some new technique they have access to a source of irresistible power. They must also have an extravagant conception of the prospects and potentialities of the future. Finally, they must be wholly ignorant of the difficulties involved in their vast undertaking. Experience is a handicap. The men who started the French Revolution were wholly without political experience. The same is true of the Bolsheviks, Nazis and the revolutionaries in Asia. The experienced man of affairs is a latecomer. He enters the movement when it is already a going concern. It is perhaps the Englishman’s political experience that keeps him shy of mass movements.
>There is a fundamental difference between the appeal of a mass movement and the appeal of a practical organization. The practical organization offers opportunities for self-advancement, and its appeal is mainly to self-interest. On the other hand, a mass movement, particularly in its active, revivalist phase, appeals not to those intent on bolstering and advancing a cherished self, but to those who crave to be rid of an unwanted self. A mass movement attracts and holds a following not because it can satisfy the desire for self-advancement, but because it can satisfy the passion for self-renunciation.
No.10388
Anonymous
2026-06-03 13:32:38
>>10375
Internet campaigns like city council elections. Okay man.
Internet campaigns like city council elections. Okay man.