5 ms·

> the opinions expressed in this subreddit make me believe that these people are preparing for a violent insurrection, full stop. What makes you think so? I'v

by smsm42 9y ago

> the opinions expressed in this subreddit make me believe that these people are preparing for a violent insurrection, full stop. What makes you think so? I've looked at it (admittedly, didn't spend too much time) and it looks pretty standard fare for a subreddit - or any other forum like it. It's slogan is "BE LOUD. BE HEARD.". People that are preparing violent insurrection don't want to be loud and heard. They want to be silent and invisible until they have enough people and materiel overthrow the government. People that want to be participating in a democratic debate want to be heard. There's no point in being heard by the other guy if the next thing you're planning to do is shooting him (well, maybe if you demand surrender, but I see no such demands there and if would be weird to do it on Reddit). The only point I can see of being loud and heard if you try to convince somebody, or at least gather support - e.g. for winning al election, or pressuring an elected representative into doing something by showing them how many people demand it. All that is part of the normal democratic process. Even if people that are there hold some unacceptable views (I have no idea if they do, but even we for a minute assume they do) that doesn't mean they are planning violence. What is the evidence they do?

tmuir 9y ago
I mean preparing for violent insurrection that they believe is about to be started by someone else. I don't think they are planning to start it. So many of the posts are alluding to events that are imminent. My fear is not that the logical progression of this group is a pre planned and executed terror attack of some kind, but that they are being radicalized, and are not far off from a mob of Manchurian candidates. Perhaps thats a very loaded and hyperbolic phrase, but consider this: imagine a hypothetical situation where Donald Trump resigns, or is impeached, or for whatever reason leaves office on a day other than Jan 20, 2021 or Jan 20, 2025. The mass demonstrations that would inevitably ensue would be powder kegs. I don't think its hyperbole to say that those protests could quickly devolve into mob violence on a large scale. This subreddit is essentially prepping people for that day, and like a doomsday cult, insinuating that the day is coming very soon.
- smsm42 9y ago
  That may or may not be true that they are expecting doomsday of sorts, but there are a lot of conspirologists which predict imminent doom literally for decades, and when it never comes they aren't bothered by it even a little. If that day will never come - and most likely that's exactly what would happen, if history teaches us something - there wouldn't be no other harm done than a bunch of folks wasting a lot of time on the internet talking about stuff. So far mob violence was a rather rare occurrence in political demonstrations, actually - and one that happened lately was mostly driven by antifa. That's pretty much the only movement right now that openly uses mob violence and achieves some political success by it - cancelling speeches, shutting down events, etc. Are there any other examples? I see a lot of explanations - especially on the left - how expressing certain views is akin to violence. If we had tons of actual violence happening - or clearly imminent to happen - we wouldn't need any speeches about how words are similar to violence. It would be clear to us that there's actual violence and there would be a lot of pointing to it instead. So, I take it as a sign that there's actually not much violence to be pointed at, if we are pointing at words instead.
  - tmuir 9y ago
    I'll whole heartedly agree that there is no smoking gun to any of my theories. I don't equate this speech with violence. My point is just that situations that result in mob violence can deteriorate at a rate far faster than rational voices can prevail. People are programmable. The level of fervor I see on some of these subreddits tells me that someone is programming these people. People are using the tools of psychology to achieve goals that would not be achievable otherwise. In the time elapsed since the programming of this particular group of people, two years ago, all of the protests I've seen from Trump's base have not been airing of grievances, but more of "lets go gloat in public and see if we can trigger the left.". Trumps base is triggered with shadenfreude, not anger. My point is that there is a singular event, Trump leaving office prematurely, that large groups of the right will inevitably interpret as a coup. If that very situation arises, then the calm, see-it-coming-a-mile-away, clear signs of trouble you envision, is suddenly hundreds of thousands of people in crisis mode. I realize that there is a spectrum of using psychology to influence people, and I can't tell you where the line is of too far, but can we agree that the line exists?

by smsm42 9y ago

tmuir 9y ago

I mean preparing for violent insurrection that they believe is about to be started by someone else. I don't think they are planning to start it. So many of the posts are alluding to events that are imminent. My fear is not that the logical progression of this group is a pre planned and executed terror attack of some kind, but that they are being radicalized, and are not far off from a mob of Manchurian candidates. Perhaps thats a very loaded and hyperbolic phrase, but consider this: imagine a hypothetical situation where Donald Trump resigns, or is impeached, or for whatever reason leaves office on a day other than Jan 20, 2021 or Jan 20, 2025. The mass demonstrations that would inevitably ensue would be powder kegs. I don't think its hyperbole to say that those protests could quickly devolve into mob violence on a large scale. This subreddit is essentially prepping people for that day, and like a doomsday cult, insinuating that the day is coming very soon.

smsm42 9y ago
That may or may not be true that they are expecting doomsday of sorts, but there are a lot of conspirologists which predict imminent doom literally for decades, and when it never comes they aren't bothered by it even a little. If that day will never come - and most likely that's exactly what would happen, if history teaches us something - there wouldn't be no other harm done than a bunch of folks wasting a lot of time on the internet talking about stuff. So far mob violence was a rather rare occurrence in political demonstrations, actually - and one that happened lately was mostly driven by antifa. That's pretty much the only movement right now that openly uses mob violence and achieves some political success by it - cancelling speeches, shutting down events, etc. Are there any other examples? I see a lot of explanations - especially on the left - how expressing certain views is akin to violence. If we had tons of actual violence happening - or clearly imminent to happen - we wouldn't need any speeches about how words are similar to violence. It would be clear to us that there's actual violence and there would be a lot of pointing to it instead. So, I take it as a sign that there's actually not much violence to be pointed at, if we are pointing at words instead.
- tmuir 9y ago
  I'll whole heartedly agree that there is no smoking gun to any of my theories. I don't equate this speech with violence. My point is just that situations that result in mob violence can deteriorate at a rate far faster than rational voices can prevail. People are programmable. The level of fervor I see on some of these subreddits tells me that someone is programming these people. People are using the tools of psychology to achieve goals that would not be achievable otherwise. In the time elapsed since the programming of this particular group of people, two years ago, all of the protests I've seen from Trump's base have not been airing of grievances, but more of "lets go gloat in public and see if we can trigger the left.". Trumps base is triggered with shadenfreude, not anger. My point is that there is a singular event, Trump leaving office prematurely, that large groups of the right will inevitably interpret as a coup. If that very situation arises, then the calm, see-it-coming-a-mile-away, clear signs of trouble you envision, is suddenly hundreds of thousands of people in crisis mode. I realize that there is a spectrum of using psychology to influence people, and I can't tell you where the line is of too far, but can we agree that the line exists?