"You need antagonists, and most of those are government/institution related, but by defining yourself in opposition to them, you in-effect leave the middle clas

"You need antagonists, and most of those are government/institution related, but by defining yourself in opposition to them, you in-effect leave the middle class. E.g. cease to identify as someone those institutions ostensibly serve, and identify instead as one of those they target." This describes quite well the process of becoming a political dissident. The value of anonymity is that it allows you to exist in both states at once, both of the middle class and apart from it. By "doxing" dissidents, some hope to eject those people from the middle class, or otherwise make their political activities so costly as to dissuade them entirely. Anonymity has had a role in Western politics, of saying things which cannot be said, that dates back to at least the 18th century if not earlier. No doubt there are many on this website who will argue that speech without fear of personal reprisal is categorically a bad thing - but uninteresting? I don't think so. I agree that this fund produce wont produce anything, but only because I believe it's entirely fake.