3 ms·
> if they really believed we were in that imminent danger, violent attacks would have been the rational thing to do. That's what these guys figured. But if we
by lupusreal 2y ago
> if they really believed we were in that imminent danger, violent attacks would have been the rational thing to do.
That's what these guys figured. But if we're being rational and realistic, all it accomplishes is getting your group killed or imprisoned.
- PaulHoule 2y agoDepend if you chose the right target, pretty clearly they didn't.
- AnimalMuppet 2y agoStart further back. Depends on whether you are actually in imminent danger. Then, if you are, then you have to choose the right target.
- CaffeineLD50 2y agoThe fabrication of imminent danger as a means to break people out of the norm and into their matrix reality may make their ability to evaluate real imminent dangers perhaps? They were terrified of some AI Roko's Basilisk they imputed some fantastic power to. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roko's_basilisk https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roko's_basilisk
- lupusreal 2y agoThey had issues with so many different groups and causes they may as well have been raging against society as a whole. A dozen or so kooks resorting to violence against the world will only ever end with their demise. They thought themselves rational but were in fact totally insane to think their course of action was anything other than elaborate suicide.
- CaffeineLD50 2y agoI don't think its necessarily suicidal if the leadership is competent. Mao Tse Tung when he decided to become a "mountain bandit" and formed the basis for future Red Army may have had no greater advantage. Except he was a military genius and these guys were just geniuses.