Referring to the Russian revolutionary period of 1905-1917, it becomes clear that provocation inspires hardline response on both sides. Each time one side doe

Referring to the Russian revolutionary period of 1905-1917, it becomes clear that provocation inspires hardline response on both sides. Each time one side does something aggressive to the other side, it is used as justification for the next, even more aggressive, counteraction. It is a pendulum that does not naturally dampen except without some kind of definite change. So I expect see another Operation Sundevil beginning to play out, as the DoJ sees itself under attack and gains whatever authorizations to go after Anon hackers. This will doubtlessly inspire some level of strikeback, and etc etc etc. Personally, I don't believe Anon's style of DDoS/hacktivism really resonates with the non-tech public. Anarchism is not a dance that most people like to dance to. I would suggest that uncovering clear evidence of corruption and crime, then bringing it to light via the New York Times/Guardian/etc (i.e., respected news sources) would have a much more profound impact on the general public. You have to understand the system to effect change on it. You have to understand the nature of the broad crowd and, yes, pander to what they will be energized by. Phrased this way: No one "outside" cares about the GPL allowing rights to muck about with your computer code, it's all lawyer eggheadery. But if you frame that in a "repair" sense, it is obvious, of course you should be able to hire someone to fix your software. It's all about framing it to make it relevant to the audience. So it goes with political movements.