Add new comment

This statement is... okay, but if the point is to challenge the mainstream media narrative about insurrection and sedition, then I think it's a bit lacking. If the temper tantrum was entirely permitted, then how do you explain the State seeming to take it as a serious threat, for example in their planning for Jan 20th?

I'm not saying that we should take the State response at face value. They have every reason to exaggerate the threat. But I guess I would approach this with wore nuance. In fact I think the truth is probably somewhere in between. The State does consider these actors to be a real threat, I mean if you look at some of what's going on with boogaloo or Q for example it doesn't fit in to the narrative that IGD would like to push here (oh they're all just fascist or neo confederacy types). Something weirder really is going on, we shouldn't rely too much on a WWII reenactment story or one that just doubles and triples down on really anarchists have always had the right answers and are always the good guys. But I guess that's propaganda for you.