Add new comment

Let's take the last 10 years, since Occupy a s a survey.

What has all the armchair, or attack activism done? Society has shifted even further right.

Also: what's the point in categorizing people this way? Some of us aren't interested in armchairs, activism, or joyless professional militancy (and you might want to look at how that often contributes to being a political pawn for other groups and also the state (because so often the conversation from the word jump is to put an automatic target on ones back with a fixation on scale of violence before anything else has been laid down).

None of these mindsets leave any sort of lasting impression or infrastructure so as not to have to keep rebuilding skills, relations, memories. But, making a bolo or exarchia isn't the sexy work.

I'd like to create and live anarchy. This obsession with attack seems a rather one dimensional role. Is one allowed adequate sleep? The story of elephant editions plays out as death or prison. Even at scale the stock exchange, and world trade center were rebuilt. From the relatively homogenous cultures these ideas have been imported to america from: section 127bis (sorry if wrong on the title of this italian code), and the creation of type c prisons just for those that go on the attack (greece). You have any workarounds to the CMUs and that type of mentality? What can we do to not make our social isolation worse? I don't see how being a sacrificial lamb for some cause would help. You cannot predict the outcome of 'attack.' That's not me, but basic military strategy. It would greatly help to think more strategically. Are tom nomad's books too 'armchair'?

Plus, the idea of attack post ww2 (where weapons are at the ready to destroy life as we no it didn't exist previously) seems hilariously laughable. In our current context, it was deemed acceptable for over 200,000 to die to keep the US economy going. Got that? The system didn't flinch at a projected loss of a quarter million lives sacrificed. You and whose army!?