Political terrorism

Admin

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#1
Messages
4,369
#1
Breivik didn't suffer from schizophrenia
"As in the first evaluation, neither the new pair of evaluators nor the observation staff saw any signs of gross disorganization or outward signs of auditory hallucinations"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3619172/

The first team though he was psychotic while he was carrying out the attack which i find very unlikely considering how effective he was, someone suffering from anything close to serious schizophrenia would have failed trying to do something like that.

He may have been delusional but everyone has delusions about reality, it is also possible that he lied about he leading a group (knight templar) meaning he just stated that as a scare tactic and didn't actually think he was leading anything.

In his manifesto he promotes a decentralized strategy and it's likely he avoided working with anyone else to prevent his plans from leaking.

The actual factors leading up to his attack is him rejecting his own emotions in favor of statistics and logical thinking, he simply made cold calculations about how to archive his political goals and he put effort into suppressing his own empathy.

The consequences of his terrorism was not exacly as planned (the right took over norway next national election, they wasn't hurt by his attack).

He was hoping more people would follow him but it didn't really happen, it's unclear what he actually archived by it.
 
Oxblood

Oxblood

Well-known member
#2
Messages
299
#2
The media reported that he wanted to be emulated. So they immediately started to paint him as a bad man.

I never understood why he attacked white men. People on /pol/ told me he was a Jew and he attacked white people just to deceit. I don’t know.
 
A

adolf512

Staff member
Moderator
#5
Messages
380
#5
It is becoming increasingly difficult to get your point across as platforms increasingly restrict speech and people get trapped inside tightly controlled echo chambers.

We also have to deal with the fact that you do not actually have any real rights, there are too many ways in which authority figures can hurt you, uf they cannot convict you of a crime they declear you as mentally ill abd lock you up anyway.

It seems to me what this invariably suggests is that brute force, violence, is the only viable method for the people of ensuring any political message can get across the complex and shifting barriers established by the bureaucratic, labyrinthian disaster that we call a legal system, which only a certain class of people are even capable of navigating. There are people who are very actively shifting all of the resources toward themselves and away from you, having a very direct, material impact on your life. In any sort of society which we evolved to live in effectively, this wouldn’t occur, because to steal from the people is to put their lives at stake, and physical means would be utilized in order to stop this theft and preserve the group.3rd

The law is simply a mechanism to obscure this theft, to make it not only possible for it to occur unhindered, but to effectively trick the people into believing it’s immoral to interfere with the process. So we ritualistically undergo the democratic voting process as a compromise, so that we can feel we’re “in” on what’s happening, and therefore feel we can be less easily stolen from, while at the same time the thieves can continue to do their work while we celebrate them as our elects and their friends.

The past two decades in American politics have demonstrated that this compromise is failing. The people are starting to see what’s going on, and there’s not a backup plan. Increasingly nightmarish tactics are being deployed in order to subdue us, but they’re being called out at accelerating rates. We’re awake but we don’t know who to point to, and we refuse to confront the fact that the thieves surround us from every angle. Every single one. We have nothing left. In this compromise, we unwittingly surrendered everything to those who were harming us and our loved ones by robbing us and keeping us passively distracted.

And so what’s left? What option do we really have? Does anyone wholeheartedly believe anymore that an election will save us? In the best case scenario, we’re stuck in a never ending political war. This isn’t all just going to fizzle out and be forgotten; we crossed that threshold long ago. Presumably, some group in power will see this failing system and finally put it to death, and we can of course speculate as to what this will look like, but the main point of interest is that this will have to happen, and it will certainly be catastrophic.

The law betrayed you and me and everyone else here. It can’t be relied on and will never serve as a consistent means of bringing about any positive changes for the average person, only to find ways to operate more mysteriously. It can’t be used for our benefit.

Why is this so hard to accept? Because it leaves violence as our only option. Violence, the thing we’ve been taught on all levels of culture that we must avoid at all costs (unless it needs to be utilized by the State authorities against some rogue group of people).

This is why many have begun to abstain from voting. Not from complacency, not from ignorance, but from observing that this whole system is built on horribly faulted ground and concluding that the only moral option is to let it do so without participating. It’s up to you whether this is right or wrong but this is the reality of our political arrangement.

You can and you absolutely must become self-reliant. Problems with life-or-death stakes will be coming and you will not be able to rely on the systems which have been turned against you for at least your whole life to save you. If you refuse violence after a certain point, that will only make you easier to destroy for those who accept it early.

Lose weight. Build muscle. Stop drinking, smoking, eating sludge every day. Read the vintologi bible. Buy a gun and learn how to use it properly.
 
Last edited:
Creamer

Creamer

Well-known member
#6
Messages
933
#6
By gov stealing money you mean like section 8 and similar stuff?
And yes i agree they restrict speech.
It is so hard for me to find platforms where i can code and cuss and really be my evil self. heck even when i do i usually get banned arroung 3000 to 4000 posts later, or the site goes down, it like a curse or something.

So what are you suggesting, to be a freeman and live of the land in the wilderness?
Ok, could you list some locations to do so?
I have some wilderness survival books.

Ultimately only a waifubot can trully make you happy, thats for another thread tho.

Once one has a waifubot shit starts falling into the right places as men would shifttheir time from mainly developing them to ensuring they have the rights to have one and not have their tax money thrown the wrong places and woman will spend time scrapping little cash for daily survival, i envision.

Hey pal, looks like ill be here for a while now, would you mind doing me a solid and rename the coding forum to jizzy coding ? Or even GZ coding. Make it more fun ya know
 
A

adolf512

Staff member
Moderator
#7
Messages
380
#7
With theft i mean things like civil asset forfeiture resulting in you losing assets even though you wasn't convicted of any crime.

Libertarians also view mere income tax as theft but we probably need to gave taxes to have a functional high-technology society.
 
A

adolf512

Staff member
Moderator
#8
Messages
380
#8
The real issue with political terrorism is the personal cost that often come with ut but this is also true for far less effective methods.

Goverments are better suited to do political terrorism since they can do it at a far larger scale, even mafia organization struggle to match that.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top