These discussions annoy me because there's an inherent dishonesty to them. It's illegal to advocate for organized political violence, which shapes how these arguments play out in online spheres.

It's kind of like how libtards have to make roundabout arguments about good schools because it's illegal for them to say nigger

RT: https://poa.st/objects/9e235713-f898-4719-81f6-4e19b016113b

My point is that you're not getting an accurate view of the political landscape by what you see online since the incentive structure heavily disincentivizes frank discourse of that nature.

And I don't begrudge people "doing nothing" because "doing useful things" is difficult. There's an incredibly high barrier to entry when it comes to forming a guerrilla force with the strength to topple the American government

But that doesn't mean it's not the right solution

That's a lot of gay words in a row

There's plenty of conceivable scenarios where state power is weakened and whites flourish under less restrictive conditions

@WoodshopHandman @Ghislaine @Kazak what do you mean rome is full of niggers

»Defeat motion with stillness.«