How is Nelson Mandela’s terrorism better than Anders Breivik’s terrorism?, asks Curtis Yarvin and immediately answers: Mandela’s leads to political victory, while Breivik’s, on the contrary, reduces his own party’s chances of victory. This is because there is no symmetry between globalists and populists. It is not true that what works for one works for the other. Hampl adds that the same applies in other areas. Conspiracy stories spread by the mainstream media strengthen influence, while similar conspiracy stories spread by the “alternative” push the “alternative” into the position of an isolated sect.
I am afraid that Curtis Yarvin is right that in a certain sense all anti-system activity in its present form is actually useless. Which the general public intuitively perceives.
We have lost hope of winning anything, but this activity is good for satisfying our emotions.
The typical response of the “alternative” is: it is better to do at least something than to do nothing. Translated into the language of ordinary people, this means: we have lost hope of winning anything, but this activity is good for satisfying our emotions. I remind you that such activity is usually referred to as masturbation.
Logically, two questions arise. The first is how to replace political masturbation with an activity that leads to success. The second asks with what kind of people to do this new activity and whether masturbators will still be able to move from self-gratification to sex.
