[AnonymousBosch]

(03-22-2015 11:34 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

Given am obvious fascist belief in the righteousness of their cause, and the violent undercurrent at play in the rhetoric of Fourth Wavers, I believe the level of Puritan Zealotry at play will eventually erupt into violence, and this will be the defining break with Third Wavers. Note the recent vandalisation of the UVA Frat House, and if you observe Gamergate, it's barely an undercurrent: their discourse is extremely bitter and both physically-and-sexually violent.

They despise men and normality.

As such, I'd expect two things: a mass shooting of College Men by Fourth Wave Feminists within the next ten years; and for Feminism to be a dirty word within twenty.

I've noticed over the last couple of days, the Fourth Wave SJW are now publicly-discussing the need for public violence as a 'legitimate political strategy', inspired by the recent riots in Ferguson and Baltimore. Here's the predictable schism with the pacifist third-wavers forming before our eyes, born out the degenerate authoritarian's inevitable descent from puritanism into fascism.

Here's a sample of the kind of discussion I'm seeing:

Quote:

I have been thinking lately ... ... about the difference between violence and militancy–the difference between action which is destructive, and action which works consciously to destroy debasing and unjust systems.... ... What Roy’s talk suggests is not that non-violence is impotent or wrong, but that it is a tactic more than a philosophy. Sometimes it is useful, and sometimes other kinds of action are needed, and make more sense. Every day, oppressed people make their own decisions about what type of action will work for them, their families, their communities.

And here's Benjamin Hart, writing in Salon:

Quote:

I do not advocate non-violence—particularly in a moment like the one we currently face. In the spirit and words of militant Black and Brown feminist movements from around the globe, I believe it is crucial that we see non-violence as a tactic, not a philosophy.

Non-violence is a type of political performance designed to raise awareness and win over sympathy of those with privilege. When those on the outside of struggle—the white, the wealthy, the straight, the able-bodied, the masculine—have demonstrated repeatedly that they do not care, are not invested, are not going to step in the line of fire to defend the oppressed, this is a futile political strategy. It not only fails to meet the needs of the community, but actually puts oppressed people in further danger of violence.

The keyboard warrior in question, looking exactly as expected:





This concept of violence in the name of social justice perfectly plays into their darkly-violent fantasies, so I'm not surprised to see finally enter into mainstream discussion, and expect it to be normalised by the end of the year, especially as George Soros is funding articles selling this idea in media outlets like Vox.

soros-group-advocates-violence-against-cops-in-baltimore

Given how desperately White SJW's long for the martyrdom they could get from being a person of colour, I expect them to leap all over this.

Of course, their solidarity isn't stopping them from being attacked:

Brutal Press Beatings Worry Advocates

It should be hilarious when these SJW's start trying to enact this philosophy, so I'm expecting a couple of Feminists with Guns to do some serious damage somewhere along the line.