fascists are literally Disco Elysium parodies lmfao

"Who runs the world? Foreigners? Financiers? Yes, but mostly, it's wömen! …we don't like them."

here's free art for my Veg-Lich and their Amulet of Regicide ("checkmate anarkiddies")

See also the neoreactionaries who read a bunch of crimethinc and 70s history in 2017 and keep screaming about the importance of arresting all the anarchists asap:

Back in 2017, during the first massive surge of fascists, the Threepers did an actual infiltration op of multiple orgs that was pretty successful and wrote an extensive report on left activism that *got shit right.*

That is the sort of right-winger who never sleeps again, fixated on us forever.

like how 1880s-1920s century anti-anarchist political cartoons draw us cool-looking cool-sounding robed skeletons:

- "FREE LOVE | FREE MURDER".
- "KING KILLING ASSOCIATION"
- "FREEDOM TO ASSASSINATE THOSE WE DON'T LIKE"
- "WE HATE KING AND LOVE HONEST LABOR"

exactly.

tbqh, I've been surprised by him, same with Obama pardoning Manning, but never supportive (like that pardon which came after years of torture).

(I just saw an account with a Pope Francis banner and got flashbacks... unless it's some ironic meme like a leftist with a Biden banner?)

Generally legal observer training often includes being told you can't engage in protest while you are observing because doing so can undermine your account and documentation of police activities.

It's not just about optics. It's about doing a particular volunteer service in public order situations.

When people challenge the idea that a particular victim was a "protestor" and point out they were an observer, they are pointing to indiscriminate violence targeting those documenting and recording police violence, preventing evidence getting out, rather than eg crowd control or dispersal.

obeying orders from The Leader (who may be an informant, surveiled, or just incompetent) makes a little sense as "taking a majority vote on doing something and forcing the other 49% to do it"

if different people have different risks they're willing/able to take, you split into affinity groups to manage that risk.

if different people have different morals on violence, property destruction, you split into affinity groups (and don't snitch on each other).

etc

Grass roots groups spin up and conservative wonks start trying to figure out which lame duck politician could possibly be leading and funding all this chaos because people coming to reasonable conclusions applying logic to their own senses have figured out how to cooperate with each other.

yeah. like I get why Signal verifies with phone numbers (and why it has centralized servers and so on), but there are obvious risk & dangers. (tbc, im not a security consultant or hacker or w/e)

You want to be able to prove the person on the other side of a conversation is who you think it is (bad for privacy but good for knowing when the bad guys are pretending to be your friend!)

But you also don't want to be able to prove their identity too strongly and risk exposing them if your device gets compromised. You want to strike a balance between authentication of others and privacy. Which signal does.

Churchill was family friends with Mosley and the whole set was really close until the war made it impossible not to treat Mosley, the Mitfords etc as national security threats.

There's a gushing account of how friendly everyone was in the telegraph from 2005.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/...

no I know!!

She married a cop in 2017 and started turning tradwifey from there.

She transformed her public facing rhetoric towards the importance of traditional gender roles and traditionalist Christian sexual ethics, writing a book against the sexual revolution in the 60s.

2/2 like I'm always surprised at reading a feminist / trans person (not Mallory, tbc!) uncritically praising Pope Francis's for his "progressivism", as he was anti-trans/anti-abortion (like most liberation theologists). or calling his evangelism in Africa (soft power & recuperation) "anti-colonial"