I mean, we’ll never do it under capitalism, Gore. So you good with dismantling capitalism?

(Crickets, I’m sure.)

Only thing I’m going to (have to, unfortunately) buy today is a round in a couple dryers at the laundromat, because I’ve put it off too long already and the clothes line is currently a no-go due to weather. sigh

Thusly, any violent revolution stands a STRONG chance of being shunned by those who do not want a government with sanctioned violence.

I disagree with this part. Violent revolution—violent opposition to our oppression—is absolutely necessary. However, turning it on ourselves—that is, in any direction other than that which opposes authority—is a recipe for disaster as you say.

It’s not violence itself that is the problem. There are literally always forms of violence sanctioned by every single political philosophy (including absolute pacifism/non-violence, which sanctions violence performed by the state even if its subscribers often don’t realize this). The question is how and when that violence is performed and by whom, and the anarchist/non-authoritarian answer is that it must only be in the struggle for liberation, not the fight to gain and maintain power over others.

Paywall bypass on the linked article: https://archive.ph/bRBjE

Of course political speech is illegal. Always has been. It just isn’t nominally legal on paper. People have been indicted, prosecuted, and imprisoned for it constantly. A famous example is Eugene Debs, who was prosecuted under the Espionage Act and imprisoned for an anti-war speech he made in 1918.

Please don’t be taken in by the veneer of moronic constitutionalist liberalism. The state punishes people when it feels like punishing people, and does so especially for political speech and dissent…for being an anarchist; for being a leftist. The propaganda it puts down on paper has never changed that.

Definitely what the RICO Act was sold to us as being designed for. /s

Fuck the police. Fuck the state.