faceh
15hr ago
My personal push would be to form a unified group that pledges simply to withhold tax payments while this particular discrimination regime is allowed to continue.
Needs to be enough buy-in that "they can't prosecute all of us" is a legitimate factor. And ideally pool funds to pay for attorneys for those who do get tried.
Yes, there's like a dozen ways the state can crack down on this, but that would actually force them to cross those lines OR negotiate.
It's harder to disrupt or de-legitimize such a group compared to one that threatens violent martial resistance. Hence why this approach would probably beat forming an informal militia.
faceh
15hr ago
Ding ding ding.
And then there's the added problem of "oh, and any other field you might want to try could arbitrarily be closed off to you if it ever becomes lucrative and high-status enough for entryists to target."
faceh
18hr ago
Well, its pretty clear that you'd prefer to live in this era in terms of the sheer abundance any goods you could want, and the technology available.
But the inability to parlay that into a meaningful life is... problematic.
faceh
18hr ago
The contradiction is "you cannot save yourself from a literal systemic issue, coordinated action is necessary."
The point that needs to come across is "everyone else is coordinating with others to your disadvantage, you need to coordinate with others to prevail."
Boomer advice that ignores this sets people up for failure.
The institutions being hostile demonstrates that you cannot, in fact, save yourself without defeating those institutions. You cannot defeat those institutions by following the advice of going it alone. Its a contradiction in terms when you acknowledge the underlying fact.
Who is going to pay for the lawfare?
More options
Context Copy link