Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Reposting a comment from the previous thread I made very late.
Idea: all else equal, a terrorist group that believes in hierarchy being not bad (or even good) is more dangerous than one which does not support hierarchies.
A group that supports the idea of a hierarchy will naturally create one in the process of coming into being, and an organized group is more effective. In contrast, a group that does not support hierarchies will have a tougher time organizing until effective. Of course, both are dangerous once formed, but the former will learn the need/lessons of structure more easily.
If this is reasonable, it suggests that the former type should be monitored more closely and actively disrupted over the latter.
But this would also suggest that between a brewing Nazi group and a brewing Antifa group, the former is more dangerous and needs to be handled first and foremost.
Is there some idea I'm missing?
There are advantages to having an opponent that is hierarchically organized: you can negotiate with them. They're less dangerous because you can make a deal, where a disorganized group is toothpaste that can't be put back in the tube. BLM is a great example of a "group" that is more like a reflex today, even if every [corrupt] BLM leader and every member of the congressional Black caucus signed on to a series of reforms and said BLM is over, you'd still get a riot if there was a bad shooting.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link