risk is inherent in life

If you want it gone get yourself arrested and put in solitary confinement

Of the opposition accepting the result which you didn't want in the first place. Like leftists accepting the loss of women's only programs rather than pushing back against the "attack against women"

No, don't read Rules for Radicals, read *this*

```RULES FOR RADICALS is honestly not very useful for Righties, despite the fact that it’s the only Lefty organizing book of which a lot of Righties have even heard. In the Tea Party heyday, people basically xeroxed Alinsky’s chapter on tactics: you know: “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it,” all that stuff. But if you read the rest of the book, you quickly see the problem: Alinsky had the benefit of lefty Institutions, many of which he didn’t even have to build, and he blithely assumes that you’ve got access to Institutional support the way he did. Dude ran an organizer training school with a full-time fifteen-month curriculum. Yeah, no, not gonna help us Righties right now```https://status451.com/2017/10/27/radical-book-club-the-centralized-left/

Read what?

The link

all of it

someone who doesnt understand how technology provides a route around the instiutions?

I mean, I'm listening to someone who forgets that technologies are built, run and maintained by people. That if you target people the right way, you can get them *and their technologies* to bend your way,.

Remember when the internet was supposed to be a big, un-censorable and uncontrollable decentralized network that would be unable to be controlled?

Twitter seems to be gaining control. And when you can't do that, you hit the financial services. And the Crypto exchanges (yes, that's already happened).

Bending your way is just a question of minimizing internal resistance

WTF does that even mean?

Get people in the companies and nothing else

Manipulate the ever living shit out of them until they do what you want

Tug at their heart strings, unite them in struggle, force them to contribute to the fight

Who? And what are you basing this on?

I don't get where you're getting this from.

I'm saying we need to band people together. The next time there's a James Damore, heads need to roll.

Or he doesn't get fired.

Only then can you even begin to get neutrality from these institutions.

The next damore is the proud boy who got his chase account shut down

Now whats the solution? Mass withdrawals? Twitter outrage mobs?

This should be the point at which the left loses its collective minds because a black man got his account shut down for political reasons

by what vector should chase be attacked?

And now we come to the end of every time we have this conversation

1. You're missing my point. The reason the Proud Boy got his account pulled is because the culture *within Chase* is sufficiently hostile to allow it. Damore was internal when he got fired and everyone else fell in line out of fear.
2. Any and All of them. Better than sitting around doing nothing. The current trajectory is that the left just set a new precedent: people who look alt-right (but aren't alt-right--and aren't even white) can be banned from the financial system (and don't pretend this isn't going to continue creeping forward from here)
3. Clearly the left isn't holding to it's own standards. So what? Are you going to make them or are they only accountable to themselves (in which they're not accountable to anyone).

> You really need to read that link, it's part of a series, and it's more realistic and actionable than it looks.

It's not enough to have people in position either, they have to be enabled.

Which is why "keep your head down" is such a losing long-term strategy.

Yeah sure, you avoid problems in the present. But the creeping authoritarianism keeps gradually taking hold. Furthermore, the frog continues to boil slowly and the left get's it's tactics, ideological positions and goals "normalized" to where it becomes harder and harder to fight back.

...And yet here we are. Having spent the last hour or so arguing and playing the usual "libertarian purity spiral" game.

The frog boils slowly.

back at the same point yes

Do something. organize, nothing vaugely resembling a plan and nothing to rally behind

Do what the left did, but dont

etc etc

If all you want to do is get people over the hurdle of not wanting to organize thats fine

otherwise the approach may need to be re thought

Okay, so read that series. It talks alot about it.

Second, I'm saying it comes down to things like networking.
And we need that discussion. We need to talk about *actionable options* that can be undertaken individually or as a group to shift the battle lines towards neutrality or advantage.

I actually had a plan. This was my plan:

1) "we need to talk about what we will do about this. It's important to organize *something*"
2) See what people think are options.
3) Try and build the network.
4) If we can find something actionable, do it.

Here's some options I had in mind:
Letter writing congresscritters to actually regulate the banking system like they're supposed to (the original BoA boycott on the gun industry was illegal. They haven't been hit at all as I understand. And guess what happened when BoA got away? Chase joined in.
Start withdrawing funds from Chase

But you know what's better than one letter? 100 letters.
Of course, you can do all of the above. "diversity of tactics" as the left calls it. As long as the diversity doesn't cross clear ethical lines...

The problem is that we got stuck arguing over things like the role of government and "I don't want to be like the left" at step 1. So I shifted to "convince people we need to do *something* and moving as a group is more effective than just doing it individually and far better than just sitting around whining about it."

Sorry this took so long to type. I'm slightly busy at the moment, but this is a conversation that needs to happen.

Also, *any* organization is better than no organization. Imagine if the Grange decided that if BoA wouldn't sell to the firearms industry, then the Grange wouldn't sell to employees of BoA. There would be a riot and this "boycott people from buying products because we don't like them" would come to an end pretty darn quick. (I am not endorsing a food withhold--yet. That's pretty damn close to the "shoot everything that moves" level of civil war)

Thats where society is headed

Sellers will soon have a right to deny products/services based on political views