Guy

[Guy @Ba9673]

@the_jefferymead @TifahCrump777 Admittedly it's a little weird.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@visegrad24 Maybe. But I've seen most women who leave Islam don't make an official announcement. They just "ghost" it.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@Heal_within96 well my ancestors fought for the North and freed the slaves. Does that mean she'll treat me like a hero?

[Guy @Ba9673]

@Beanie13072 @andrewilliamsus Hopefully. Because its starting to look like the media narrative is failing and folks are starting to notice behavior. If that's the case it's REAL bad news for black Americans.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@sirferrell2 @Jocelyn46748315 Actually black people are disappearing faster. It's just that no one seems to really care.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@CCFreedmen @__Mafia110__

[Guy @Ba9673]

@AutismCapital The system isn't great. Some people are raised by wolves. But the same people who blame the individual instead of fixing a bad system are no better than an individual blaming a trillionaire.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@RiseAgainstEvil @DissentFu Yes. The system is great. The good guys always win. No notes.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@EndWokeness Well I'm glad to see a particular group isn't in denial about how the world views them.

[David Betz @DavidBe31099196]

I don’t think that academics should do ‘hot takes’ on matters of the day. Their opinions are rarely better informed than anyone else’s and cloaking them in scholarly garb cheapens the principle of objectivity. With respect to what is occurring in Britain today, in my opinion a fundamental error right now is to let the churn of the daily ‘news’ cycle drive your analysis.

The legacy media, the government, and the police have all forfeited any claim to credibility; they lie routinely, by omission and commission, and they are actively shaping the narrative to protect a failing political order. Strong-arming victims’ families, suppressing footage, and spinning every incident as isolated ‘far-right thuggery’ or random criminality is not journalism or policing, let alone governing—it is damage limitation for a system that has lost control of the streets and the story.

Instead, fix your gaze on the structural factors. Demography, geography, economics, and the hollowing-out of institutional legitimacy matter far more than whatever grainy mobile-phone clip is being waved at us this week.

Britain has imported, at scale and with minimal integration, populations whose cultural distance from the native majority is large and, in important respects, growing rather than shrinking. Parallel societies, concentrated in particular towns and cities, now possess the critical mass to sustain sustained low-level conflict and, when conditions align, more organised violence.

The state’s monopoly on force is visibly fraying; its willingness to use what remains of that monopoly is selective and therefore delegitimising. Trust in the police, courts, and political class is in the basement and still falling. Economic stagnation and housing pressure sharpen every grievance. These are not transient conditions; they are the terrain on which coming events will play out.

On the Belfast attacks specifically: the operators are clearly more security-conscious than has been the case with the migrant hotel and other protests over the last couple of years—masked, disciplined about visuals, limiting the evidential trail. Some attribute this to institutional memory of the Troubles. That may be part of it.

But I suspect the more immediate and probable vector is simple tactical diffusion from the modern Left and anarchist playbook. Black Bloc methods, the utility of anonymity, the selective application of violence, the media choreography—these have been field-tested and refined for years in Europe and North America.

The manuals are not secret and the examples are legion: Marighella’s Minimanual of the Urban Guerrilla, the writings of the Red Army Faction, Alinsky’s organising principles stripped of the moralising, the operational literature of the Global Justice movement and Antifa networks.

Remove the Marxist dialectical claptrap and you are left with cold, competent observations about how small, determined groups can punch above their weight against a larger but slower and more constrained opponent. Diffusion of those techniques was inevitable once the incentives aligned.

You don't need an aged ex-IRA uncle to tell you how to do these things. The internet and a library card will do it.

I am wary of firm day-to-day pronouncements precisely because reliable, on-the-ground reporting is so thin. I am not in Belfast, the journalistic desert in this country is real, nearly every dead-tree media and teevee pundit is a literal know nothing.

What I will say with higher confidence on account of my reading of such conflicts elsewhere in the world is that certain escalatory dynamics are now highly probable:

Police over-reaction that produces a martyr or martyrs, further radicalising elements on all sides.

Targeted assassination of a judge, prominent politician, or influential voice.

A spectacular, Christchurch-style mass killing when some individual or cell concludes that only dramatic, indiscriminate violence will break the equilibrium.

Stabbings and gang rapes will continue at their grim baseline; they are already normalised enough that they barely shift the political dial. The deeper pattern is polarisation, erosion of restraint, and the slow emergence of organised ethnic and ideological blocs willing to use force to defend or advance their interests.

All of that is in accordance with the rules of the game of identity politics, which were created by the *very same* people now most frantic about the perilous consequences of their own ideology.

The centre is not holding because it has spent years delegitimising itself and disarming its natural supporters.

Watch the structural trends—demographic momentum, institutional decay, the diffusion of effective small-group tactics, the collapse of shared reality—more than the latest headline. The news will keep lying. The underlying physics of the situation will not.

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

The message of a protest is "we don't like this".

The message of a riot is "we don't like this, and we're able to do something about it".

People who unconditionally call for peace and calm, regardless of the provocation, don't fundamentally understand how politics works in the real world.

They do understand that the purpose of politics is to provide an alternative to violence, but that's as far as their understanding goes. They don't think through the implications, usually because they are quite comfortable with things as they are.

If politics is an alternative to violence, then politics is a proxy for violence.

And that means you have to dole out power in proportion to capacity for violence. Or someone's going to figure out they can do better by flipping the table.

Monarchy wasn't replaced by democracy because of fine-sounding philosophical ideals and eloquent documents declaring this or that.

Democracy happened because if you added rifling to the flintlock firearm, suddenly a individual farmer with a tube was the pinnacle of military technology, and now you had to keep all the farmers with tubes happy by giving them political power.

(Ancient Greek democracy had a similar relationship with the hoplite warrior.)

When political systems work well, for a while, the violence they represent becomes further and further from people's minds, and those who can't effectively commit or direct violence worm their way into power, and begin to take it away from those who can.

And they'll defend their position by saying that violence is unthinkable, barbaric, always bad, must be disavowed at all costs, etc.

This isn't some sort of high-minded principle on their part. It simply means one of two things. Either "the status quo works for me, so I don't want you to upset it", or "I suck at violence, and I don't want to have to fight".

They want young men demoralized, so that their artificial meritocracy of spreadsheets, or their non-meritocracy of patronage networks, can be protected from the natural meritocracy of conflict.

This means that riots aren't actually for achieving any specific material aim. They are for reminding the comfortable that judges and bureaucrats and policemen have home addresses and families. And that violence is always on the table.

A protest would only send the message that the Irish don't want to be ethnically cleansed. But the bureaucrats and judges and lawyers already know that. They just don't care.

A riot reminds them that they have to care, because the Irish have a long tradition of doing something about it.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@JimSimon2241 @tj21245 @SeeRacists Shh. You're ruining the fantasy.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@oowhite80 @DezGoth Uh, you okay, man?

[Guy @Ba9673]

@OurOwnNation

[Guy @Ba9673]

@Timcast Wouldn't advise it.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@mikerecine It was that bullying behavior that angered and emboldened the next generation. You didn't stop it, you added fuel to the fire.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@Omowale99949437 @WrasslinRyan

[Guy @Ba9673]

@HimBivins @1nfamouzKing @ImMeme0 He's right. You lost the argument. Take the L. Even the other witnesses there who were black want this lunatic put away.

[Guy @Ba9673]

@Heal_within96 @dmoonglampers_

[Guy @Ba9673]

@FocusedJustice Weird hill to take a stand on.