Edit: you do make an even-handed argument that there is a vast spectrum of options between peaceful and non-peaceful means. > when the reality is that we can just start taking over political institutions to get some big wins. I actually thought this was an option for a while. Start off by taking over low level political offices. After seeing the "school board takeovers" and how the teachers unions, an arm of the state, will just do what they want. And the walk-back by the judicial branch its pretty clear at this point why that won't work. Essentially if all this is is looting, then any of the "wins" we have now are just low level battles being given to us because the state doesn't care anymore, because they already know the conflict is over before it could begin. We're not winning "territory", they're *giving up territory*. It's either to exhaust us with false hope, or its because they got what they wanted anyway (total control in all the key positions), and now this is just them running up the score. They know its over. We know its over. The only question is "what' is over, and what the consequences of it will be on a national scale. As someone said, the "soft" reset plan has been withdrawn. I think they are planning on a *hard* reset. The federal government, and western governments are planning on starting mass conflicts or pandemic to kills hundreds of millions of people. Maybe I've lost touch with reality, but I don't think, taking a 40k foot perspective, that they can even control the situation on the ground here in the u.s. without an absolute dictatorship to enforce order. So they'll just kill millions of people instead. And thats the reason faceberg and all the other paper billionaires are buying island bunkers. Edit: your post was really excellent and I wish I could offer you more than the same old shitposts as a thank you. But I know when I'm dealing with someone who actually knows their stuff, and all I can say is thanks.