falsereality said:

shivas.wisdom said:

what resources?--one of the core concepts of these methods linked in the op is that a single individual can effectively disrupt multiple online communities with minimal resources

and what would the risk of being outted consist of? especially when it happens over the anonymity of the internet--to me, the risk/benefit ratio seems to be skewed towards benefit

the net cast over the environmental movement spans everything from direct action training camps to community puppet shows--for what is, arguably, a non-threat--what makes you think that the net cast over drug culture, specifically that part of the culture which intends to reveal government misinformation, would not be placed under a similar net?


published in 1926, still required reading: what every radical should know about state repression; by victor serge

---

It would take far more resources to offset a community this size than a small grassroots movement, it only takes a few agent provocateurs to truly fuck a movement that involves corporeal activism. It would take a sustained effort from many individuals to alter the general atmosphere of this forum. It's huge, there are over a hundred people active at any given time and thousands of posts per day. Your link lead to a page with more links than I care to read over, if you want me to respond to something in particular, quote it.

The risk of being outed would be increased vigilance in whatever community a group failed to disrupt and media attention directing more people into the group. The internet is not anonymous, highc thought it was anonymous and asked me to DOX him, even offered to pay me, I did it for free in under one minute. There are ways to obfuscate your identity, but there really is no surefire way (unless you spend a godawful amount of time) to completely hide who you are online. TOR has many flaws and it is not completely anonymous.

The environmental movement is not "arguably" a non-threat, there are several organizations that are officially recognized as domestic terrorist groups and should be treated as such. They have caused millions of dollars worth of property damage and have endangered people's lives. You think we're breaking ground here by revealing misinformation about drugs? We're not. Any person can readily discredit government propaganda about drugs by looking at legitimate medical journals and wikipedia.

---

akira_akuma said:

the tactics are absurd. it's merely a distraction...sorta like Anonymous. they too provide a distraction, though they vie for actual real world action (as opposed to consequences) and they kinda seem to be working as the counterforce to the kind of disinfo stuff that might be perpetrated via media, or this kind of cyber-infiltration ect.

---

shivas.wisdom said:

surveillance is the complement to disruption, in my opinion, but despite seeking the same results they have different functions

targeted surveillance seeks to identify and remove the greatest threats, whereas disruption campaigns seek to cultivate an environment where such threats are less likely to occur in the first place

---

Quote:

for an example,  a disruption tactic can be seen in the environmental movement of the late 80s--instead of only seeking to arrest the top leaders (though this was occuring as well), the movement was infiltrated and internal division fomented (thru the introduction of pacifism)--both actions, surveillance and disruption, worked towards the goal of creating a neutralized environment movement

---

Quote:

in both cases, an increased shift towards decentralized activism and practice of security culture has shown to be the best response to the techniques of state oppression--that, and knowledge of those very techniques

---

Loyola10 said:

akira_akuma said:

the tactics are absurd. it's merely a distraction...sorta like Anonymous. they too provide a distraction, though they vie for actual real world action (as opposed to consequences) and they kinda seem to be working as the counterforce to the kind of disinfo stuff that might be perpetrated via media, or this kind of cyber-infiltration ect.

---

I would bet tons of hard currency you are a Canadian intelligence agent.

---

my guess is that's only going to end up working in my favor.