Building community and mutual aid is subversive.

This. Both the government and the major corporations depend on being able to extract wealth from real people getting what they need. If we build dual power structures, help one another out and cut the owner class out of the transaction entirely, we weaken them. Growing food in your garden is revolutionary. Clothing swaps are revolutionary. Cutting the old lady next door's lawn, then eating the soup she made is an act that strikes at the fundamental underpinnings of the power structure set up by those who think that they should be entitled to our labor because they've been arbitrarily designated as the "owners" of things. We can and should remove them from the equation entirely.

Why wasn't I taught about the free food and medical care part of what they did?

https://valleysunderground.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/blackshirts-and-reds-by-michael-parenti.pdf

Building community and mutual aid makes those in power uncomfortable.

Small mutual aid for local communities grow out into large social aid organizations that have political power. Politicians can make them redundant by unemployment, healthcare and pensions, or try to nip them in the bud.

Socialism bad! Sending people to die in wars good!

start listing all the times anti-abortion activists either successfully murdered or attempted to murder their political opponents in the name of the pro life movement. A hit list of judges, physicians, nuns, retired old ladies that like to knit

The problem is that this form of violence is implicitly endorsed by the state and by a majority of the ruling class. They don't see it as competition to their monopoly on violence.

However, if leftist groups were to emulate this level of violence it would be condemned by every media outlet for weeks. Liberal politicians would rush to condemn the violence and lay the groundwork to justify an even more violent retaliation.

I'm not saying that violence is never the answer, but if you are not on the side that has a monopoly on violence then you have to be much more aware of how your actions may validate the state's ability to do violence upon yourself and your cause.

Exactly. The louder and more obnoxious you are, particularly towards those in power, the more likely they are to actually listen, even if just to get you to fuck off

That is the question:

live in an unjust and amoral society

or die trying to make a righteous one.

The stoics, at least Seneca, opted for the former.

Far more people than you seem to think so are feeling up to it, risk of bodily harm nonwithstanding. That same history shows that whole lots of people do and have gotten that fed up.

The current challenge imo is the hyperfocused and extremely well funded tools to disorganize and fracture populaces globally.

They are so abstract, so psychologically targeted and so pervasive that they enable the rise of fascism again even though many of the players are frankly cartoonishly inept (more so than in the past; fascism is cunning and bullish, but seldom clever) to the point that the banality of evil of yesterday is nearly preferable to the bumbling cruelty of today.

Yes, still feeling up to it, but while the precipice nears, there's still both time to turn the car around and get ready to violently brake. We're just careful drivers until there's a need to maneuver.

Joke's on you, I already wish I was dead

When doing nothing becomes so intolerable and the potential gain is high enough to make the risk of death is worth taking then the answer becomes "yes". That's why people don't take extreme actions easily.

Putting it another way, if enough people are willing to take big risks, then the status quo must be pretty damned awful in their view.

They're gonna kill me if I don't

uhhh... eenie... meenie... miniey... mao