/lit/ - Literature

>>23284697
if that were the case, there would be an active and meaningful opposition force by now. There is a difference between real political movement and bitter social posturing. Every current "opposition" group have proven themselves as impotent, uncoordinated grifters with no leader, no common goal and a very obvious interest on monetising their platforms.

Not only is there no opposition, but these grifters are actively training the population that "real political movements" are short, flimsy, bread-and-circus events which they will inevitably fall out if favor and move on to the next anti-liberal sentiment mouthpiece to chant and rally for.

The opposition has been controlled for decades, and none of them will ever call for direct action, let alone try to unite all sides for a common goal. The only time it ever came close to that was Occupy, and we all know how fast that was stopped. it wasnt stopped because "no one knew why they were there". Everyone knew why at the start. That idea was forced into their minds, and it became reality. The "protest against banks" was gradually phased out and without a figurehead to remind the people, (like with all other movements and revolutions) Occupy phased out in deranged obscurity and the confused, demoralised remnants were quickly stamped out by police. The people stopped supporting it, because they "forgot" why they were there.