Accelerationism
I&#x27;m a scary far-right NRX guy, and the accelerationist idea has obviously been raised in the circles I frequent.<p>But it generally leaves me cold. This keeps coming to mind:<p>&quot;Wo unto the world because of offences!  For offenses must come, but wo to him by whom the offence cometh!&quot;<p>You have to be <i>pretty damn sure</i> you can build a better new world before you burn down the old one.<p>Would-be revolutionists would do better to focus their energies on things that:<p>- even the &quot;evil other side&quot; could never convince themselves to call a war crime<p>- are resilient to and helpful after whatever collapse is foreseen<p>- will have some benefit if the collapse does <i>not</i> occur<p>- don&#x27;t make things worse.<p>It is, in fact, possible to find these things.<p>The worst-case scenario is that there&#x27;s a collapse and it brings neither a worker&#x27;s paradise nor the return of kings, but pointless gang wars.  You can build that worker&#x27;s paradise, or aristocratic character, <i>before</i> the collapse, and if you&#x27;re right that the system is unsustainable, you&#x27;ll &quot;start&quot; the collapse in a much better position.  Sure, there are likely entrenched obstacles in your way, but making an omelette does not justify killing a few people.<p>Get to know your neighbors!