0
0

[–] 17526627? ago 

If you're considering it from the perspective of accelerationism, it is beneficial for Europeans. Even if many are turned off, some will be turned on to the prospect of violence, inspired by it. It shows that violence can be done in a way that asserts our right to exist. Sure, it was Muslims insome random mosque this time, but, as those governments crack down, why would it not escalate to politicians, Jews, and others? Let's say things do accelerate to constant bloodshed. It'll do a few things:

1.) Wake people up to the fact that there's a cause here that people are ready and willing to die for, spreading the message.

2.) it could force politicians into reversing course in some things under the threat of violence

3.) it could discourage more immigration

4.) as governments keep cracking down, it will force people into a position of do or die to defend themselves. It forces the normies into a decision.

Of course, I concede that such attacks would need to also take the form of attacks on the ones really calling the shots, in a politically obvious way, to have any chance of bringing about any of the above possibilities.

Essentially, the white race really looks to be on the ropes. There's two options really. The slow and steady approach has possibility, but then you look at Trump's failures and the many people still asleep. The other option, that Tarrant has shown us, presents the possibility of rapid change. It could be for the better, but also could end for the worse. However, I believe it would be better to stand and die quickly while we can, rather than slowly perish beneath (((democratic))) institutions that seem to be failing us.