@phillmv i guess i’d add again, success at what? in the US the far right is succeeding at polarizing the country, sure. and a tragedy is that by breaking bonds of communal affection, the far-right’s Schmittian friend-enemy division can come to seem like hard-nose realism and win elections. that’s Israel’s last few decades. then what? the bonds of communal affection are still frayed, there is still conflict and repression. 1/

@phillmv is there an “after the revolution” when the genocide is complete and the friends, now with no enemy, live happily ever after? i don’t think so. have there been any examples? this is a politics that depends upon enemies, and has to manufacture new ones. but more usually there is no vanquishing even to hope for that. there is just endless conflict. only Gerry Adams political role did any good. the diaspora of the suppression you think you’ve completed lies in wait. 2/

@phillmv ironically, if there is any hope of a constructive result to terrorism it’s that people desire its end, and that creates impetus for hammering out a political solution that might otherwise be too contentious. if hamas were to offer now to revise its charter and declare its desire for a binational settlement (and its willingness to ultimately cede governance to others), perhaps a pause might be taken at this precipice. 3/

@phillmv creating a darkest hour only for a dawn is very rare i think and hard when the darkness is terrorism though. you have to have truly demonized those you terrorize by the time you are murdering their children. how does one make peace with demons? nevertheless there are the occasional Arafats or Adams, and even more occasionally also a counterpart not so embittered (or cynically reliant on their enemy to remain enemy for their own political legitimacy) that a dawn may come. 4/

@phillmv i think such events are far too rare to rehabilitate the tactic. it is nearly always a catastrophe for all concerned, except perhaps political insiders who gain power and entrench their positions from conflict. (and of course war profiteers.) but for every mass constituency in all of the rival groups, adoption of the tactic brings only catastrophe.

maybe for some groups, there would be catastrophe anyway, so you can say misery loves company. /fin