Carl Gustaf my beloved Marshal, that is the modus operandi of all radical leftist movements: utilize deniable assets to terrorize the population and further their revolutionary goals, while still asserting themselves to simply be a peaceful movement fighting for equal rights. Sinn Fein does it with the IRA, ANC did it, and American Antifa is a very thinly-veiled paramilitary wing of the Democratic Party.
I honestly wouldn't be opposed to a group like Sunrise protesting CNN. You reap what you sow after all.
Yeah and it would be like 2020 riots when they stormed cnn hq
Unlikely.
Nobody likes her they played themselves when they voted for her and the old man
Yes and no. Sunrise is based around "hubs" which is a term Sunrise uses for local chapters - you can find a list of hubs here. These hubs are pretty decentralised and can generally make decisions on their own; what normally happens is that Sunrise leadership comes up with an idea (for instance, "let's protest politicians' houses"), releases some guidelines (like these) and the hubs decide how to do whatever leadership's told them to do. The idea is basically that if some activists decide to bomb a pipeline or take part in riots for "climate justice", the leadership has plausible deniability and can say "we never told them to do that, we just told them to take 'direct action' against pipelines and 'fight for racial justice', it's not our fault if people decide to use 'a diversity of tactics' to do that".
Someone really needs to make a chart like this about the movement and one for the heirarchy of said movement
I wouldn't call Blazevic a second in command or really say anything about their structure. From what I know:
Yes, that's because there are very few progressives in those states. California, the PNW and the Northeast are very left wing areas and so it makes far more sense for Sunrise to open a hub there than in a rural bit of Texas where most people don't care about climate change and work in oil. Remember that Sunrise is a left-wing group and has no real reason to recruit members in states where most people won't support its message.
So they are cells or sects then from I can draw parallels they operate with immunity and don’t care how it’s done
I live in the UK. Sunrise isn't a thing here.
Sorry I didn’t know but considering it concerns me and possibly you that they might spread over there it happened with BLM that started on American shores before heading to Britain and becoming global
As I said in my post:
Why would Sunrise go to the hassle of setting up a hub in the UK and dealing with all the legal headaches that come with being a foreign organisation that tries to influence UK politics when it can just get its comrades in Green New Deal Rising to do exactly the same things that Sunrise would do?
i haven’t thought it all the way through since I live in the states and UK law is way different than US law
Terrorist groups and some other criminal organizations call things like this "cells."
Because cults aren't ever about whatever they claim to be about, and Green New Deal isn't going to give them all their money.
"Affinity groups" is another term I've seen groups like these use.
True, but I don't think Sunrise is a grift - I've seen enough videos of its leaders speaking to give me the impression that they genuinely believe what they're saying.
Yes, in this case, that's the hook that gets people in. They're also common when parasitizing other religious groups, like the various Ponzi scams in Utah that prey on LDS members.
To add to this, I've been talking to a guy who left Sunrise and he says that:
I feel I should be surprised by this, but somehow I'm not. Does this ex-sunrise member have any other stories to tell?
He's pretty busy with work at the moment so I won't be able to speak to him now.
