But lets say, that book is also good proof of why extremism is relevant. Why issues like the treatment of pigs needed some masked commandos take video footage and expose it. Why there needed to be nazis and die hard racists to get mainstream parties to modify their policy and so on. When nobody aknowledge the problems of loose immigration and most generous free money given (like state of finland being only country in world paying to import family & relatives of each refugee who claims he has them somewhere. Which means one guy can get even 15 other people (wife, children, foster children, grandparents,..), imported here free of charge.) and creation of problem gettoes etc. when suddenly this mere online bitching is channeled into relevant political force, suddenly almost every political party had to make a change. Some modify their stand slightly. Some do nearly U turn. And these were things what wouldn't have been done if nobody had reacted as they have.
One can ask should the wings of extremist be cut off? I think not, but that extremist should aknowledge their actual role.
I think it is theoretically interesting scenario, what would happen if instead of "common people", you'd let the die hard fanatics to rule. I could quite easily admit, that I may not be balanced enough to decide on social matters in scale of state. I simply don't even know how the infrastructure of society works, although I think this is case of most people in politics.
One can look examples like Kambodia, where decent fraction of population get erased in process of getting rid of intellectuals, city-life etc. I could imagine finland, after all the highly educated, intellectual elite and burgeous pigs are just ash in the sky, and the "regular" hessburger fed people scattered around into agricultural villages. Perhaps no negroes of jews in sight, yet not much else either, than fields last seen with decent crops back in 80's. Regular life may be pointless savage life, even if you could carry mighty banners of victory. This is the relevant topic, what any extremists should consider. The amusing
patriootti.com for example, which is not THAT highly valued even among most of extremist right. Their ideas are so vague, so pointless, and in the end, based on such a pure illusions. Like why the fuck fight against "multiculturalism" and then agitate towards mighty nordic national socialist state consisting Finland, Sweden and Norway, under one führer? Would any swede take commands from some jävla finne führer? Or would we bow down in front of some whale eating oil barons? hehe.. What are the common cultural characters we should unite with? How this goal could be achieved, and how you arrange idea what may have support of 0,0000001% support or less in the population, to become effective? In situation where organisation refuses to define any actual political program. Just talk about it in level of "fight must go on!!" & "never surrender!!". It is like forming organisation with goal to invade mars. While your only skill is 2 finger typing system on laptop and best achievement to open free blog.
Aknowledging the role of misfits of society, doing best to throw rocks into the machine seems much more fruitful. If you really don't have potential to be anything more than .. for example street thug. In deed, there would need to be führer giving commands to wannabe führers. Explaining them what could and what should be done if aiming for actual results.
