The problem with repression is not financial. Since A/I's goal was never to make profit, Bitcoin can't do anything to help them.

> Now, what about A/I group?

Yes, in my local food distribution networks here in France, quite a few people had autistici emails registered on our mailing list.

Don't talk about something you don't know like you do and you're smarter than anyone.

lol, it’s sort of pathetic to cover for a terrorist group with ”but they run a mailing list”. No one is buying that.

I’m sure their helpful functions will be picked up by another group that wants to do good work without USAID money.

Is the car manufacturer responsible for their use of a car? The power tools manufacturer? The paper sheet manufacturer? The restaurant that fed them?

Technical intermediaries could be held responsible specifically for hosting the manifestos (under freedom of the press laws), but that requires an actual due process. Meanwhile, 100% of the authors and websites who inspired or relayed Anders Brejvik and other neo-fascist terrorists are still online and are not facing any kind of repression.

Well A/I doesn't engage in resistance either. All they did was provide email services and host blogs for people. By this standard, Wikipedia or CCC could indeed be next.

Consensus is strictly 100% agreement (or at least 0% disagreement). Granted, it's not always possible. But in some setups and given some objectives, it's sometimes possible to have a collective that finds compromises that satisfy everyone (consensus).

> Consensus is not synonymous with unanimity – though that may be a rule agreed to in a specific decision-making process.[1]

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making

The BRICS organization is precisely setup to not rely on the single actor, China included. They all have strong disagreements, but they all agree having a single global bully (USA) is bad for all involved parties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS

> Antifa defenders just hide behind the fact that the movement is decentralized and leaderless by design

Calling a movement an organization is a fiction, unless you live in an alternate reality. Should i consider you part of an organization because you tweeted a certain hashtag once? Are you the member of a band because you whistled a song on the subway? Are you in the military because you watched a Rambo movie when you were a teen?

That's not true. Black Panther was a group. CNT was a group. Even on the other side of the spectrum, KKK and Boogaloo Boys are groups. They all have a name, membership, and identification.

There's no "antifa" organization because antifascism is a concept with different branches of thoughts and practices. Calling antifa an organization is akin to calling "science" an organization. Sure a dictator can arrest millions of people of the "science" terror organization and jail them for their dangerous subversion, but that doesn't make the "science" organization any more real.

Not arguing in favor of banning A/I, but the US administration claims A/I email services were used to coordinate sabotage actions. I mean, that's as stupid as saying telephone networks or paper sheets were used to coordinate sabotage actions.

Furthermore, the noblogs.org platform (previously hosted by A/I) is used to host a lot of politically-motivated content, including news and statements by various resistance groups across the world, which of course is considered terrorist by the USA, but legally should fall under freedom of the press.

So Google will be shut down tomorrow, right?

I don't have a scientific study at hand, but historically many revolutionaries and resistance fighters were family men and women with children who precisely cared for their children's future.

Historically, those family fighters had really trouble keeping their families alive and very little to lose.