How "accelerationism" supposedly works:

1. Terrorist attack

2. The government uses the attack as an excuse to take away rights and freedoms

3. The populace freaks out over losing freedoms and overthrows the government

How "accelerationism" actually works:

1. Terrorist attack

2. The government uses the attack as an excuse to take away rights and freedoms

3. That's it. Nothing else happens.

I'm willing to bet that a year from now, the political climate in Australia and New Zealand will not be markedly different from today. There will be no "escalation", no further conflict, and no real change in the lives of people, except for the loss of free speech and gun rights in the wake of the recent attack. The attack and subsequent removal of rights will not prompt any mass awakening or popular revolt.

History shows us this is what happens every time. You can look back at many similar attacks that were later used to justify the removal of freedoms, and there was no mass revolt afterwards, and those freedoms were ultimately never restored.

I'm happy to debate this. However, time is all I need to prove me right. If "accelerationism" is correct, then New Zealand, Australia, and likely much of the West would be considerably more violent and conflicted by the end of this year, possibly even engaged in some kind of civil war. If I'm correct, then they will be basically the same except with less freedom for the average person. At the end of this year we'll see who is right.

Civil war and "accelerationism" are pipe dreams. No one can tell you when these will ever happen, although they tell you they'll happen "soon". This is because they're illusions with no basis in reality. They're fantasies somebody came up with because dreaming of an epic societal collapse is less work than raising a family or building a community.

"Accelerationism" is a path to losing freedom, nothing more. It is a path to failure.