Neo-terrorism on the individual may be possible to predict using creative thinking.
But if its perpetrators’ actions are based on observation – in the morning this, so in the afternoon the consequent result thus – and is therefore entirely dependent on giving the impression that the agency of the target doesn’t exist, even when it does, it will be almost impossible for the subject of the neo-terrorism to have the time to reflect creatively enough to anticipate the practically split-minute, maybe on occasions split-second, forking-paths.
That is to say, if someone decides not premeditatedly but in the act, yet even so according to an overarching strategy, to gaslight a concrete individual’s agency into perceived non-existence – the strategy long-term is well structured, even as the tactics are highly moment-to-moment – it will be practically impractical and unworkable for anyone to think quickly enough to prevent personal harm and damage to their humanity and bodily integrity.
And even when for a while they are able to keep up a brave face and combat such attacks, over any sustained period of gaslighting and neo-terrorism on the individual on this scale it’s clear a real weariness is bound, inevitably bound, to set profoundly in.
These are the implications if our neo-terrorism on the individual delivers its violence and abuse using processes which appear cleverly predictive to the mark but which actually only need to be rapid in their responsiveness to obsessive observation of the latter.
The objective is to destroy in the mark all belief in their agency for change: a self-fulfilling prophecy if there ever was one. And giving the impression the skillset used is predictive when it’s just brute observation is precisely what generates the terrible feelings of hopeless future which this kind of terrorism may already be delivering.
For many exposed to such dynamics over decades or more, self-immolation can only ultimately one day be the result. Which is – essentially – a disgraceful state of societal affairs.
Wouldn’t you agree?