i think desired success from entryism is more or less subjective in nature & what one aims for.
-[as mentioned in the starting] to change the pattern of org/insti. is roughly impossible, for the very starters it is needed to have rebel ideological cogs at all places, most imp. at higher up in the ladder - which itself is a huge, complex task in long run to achieve and maintain [due to the nature of selection up - as mentioned in the article too] without cover getting blown.
-the only crucial help entryism can provide is sensitive info/plan/strategies which are not available in the public domain - that also is directly proportional to the position rebel hold in org. - and repeatedly unsuccessful actions might alarm org. as well.
having an insider only helps when there's a proper vision to use in the longer-term continuously.
The entryism concept is intresting as what it tries to tell is that by joining the bureaucratic machine, you can help your people but what if the entrant messes up big time? Maybe it is cheesy to think it in the way Hollywood has us beleive but I'll still try to make sense. Imagine yourself being as the rat or the mole who cracks some exam or interview and enter the XYZ institution that you eventually want to bring down or tame for your community's intrest. But you can't do that in one sweep. It is not like you are someone like Edward Snowden who could turn whistleblower after a few years and expose the XYZ institution(not to mention live in exile like him). Even he had to do the jobs before he made a move against NSA(was it this or someone else?). Now, let us say that you are about to spend x years in the institution and for the sake of simplicity, will have to take part in around a 100 operations in your line of work. These 100 operations which basically boils down to "ensure the interests of the institution are achieved by any means possible". Now, some will be heavily against your community, some are for your community's betterment but won't most of them be indifferent to the community and seek self-interest at the cost of community? Now you try your best to nullify the damage in the anti community jobs and turn the soulless bureaucratic self-interest jobs for your community's benefit, you will still have to do something that might harm your people and here comes what I proposed earlier about the entrant messing up. What if the damage you do leaves a permenant scar the community will not recover from? I'm preety sure several "anti-my community" decisions are taken every day but still no lasting damage and then one decision arrives that causes all the problems. What if it turned out you made the decision while pretending to play ball for the institution? In such case, a corrupt daroga is better than you who could give quick results.
nice article, kudos !!
i think desired success from entryism is more or less subjective in nature & what one aims for.
-[as mentioned in the starting] to change the pattern of org/insti. is roughly impossible, for the very starters it is needed to have rebel ideological cogs at all places, most imp. at higher up in the ladder - which itself is a huge, complex task in long run to achieve and maintain [due to the nature of selection up - as mentioned in the article too] without cover getting blown.
-the only crucial help entryism can provide is sensitive info/plan/strategies which are not available in the public domain - that also is directly proportional to the position rebel hold in org. - and repeatedly unsuccessful actions might alarm org. as well.
having an insider only helps when there's a proper vision to use in the longer-term continuously.
The entryism concept is intresting as what it tries to tell is that by joining the bureaucratic machine, you can help your people but what if the entrant messes up big time? Maybe it is cheesy to think it in the way Hollywood has us beleive but I'll still try to make sense. Imagine yourself being as the rat or the mole who cracks some exam or interview and enter the XYZ institution that you eventually want to bring down or tame for your community's intrest. But you can't do that in one sweep. It is not like you are someone like Edward Snowden who could turn whistleblower after a few years and expose the XYZ institution(not to mention live in exile like him). Even he had to do the jobs before he made a move against NSA(was it this or someone else?). Now, let us say that you are about to spend x years in the institution and for the sake of simplicity, will have to take part in around a 100 operations in your line of work. These 100 operations which basically boils down to "ensure the interests of the institution are achieved by any means possible". Now, some will be heavily against your community, some are for your community's betterment but won't most of them be indifferent to the community and seek self-interest at the cost of community? Now you try your best to nullify the damage in the anti community jobs and turn the soulless bureaucratic self-interest jobs for your community's benefit, you will still have to do something that might harm your people and here comes what I proposed earlier about the entrant messing up. What if the damage you do leaves a permenant scar the community will not recover from? I'm preety sure several "anti-my community" decisions are taken every day but still no lasting damage and then one decision arrives that causes all the problems. What if it turned out you made the decision while pretending to play ball for the institution? In such case, a corrupt daroga is better than you who could give quick results.
This is nuts
Adbhim 😘😘