People say that a lot, but it's not really true. The state will make some encroachment hear or there periodically, but it's nothing like the immediate move to crush dissent and organizing that we see when we give them an excuse. Probably the closest thing to a real argument is that "well, they'll generate that excuse with agent provocateurs or whatever" to which I say "the correct response is to stop agent provocateurs, not do their work for them". There's a reason that the feds have a long history of trying to turn leftist activists (among others) into terrorists, and it's because terrorism is useful to the state.

People are just too dogmatic about this. Palestine Action is very much doing work even though they're technically being adventurist. The orgs doing it the right^TM^ way haven't come close to the amount of material good Palestine Action has done. Is "building a working class movement" by protesting at the DNC supposed to help the Palestinians somehow?

The way I see it is imagine if you were a socialist in 1941 Germany who, through alignment of the stars, was able to avoid conscription to the Wehrmacht but couldn't leave Germany. What would socialist praxis look like in 1941 Germany? It would essentially be blowing up railroads and bridges, sabotaging airplanes and tanks, and committing wanton acts of violence against random Germany bureaucrats through gruesome murders. At best, you might have contacts with Allied intelligence and smuggle sensitive government documents, but every other form of socialist praxis is pretty much just every form of adventurism. I'm sure killing the German leader would've alienated the German working masses, but the German working masses were completely on board with exterminating Jews, Roma, and other undesirables in 1941. The whole tailist-commandist paradigm just doesn't make sense. The path to socialism with German characteristics in 1941 is the complete destruction of the German state wrought by the Red Army and the forceful reorganization of the German state into a socialist one by the Soviet Union. The proper socialist praxis would be being an underground partisan movement based within the heart of the German war machine itself.

2 successful assassinations

There's Abe. Which one is the other one? Prigo?

The Trump assassination was a) such a failure that it barely scratched him, b) not against a sitting official, and c) did not actually accomplish anything (his ptsd does not seem to have actually changed anything outside him). I don't think we can use the lack of backlash to prove much of anything given these features.

Abe's assassination was literally one of the most effective political assassinations of all time in terms of causing concrete policy changes, and that was in large part because of the existing racist animosity in the Japanese population towards the moonies, along with the killer having basically the perfect message to tell the media (and not getting killed before he could tell it) of actually supporting Abe politically but having his mother suffer due to one specific policy.

I don't know what the other assassination you are referring to is. Remember, I didn't rule out the killing of an Israeli general or something because it would be concretely useful for disrupting Israeli military operations, but I really think that if you kill some gentile Zionist politician, it just won't matter because the system does not rely on them and the media will still call you an antisemite and move on. If they're a Jewish Zionist, forget about it.

I think shattering the existing BDS movement would be bad, actually, even if we wish it was more effective. It has still gotten some institutions to divest.