They used signal set to auto delete messages, and the prosecution used that to show intent, which is insanely fucked up tbqh.

What do you mean by this?

The downside to full anonymity that I can see is it's easier to get infiltrated. One of the best defenses is being friends with your comrades, knowing where they work and live, meeting their kids, their family, etc. Of course that doesn't always work (like that FBI informant who took down Fred Hampton's chapter of the Black Panthers), but I'd hate to surrender a feeling of community to maintain full opsec.

Of course if you just mean at the action, which now that I'm rereading your comment I think is what you meant, then ya, I agree. Still makes it hard to organize if we can't use digital communication tools and they can, though. Sucks doing all this in a futuristic dystopia. We'll have to adapt like the revolutionaries of old did to their time periods.

The key is that you can't act in this way and "want to get away with it."

This attitude is an extremely good example of why the average proletarian doesn't take left-wing action seriously in the U.S., if my last decade of personal and organizational interviews and conversations are to be of any particular insight.

They know that if they step out, their neck is on the line, and have absolutely no trust for leftists who are not willing to put their neck out there on the line first, publically and repeatedly. The proletariate are not stupid, they know what is at stake here, and the level of violence that can and will be used to protect it, but often activist leftists don't act as though they under that level of threat of violence. The words they say and picture of the world they paint do not match the level and fervor of action they take, when they decide to take action. It feels like they treat it as a social media game.

Op-sec is essential, but even more essential for the movement is, if you get caught, to stand by your convictions.

Not to try to downplay the tragedy and unfairness here, it fucking sucks to see this, but given the analysis, what exactly am I supposed to expect?

no digital communication about the action or between members

I would think that, surely, it should be possible to establish a secure method? It's one thing to not be able to use existing platforms, but an appropriately dedicated group could probably spin up their own encrypted messaging system?

Edit: ok, I see what you mean, they used the simple fact that the protesters used signal as part of the evidence against them. I was thinking in terms of securing your plans rather than protecting actors, which is of course also vital.

People managed to organize before cell phones. Its called you set a meeting and everyone attends in person as agreed. Discuss IRL and then dont change your plans.

Call phones have really lowered the general ability of anybody to commit to anything. Before SMS became prevelant you could set social or political meetings weeks in advance. Like July 16 at 2pm, in the park. I'll bring ___, you'll research ___,whatever other tasks. And everyone just plan for that. Maybe confirm the night before with a phone call (also planned in advance). Now everything requires 50 text messages to nail people down.

Actual paper, hand writing, wax seal. Pre-established protocols of communication and codes. You can make single use shared cyphers that have instructions on which cypher to use in the message itself. Change the code throughout the message, and burn the printed cypher, burn the message.

^this