You do realise you could use similar logic against any group fighting guerrilla warfare against their government, including the rebels in Syria and the "founding fathers" of the United States…
The latter could be used to criticize any use of violence. Most uses of violence are predicated on the claim that they're being done to prevent violence in some way. For example the right wing Bush administration went to war in Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of people, because Saddam Hussein was a brutal tyrant. The thought process there is pretty hard to understand either.
And being opposed to corrupt capitalism doesn't mean that one drops out of modern life. That's a pretty stupid interpretation.
Unless Alpert's covered in bacon grease, I don't think Hugo can track anything.
Ever notice how the Left has trouble coming to grips a with facts like Hitler, the Nazi's, Stalin, Mao, and L H Oswald were Leftists? Granted they were mostly in it for themselves and then took advantage desperate peoples and turned them into revolutionists. PC and fascism is all the rage now at our universities, all they lack is a leader with charisma. Obama turned out to be dud, and not far enough left enough for them.
Or the US in Korea and Vietnam was evil, as if we should just let neighboring communists take over with totalitarianism. Had we done nothing everything in between Japan and Australia would have slid into a Maoist paradise.