The story becomes 'people who think x are violent terrorists' and all of a sudden no one wants to admit they think x, or even discuss x from a rational standpoint. Everyone will just remember the violence.
Perhaps not, though. Bill Ayers still ended up in a position of powerful political influence and mainstream academic acceptance even after he and his associates in the Weather Underground committed a number of terrorist bombings. If your ideological clique ends up in a position of significant state influence, you'll be forgiven your crimes, even if the state is not replaced in its totality.
In a bit more detail: You're the loser with 99% probability. The only way you're going to win is by having an amazing plan, or getting amazingly lucky, or most likely some of both.
That leaves two options: You lose and get crushed, or you don't make any change and it's irrelevant. For the rest of the world, it's better that you be in the second category, because you cause less damage that way.
And, in fact, I think you are in the second category. You're talking big about "destroy[ing] the current state and creat[ing] a new one", about how "only violence will [work]." And what's your violence? You're publicizing the Ashley Madison info of people who you're mad at. Pathetic.
But, in fact, I prefer pathetic big-talker do-nothings in this area, because they cause a smaller body count.