Surely the local power structure is mainstream by definition? "Radical" doesn't imply "novel", but it does imply a much greater belief that the ends justify the means, and an opposition to the status quo. Radical is a modality of politics. Description of something as radical is not necessarily an endorsement or censure.
The American revolutionaries were radicals. The protesters with guns demanding that Kentucky reopen its shops are radicals. The Unabomber was a radical. Nelson Mandela was a radical.
(There's a much longer point to be made about how armed revolution is an event and the subsequent politics is a process, and that lots of places fall over when it comes to the long haul of building a working politics after the revolution. I'm glad this community seems to have avoided that.)
The American revolutionaries were radicals. The protesters with guns demanding that Kentucky reopen its shops are radicals. The Unabomber was a radical. Nelson Mandela was a radical.
(There's a much longer point to be made about how armed revolution is an event and the subsequent politics is a process, and that lots of places fall over when it comes to the long haul of building a working politics after the revolution. I'm glad this community seems to have avoided that.)