So what does this revolution look like and what are its goals?

[cali]

Since quite a few of you frequently predict revolution and predict it with hope for a better future, you must have some idea of what this revolution would look like or at least what you'd like it to to look like. And surely you have some objectives for the revolution.

What are those objectives? How are they met? Are there leaders? What's the story?

[Vinnie From Indy]

1. Damn! Sounds like a hell of alot of work to reply to this one

At-ti-ca! At-ti-ca! At-ti-ca!

How's that?

[bergie321]

108. Post Revolution

US broken up into several nations:
Northwest(Includes Alaska and Brittish Columbia), Northeast, Southeast, Texas, Utah

Southwest goes back to Mexico, Midwest goes to Canada.

[PinkoDonkey]

216. There is a Russian political scientist

who agrees with you: "As if Things Weren't Bad Enough, Russian Professor Predicts End of U.S."

[chalky]

226. Oh, good gawd. I'd better start pulling up stakes for Illinois or Minnesota right now.

The rednecks in the "Texas Republic" states barely acknowledge being part of the existing US as it is.
Can you imagine how hellish it will be here if these states fall under the jurisdiction of Mexico?

[Mudoria]

245. Pretty obvious the Russian "professor" is a kook....

NC, SC, Virginia and Tennessee joining up with the northern states instead of the rest of the South??? That would NEVER happen!

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Better Today]

214. Revolution = war, even if it isn't a bodily, bloody war. We shouldn't

be talking about getting into a revolution unless we take the time and work to determine its face, its function, and an exit plan.

Cali - good on you for asking your OP question.

[Brickbat]

2. IME, those calling for revolution are actually calling for someone else to lead the revolution and

tell them what to do. Or for someone else to start up a revolution so they can cheer it on. Revolution, when it comes down to it, is damn hard and dangerous work. It's a lot of fun to talk about, though, as evidenced at DU.

[walldude]

160. Maybe we ought to take a cue from the Iranians.

They are out in full force against their government under cover of an international media blackout.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

3. WOLVERINES!!!

[Brickbat]

5. Hee!

[niceypoo]

28. My cousin watched Red Dawn 50 or 60 times...

...then ran out and joined the military

[Clintonista2]

62. I've never been able to get through the first 20 minutes of that movie

It's actually the kind of film I usually enjoy, so I'm not sure why I can't stand it. I can't imagine trying to watch it 50 or 60 times LOL.

[BoneDaddy]

76. Maybe cause it was funded by the CIA

to drum up some form of support for our nonsense in the 80's

[proteus_lives]

134. Huh? Links?

:tinfoilhat:

[SIMPLYB1980]

145. Now it's our Chinese overlords.

http://www.reddawn2010.com/
:tinfoilhat:

[proteus_lives]

153. Oh, that remake is gonna suck.

How dare they mess with 80s perfection!

R.I.P. Patrick Swayze.

[SIMPLYB1980]

157. No doubt it's going to suck big time, but

it should be good for a laugh. Also see Red Moon. For a view of our communist overlords in space!

[proteus_lives]

163. That's great!

:rofl:

[BoneDaddy]

170. Sorry when I originally posted this

I had sarcasm smiles and was going to reference the remake that is coming up in 2010, but it posted the small part I had.

[proteus_lives]

203. No worries.

Wolverines!!

[Winterblues]

4. There's gunna be light sabers and star ships and all sorts of really neat stuff.

We gunna kick out all them bad guys...

[SIMPLYB1980]

29. LOL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GJOVPjhXMY&feature=player_embedded

[SemiCharmedQuark]

6. Someone on DU posted that we need to guillotine our leaders like the French

Another posted that we need to "drag them out of the Capitol".


So in other words, I imagine for many it will look like something from a movie.

[Javaman]

78. And usually those who want those types of executions never ever think

they also might be on that same receiving end. Which is how it usually works out.

[Occam Bandage]

7. I plan to watch it on television. nt

[Javaman]

80. The revolution will not be televised. nt

[Lance_Boyle]

98. Does youtube count? n/t

[Javaman]

103. Not in the traditional sense.

but it's user driven, sure, why not? LOL

[earcandle]

8. From what I heard, it will not be televised. Anybody else hear that?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

9. But it will be You Tube'd

[Occam Bandage]

12. Iran tried that.

Turns out bullets are mildly more effective than tweets.

[SIMPLYB1980]

10. Utopia?

[ipaint]

11. Use cash.

"If you're among those about to join the posse, may I suggest you put down the rope. Let's just all get together and stage a protest that will deprive Big Banking of a billion dollars a year.

That's right, and it's all legal. Plus, unlike violence, it will not give the authorities any justification to label Main Street an angry mob and commence cracking heads among the 90% of us bearing the brunt of the economic crisis.

Goldman Sachs executives' guilty paranoia aside, I don't know anyone willing to take such extreme measures, though we all have our fantasies. But, we can hit them where it will hurt by depriving the current banking and finance cartel of income and profits.

Posse lookin' to apprehend them bank robber barons

No, really, this is how: Right now, there is a growing movement to Use Cash instead of credit and debit cards whenever possible. Once it gets going it will terrify the Banksters.

How much money can we deny the banking/finance corporations? A lot.

...Let's say a typical Use Cash protester can switch just $35 of spending from plastic to cash a week – buying gas for the car, and a couple other small purchases. That will deprive Big Banking their average merchant vigor of 3.5%: $1.

But $35 of lost credit or debit card “spend” also denies Big Banking enormous additional potential revenue. And, that's where they make a killing on cardholders. Penalties and fees forgoing over limit or usingover draft "privileges" that can range from $30 to $50, not to mention double cycle interest accumulations on prior balances.

Just sticking with $1 per week per protestor, if a million people join in that's a minimum of $52 million dollars a year.

But this is not a march on Washington. A million people is nowhere near the limit. And, for many people, switching $35 per week of plastic spending to cash is nothing.

Visa cardholders in the U.S. spend more than $1 trillion a year on their cards. "

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Join-the-Posse-Main-Stree-by-Chaz-Valenza-091205-821.html

[Occam Bandage]

14. Classic slacktivism.

Reminds me of the "don't buy gas this day and it'll SEND A HUGE MESSAGE" people.

[Vinnie From Indy]

15. slacktivism

lol

I am only revolutionizing with a microwave burrito, a Big Gulp and my computer keyboard! :)

[ipaint]

16. Call it what you want. The pocketbook is the place to hit.

If that doesn't work then we can have our own tiananmen square.

[Vinnie From Indy]

21. You have a point!

While I agree with your offering that Americans should quit being suckered by the lure of buying on credit, I think the criminals on Wall Street will simply find another way to steal money. I also think that there is a sea change in the amount of credit card purchases being made today. The fact is that millions of Americans have quit using credit cards for a variety of reasons. One reason is that credit card companies are ruthlessly culling their memberships of un-credit worthy burrowers and lowering credit limits for good customers.

[Occam Bandage]

22. And if we all buy nothing next Tuesday, we'll bring them to their knees!

Then if we sign these internet petitions, wear these plastic bracelets, and post in the comments section of these YouTube videos, we'll really have them where we want them.

[ipaint]

26. So don't do it. You don't see the potential that's ok.

I think giving people a chance to take back just a bit of power is a start. If you want a real slaughter 'em up revolution then you are going to need participants. Powerless people don't participate in anything. In fact they discourage any movement to bring about a balance of power that begins to shift to working people.

You can continue to keyboard your dissent.

[Occam Bandage]

43. Here's the deal.

Using cash is a good idea for individuals, because for that one person it effectively nullifies all power the credit-card companies possess. The vast majority of the power CC companies have is directed along two avenues: first, to abuse those who use their product, and second, to ensure that the government does not interfere with the first. By using cash (or even debit), a consumer renders credit card companies virtually powerless over him or her.

Now, on to your suggestion. The problem is, the overwhelming majority of people do not possess such a thing as class consciousness, nor are they concerned with balances of power or systemic injustices or anything of the sort. Were they even mildly concerned with that, then Congress would quickly fix the problem for fear of retribution at the polls. For a multitude of reasons, people are far more concerned with their own immediate situation, and will only operate in ways that affect that situation immediately and positively.

Cash-only protests are futile for two reasons: scale and sustainability. As for the first? Getting any significant number of people to do anything even mildly inconvenient is a virtual impossibility. As for the second? Getting people to continue doing the inconvenient thing even after the initial thrill dissipates approaches absolute impossibility.

You might have more luck with your crusade if you were to couch it in terms of individual financial benefit rather than in terms of class struggle. But as it stands, it's never going to be anything more than slacktivism of the "don't buy gas today" variety.

[CrispyQ]

55. Well said & spot on.

:thumbsup:

[Vinnie From Indy]

139. As always, I enjoy your posts!

Cheers!

[LooseWilly]

183. An elegant analysis of the failure of a potential means of mass activism that hasn't been tried.

You are probably right to suggest that using cash couldn't be sustained on a mass scale for long enough to have a real effect.

Nonetheless, I'm going to keep doing it. The more one does it, the less inconvenient it feels. And when debit cards are added into the possibilities, it's positively simple.

Unless one is horrendously in debt. In which case they're screwed, and your analysis, based on laziness and stupidity of the American public, fails to acknowledge that this is the real heart of the problem... horrendous debt forcing the use of credit cards.

If people didn't buy homes under the terms of predatory loans, there wouldn't be as many people with homes that are worth less than the note. If people didn't take out extra mortgages to finance big screen tvs and vacations and whatnot, then their homes wouldn't be less that the value of all the outstanding loans. Etc., etc. ... What you are calling "slacktivism" could also be called "non-engagement". If lots of people decide to stop playing the games that Wall St. provides for us, then there's nothing they can do to us.

Of course, that is a fantasy scenario... what with all the stupidity, laziness, and crushing poverty in the US. ;)

(catch-22)

[bdamomma]

30. definitely everyone give up your credit cards!!!!!!!!!!!

[Javaman]

81. we already had our tiananmen square.

or were you not paying attention during the 2000 elections?

We have met the enemy, it's us.

[akwapez]

48. Sorry, this is quite different from not buying gas on a particular day.

You will buy the gas at some point regardless.
Using cash can definitely make a difference. Not only does it hurt the credit card profits it also helps the business you are purchasing from. If enough people used cash and saved your vendor 3.5% then its a difference you can be a part of. If you are buying from the right businesses, then this will mean either lower prices for you or higher wages for the employees.

[laughingliberal]

96. Not exactly

Obviously, restricting buying something you are, eventually, going to have to buy anyway does very little good. The above idea has nothing to do with not buying what you need or want. It has to do with paying cash for it and denying the financial institutions any share of your purchases. And it would be effective if enough people did it.

[LooseWilly]

173. Already doing that... it feels good to know it costs banks money.

:)

[ecstatic]

13. It looks like this:

[Orsino]

17. The usual.

One day, the ruling elite discover that we are not sufficiently cowed or hypnotized, and (validly or not) that they have been identified as the cause of our worst ills. They'll muster their loyalist troops and/or mercenaries to defend their palaces. They will be vastly outnumbered and eventually defeated.

As to the goals of the revolution, I don't think they'll be clear at the outset. It will run on vengeance, mostly, and will in the short run seek only to punish the parasitic ultra-rich. Religious leaders, traditionally a parallel power structure, will be relatively untouched, and will be able to enforce fundamentalist rigor on whatever society remains. Whoever can control food and water supplies will otherwise rule. These will be warlords, and they will control us by threatening to denounce us as supporters of the old regime.

Mainly, a lot of people will die, which is why I won't call for any sort of violent revolution.

[galileoreloaded]

57. Ultra rich will be on a Gulfstream before you can blink.

15 minutes from house/office to air, then someplace nice, with champagne on the way there.

This punish the rich thing is a huge delusion.

[Orsino]

89. Those who can, will.

Anyone who can't, and anyone who looks ultra-rich, will face whatever the equivalent of Madame Guillotine is.

I'm sure that witches, gays, Jews and minorities in general will face the wrath of whatever authority gives itself a fancy name. Women's rights will be rolled back.

And many, many people will die--all because we couldn't change peacefully. :cry:

[galileoreloaded]

246. I completely concur. A revolution will make today's neocon look like a children's TV host.

the balkanization sure to follow would look much more like a feudal Lord of the Flies.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ensho]

19. lobbyists and barons are abolished, our military is brought home to

clean up all their bases and sites (first cleaning up our military sites, bases in other countries.)

modified seeds banned

huge meat companies banned

antibiotics and man made hormones banned from food animals

universal health care put in place

affordable university costs

public schools brought up to sane standards and conditions

true seperation of religion and state

abortion is a woman's business and legal

the EPA actually does what its supposed to do. the same with OSHA.

the Justice Dept. is cleansed of neo cons and does it jobs in timely manners.

term limits in house and senate.

I could go on and on.

[Occam Bandage]

24. What do you mean by, "modified seeds banned?"

Are we going to be growing wild maize again? But even maize is a modification of wild teosintes. So are we grandfathering in modifications made up to some arbitrary time in the past? I ask because the thing on the left doesn't look very appetizing.

[ensho]

36. the kind that won't reproduce. the kind that has pesticides in it.

etc.

[Occam Bandage]

45. Bananas won't reproduce. Should we ban them? nt

[MineralMan]

54. Well, you can't really grow them locally in most of the US,

so they're really irrelevant, right? Remember, we're only to eat what is grown locally and organically. Those are the rules. And no meat at all.

[laughingliberal]

102. No meat? I'm resigning from the revolution. Not fighting this so someone can control my food. nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

71. Death to seedless grapes and watermelons!

[dionysus]

73. they seek to control us with science!11!!11

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

74. Viva la revolucion!

[Javaman]

84. Personally I welcome our seedless grape overlords. nt

[KatyMan]

121. There needs to be a Brockman's Law:

Any discussion on the internet about changes in any given power structure will result in someone posting "I for one welcome our ______ overlords" :)

[Javaman]

193. Personally, I would like to welcome our _______ overlords. ;) LOL nt

[cali]

35. that's the end result you aspire to but it's not what the revolution is

going to look like. How do you get there? What steps are necessary to achieve this? And what does it mean when you say lobbyists and "barons" are abolished? Who are the barons?

[ensho]

39. you don't know?!

nt

[cali]

42. no. that's why I'm asking.

I don't think you know either.

[arcadian]

44. Don't take the bait.

[Occam Bandage]

47. A mindset that sees orderly thought as a trap is a mindset that is moribund. nt

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cali]

75. look, I know you weren't threatening me.

you were just demonstrating that you hate me, but it was and is inappropriate. Furthermore, everyone on this board hardly agrees with you about me. Then you post this nonsense about the op and subsequent posts of mine being bait.

try to exercise a bit of self-control. That you hate me enough to post such a comment is truly disturbing. And no, I don't feel the same way about you.

[arcadian]

86. I don't hate you. I really don't hate anybody.

You are just a name on a screen accompanied by some mindless text.

Why are you even on this board? All I can see is that you like to post "gotcha threads" and piss people off. You aren't fooling anybody.

[dionysus]

95. now that's irony right there. cali musta struck a nerve...

:rofl:

[arcadian]

101. Yeah... that was her intention.

To stir up the pot. I can't see that she really does anything else.

[cali]

107. now you're speaking for me? You claim to know my intentions?

bzzzt. And let's see, in the last day, I posted a piece about composting, news about the EPA action and a couple of other excerpts.

[berni_mccoy]

111. Your intention could not be any clearer. To make baseless accusations against good DUers

Cali has asked some valid questions about all this talk of revolution. Many times, I do not agree with Cali, but she is respectful, which is far more than can be said about you. She also is well known and loved on this board.

Your direct response to that was an intimidation tactic in the least, and at worst, I don't want to think about.

You need to get a grip, which is clearly demonstrated by the numerous responses you've felt compelled to make in this thread, many of which have been deleted as rule violations.

[arcadian]

115. You are in violation of DU rules with this post.

[berni_mccoy]

119. So Alert on it. I don't agree, but I'm willing to let the Mods be a judge of it.

[arcadian]

123. "Many ppl cheering Hamden's TS I'm sure would cheer mine as well.

Let's have a witch hunt shall we?"

You sure don't have a very favorable opinion of yourself, now do you? Why would people cheer your being banned from this board? Is it because of your bad behavior, like say, in this thread?

[SidDithers]

199. You don't know DU's rules very well...nt

Sid

[cali]

105. people don't post fantasies about other people "up against the wall"

unless they feel some serious animus. You couldn't have posted anything more hateful, and you won't take ownership of it, instead you're hiding behind the cowardly act of speaking for other posters here.

And you read selectively. A good 80% of what I post is simply excerpts from stories I think are interesting.

[arcadian]

125. Fantasy? Hardly, it was an off the cuff remark.

Because I have had the song Paranoid Android stuck in my head since I played it last night. What's this?

[cali]

141. sorry, people who aren't hating don't post off the cuff comments about how

their sicko fantasies about seeing other people killed. you said, in no uncertain terms, that you'd like to see me put up against a wall and killed.

You can try and weasel as much as you want but you wrote. YOU own it. And lots of people now know it.

[arcadian]

149. Up against the wall does not equal killed.

Nice try though. Welcome to ignore.

[cali]

158. lol. saying someone is going to be the first up against the wall

in the context of a revolution isn't about killing. sure it's not.

I sincerely hope you do put me on ignore. It's better for you.

[apocalypsehow]

202. WTF? How intellectually dishonest can you get, arcadian? That is *PRECISELY* the context of the

phrase "up against the wall" is in - putting people "up against the wall" in order to execute them by firing squad. That's what most Revolutionaries do to those they perceive as being defenders of the ancien regime. That is the *exact* historical context, and you damn well know it.

"Welcome to ignore" - Yeah, if I'd been as thoroughly discredited by a poster as you have by cali and others replying to you, I'd be employing that "ignore" button myself....

[dionysus]

69. you're not going to do any more than bitch about how bad the democrats are, on internet forums.

they will tremble.
:rofl:

[arcadian]

83. I'm not bitching about the democrats.

I'm bitching about their "leadership".

[cliffordu]

67. You're kidding, right???

[Tommy_Carcetti]

20. Well, clearly it will involve Margot Kidder being elected Emperess. nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

23. +1

:rofl:

And only those who get it will not get it.

[MineralMan]

37. I was thinking Natalie Portmann. She has experience, after all.

[Number23]

232. You know what? That is actually DAMNED funny.

:rofl:

[MineralMan]

25. There are calls for revolution from both ends of the political

spectrum. In each case, the end result would be the end of the constitutional republic we call the United States of America. Since our government is the result of recent elections, calls for revolution essentially say that an elected representative government is no longer wanted.

There is the principal problem with revolutions. They must overthrow the existing system of government and replace it with something else, as happened in 1776. So, before the revolution begins, there has to be some sort of understanding of what will replace the current system.

So far, I've heard no useful suggestions from either end of the spectrum.

[pscot]

41. I'll bet both sides could agree

that decapitating Goldman Sachs would be a good place to start.

[Occam Bandage]

50. Goldman Sachs is just one of many.

If destroying one investment bank accomplished anything, why didn't the collapse of Lehman Brothers have any positive repercussions?

[MineralMan]

53. I doubt it. I doubt that there would be much agreement at all,

except that both sides don't like how things turned out. The rabid right wants to install an Old Testament-style theocracy. I'm not sure what the left end really wants. If you get them talking about it, it often sounds pretty awful for an awful lot of people.

The left has too many single-issue axes to grind to ever come up with any sort of consensus, I'm afraid. They also haven't considered the fact that at least half the population of this particular country would be opposed to their efforts.

Our 1776 revolution established a representative republic, and that's been tuned and altered since that time. Before any other revolution occurs, there would have to be something on the other end to govern. What that might be is the hard question, and it's one that is likely to be very difficult to form a consensus about.

Therefore, there will be no such revolution from the left. It's not going to happen. I worry more about the right's ideas. They, at least, have a fairly clear view of the ugly form of government that would result from their revolution.

Given the more-or-less equal division of the population on political lines, it will take a very ugly government to handle the aftermath, regardless of which side held their revolution deal.

I guess my bottom line is that revolution is a bad idea, overall.

[CrispyQ]

56. +1

You point about a plan for after the revolution is an excellent one & one that most don't consider when they are advocating revolution.

[MineralMan]

59. Most people advocating revolution don't consider much at all,

except their dissatisfaction with the current state of things. In reality, few are really interested in revolution in the first place. They just can think of how to fix things, so they figure throwing the whole baby out, along with the bathwater, will work just fine. Beyond that, there's no plan at all.

This is why I take pretty much all talk of revolution as nothing more than idle musings.

[cali]

68. one of the reasons it's a bad idea was brilliantly illustrated in this thread

when someone announced that I'd be one of the first put up against the wall. Revolution, whatever else it may do, too often brings out the very ugliest shit in humans. Pettiness, blood lust, mindless revenge, etc.

[dionysus]

70. except that these keyboard revolutionaries are just as much empty talk as the freeprs in this regard

they're not going to wash the cheetoh dust of their hands and leave the computer to do jack.

[arcadian]

92. as you type this... sitting at your computer.

:rofl: The irony, it hurts.... :rofl:

[dionysus]

94. the irony would be, if i was proposing revolution, as opposed to eating lunch on break, laughing at

you, so irony FAIL
:rofl: indeed

[arcadian]

99. "opposed to eating lunch on break"

Don't for get to wipe the cheeto dust off your fingers. oh and yeah... we "get it". "Lunch Break" That's code for, should be doing work, but I'm scanning the internet on somebody else's dime. Gottcha. Won't say a word.

[dionysus]

114. i guess a paid lunch hour is foreign to you?

[SIMPLYB1980]

109. ...

:hide:

[arcadian]

91. In a hypothetical revolution in this country, which side would you be on?

[MineralMan]

104. That's an interesting question you pose, there...

I'd ask the same of you? I'm assuming that you would be taking up arms and shooting neighbors who disagreed with you, right? That's what a revolution is all about. Are you truly prepared to engage in that sort of activity? Really?

[arcadian]

112. I would probably split to safety.

I've had it with the politics of this country. The USA, it's beatiful, got some nice people, but if it got to that point, I'd really want nothing more to do with it. If I had to protect my family while en route, then I would do it. That's about it.

[MineralMan]

178. I see. Well, then, by your own statement, you have no stake in

any of this. I have to wonder why you bother to post in threads like this, then. Is there an anarchist country you could go to, do you suppose? There's anarchy in Africa. Maybe one of those places would be your ideal.

Some of us haven't given up on this country. We're still trying to move it, little by little, into becoming a better place for all. You don't want to participate in that? Fine. But, if you're not going to participate, please don't insist that the rest of us follow you. We won't.

[anonymous171]

87. Our Constitutional republic has already been overthrown

[Romulox]

27. The US ends with a whimper, not a bang. Look at Katrina. Look at Detroit. nt

[bridgit]

31. Ref standard line market retail: "If people have to ask they probably can't afford it"

[leftstreet]

32. There are 6 billion potential WalMart shoppers around the globe

Does anyone really think the Global Ruling Class cares about 300 million Americans huffing and puffing?

[yurbud]

33. no business or individual should ever be wealthy enough to buy our democracy

[yurbud]

34. deal with corruption the way they do in China--with a bullet in the back of the head

through a court trial of course.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cali]

46. no anti-dp, I see. n/t

[yurbud]

97. generally yes, but for mass murderers and serial killers who could buy a pardon...

it is the only way to protect society.

[cali]

120. no, sorry, you're not anti-dp. you can't be for it sometimes and call

yourself dp. you are pro death penalty and you've advocated it for those you believe or corrupt.

[yurbud]

167. so? How exactly would you keep these guys from regaining power if they were ever

arrested, tried, and convicted?

If they live, couldn't the bribe gaurds to let them escape, or more likely pols to pardon them?

[cali]

179. If it's not those guys it'll be the next guys and the dp is no more a deterrance

for that than anything else and it's no more justifiable because you want to use it than it is for the wingnut who wants to use it. It. Is. Not. Justifiable. To. Have. The. State. Kill.

Furthermore, how could "they" bribe guards? Presumably they've had their fortunes confiscated.

You just want to kill those you hate. Bloodlust. It sucks.

[yurbud]

198. I'm just yanking your chain. I would rather not execute anyone, but throw the bums in prison

doesn't have the rhetorical impact.

[LanternWaste]

40. Check on the rapture ready forums...

Check on the rapture ready forums as I think the ideas re: Revolution & Apocalypse (TM) there and here are quite similar in content, tone and format-- rather vague in regards to who, what, when, where, why and how.

Just a lot of self-styled street prophets wearing sandwich boards advertising their own brand of secular prognostications... 21st century style.

[Stinky The Clown]

49. Oh Look ...... a "You People" thread. How warm and fuzzy.

[cali]

52. gee, stinky, do you object in all the dozens and dozens of "you people" threads

posted where you agree with the OP? You know, like the dozens that focus on those who support Obama? No, how unsurprising?

[varelse]

221. Hehe

at least there was one constructive reply :)

http://www.usecashmovement.org/

[Birthmark]

58. There will be no revoution

That is a demented dream of those who are dissatisfied with reality.

[MineralMan]

61. You are correct, sir or madam.

Talk of revolution is just idle minds at work.

[Javaman]

77. Exactly right.

Those who predict revolution, lack the ability of critical thought.

I also will say, "never say never", because I also am unable to see into the future.

But for those folks that seem to have this very odd want or need for a hot revolution, I only have a few things to say.

Be prepared to go without. Be prepared to starve. Be prepared to be very cold or very hot. Be prepared to be filthy. Be prepared to defend yourself hand to hand.

And most of all, ask yourselves are you willing to die for a cause you might ever see?

It's the last question they either answer knee jerk fashion or if they have an ounce of brains, will actually pause and think about.

They all want the glory without the guts. They all want to be in that victory parade and not be some stone in a field.

Revolution, civil war, and general all out war, should be the last possible resort. It should never take precedent over anything else and should never ever be tossed around lightly.

Those who scream for war, revolution or civil war are usually the first to run away.

So exhausting. so very exhausting.

[MineralMan]

100. I agree. Talk of revolution is all talk and no action...

It's as if it were enough to yammer on about it, without actually facing the reality of what a real revolution entails. Whichever faction proposes such a "solution," it's really tiresome. On the right, it's a bunch of folks sitting at keyboards dreaming of a world where they can impose their religious will on everyone. On the left, it's a bunch of folks sitting at keyboard dreaming of...oh, wait, except for the religion thing, it's exactly the same.

Revolution is war. It is that simple. It's a no-holds-barred war, and the fight is in your own backyard, on your street, and in your home town. People die in, and following, a revolution. I see some of the same people who are deploring a couple of wars currently being fought actually proposing a war right here. It's amazing.

People who propose revolutions rarely engage in the battles. A pity, that...

[arcadian]

106. The very existence of a thread like this does speak volumes about where we are at.

Were people even speculating about revolution in the 80s or 90s? The fact that people are even considering revolution all be it, like most have pointed out, "from the comforts of their keyboard" speaks volumes. People who "talk about Revolution" on here aren't in most cases even talking about violent revolution. They merely want change, where as the people who would denigrate talk of a "revolution" are clearly absolutely satisfied with the status quo.

[MineralMan]

117. Is that what you think? Do you truly believe that I'm happy

with the status quo? I've never been happy with the status quo. Never. I doubt I ever will be, either, in the remaining decade or two of my life.

I'm only happy when things are changing towards the direction I believe they should go. President Obama is exemplary of that sort of change. We elected a black man as President...and a man who has, at least, in some respects, progressive goals.

Do those goals go far enough? Certainly not. But...look at the difficulty he is having getting even the small movements enacted. More work is needed in providing a legislature which has the ability to implement at least what Obama wants, and more.

Movement. That's what I'm about. Movement towards socialism within a democratic structure, which is my ideal conclusion. In the history of this nation, we have slowly, but steadily moved in that direction. It appears to me that the movement is continuing. Not fast enough to be fulfilled in my lifetime, it seems, but still moving.

As I have said here many times, politics is the art of the possible. Ask for what is not possible, and you will be disappointed every time. This nation is not uniform. It is divided almost equally in half, philosophically and politically. I see no mechanism by which a rapid movement in either direction is possible. Frustrating? Yes. Can it be changed? Yes, again, but not this year or next. Not within the next two decades, probably. Just movement. That's all I ask. If I ask for more than that, I am delusional.

[arcadian]

127. I'd say it's divided into thirds.

Left, right and middle. With middle not being moderates, but people who simply don't care and are uninformed. Politics is the art of subjugating people. Everything must be owned. Religion makes claims to the spiritual body, and politics makes claims for the physical body.

[onenote]

164. people talked a lot about revolution in the 60s

were you around for that? because while it felt that things were heading that way at the time, in retrospect, its obvious that we were nowhere near a "revolution" and we're even farther away from one now.

[MineralMan]

176. They did, indeed.

I was around then, for sure. I marched in Selma in 1964. I protested the war at the Pentagon, in my USAF uniform, in 1968. I remember people saying, "Up against the wall, motherfucker!" I laughed at them then, and I laugh at them now. There was going to be no revolution then, and there will be none now.

Instead, all those civil rights marches helped bring us out of slave-day thinking and gave our black citizens a somewhat better chance at living the American Dream. Now, we have a black President. I call that progress. Not enough, but progress. The Vietnam war finally ended, after the protest had gone on far too long. No revolution was needed to do that, either, just people willing to stand up and demand that the war end.

I don't do street activism any more. I did more than my share 40 years ago and in the ensuing years. I've escorted women into Planned Parenthood offices. I've marched with my GLBT friends in protest. Now, I write. I'm a geezer, but I can still write.

[SidDithers]

201. Good post!...nt

Sid

[MineralMan]

225. Thanks, Sid. That's a real compliment.

I wonder how many of the rabble-rousers in this thread have ever actually stood on a protest line. I wonder if they have any idea of what it is like to stand toe to toe with some Alabama cop or an MP in front of the Pentagon. Somehow, I doubt it.

They're all "Let's you and him fight" sorts, it seems to me...all rhetoric and little personal commitment.I saw the same crap at a number of other sites, to my disgust.

I have my life history. I have my knowledge of what that means. I don't do street activism any longer. That's for the young folks, like I was in those days. Screw this idle talk about "come the Revolution...
"

The pie in the sky is old and moldy by now.

[laughingliberal]

113. Yes, people die in revolutions. Even the fight for union rights, here, resulted in deaths

Unless there are a lot of people who have reached the point where they feel the gains would be worth giving their life for, it will not happen. There are enough desperate people in the country now. Problem is they are not in agreement about who or what is responsible for our problems.

[arcadian]

65. So, what's reality?

Debt slavery? Seems that way to most people.

[Birthmark]

72. Reality

...is that most people are too self-absorbed and lacking in stamina to foment any revolution, whatever the cause. They may go out to a demonstration or two but if these don't produce immediate results, they'll go home and just whine on the internet. It would probably be even truer in any "revolution" --of any type.

[arcadian]

79. Think about a prolonged Katrina.

and not one where they shipped people off to Houston and Arkansas.

[Birthmark]

85. How prolonged?

A few years? A few decades? A few centuries?

I'm not prepared to dismiss the possibility of revolution in perpetuity, however, it's not something that's going to happen any time soon.

Look at the Republican dipshits. They are arguably the angriest and most likely to incite violence or revolution, yet their boards call for the military to lead a revolt. IOW, they're too freakin' cowardly or lazy to revolt themselves (though, ironically, they are revolting)! If they did try to revolt, they'd immediately apply for deferments and the whole thing would be over as quickly as the paperwork could be processed.

No revolutions for us. Probably some scattered violence, mainly backshooting by the "brave" right-winger types will occur. But revolution?

I just guffawed actually trying to imagine it.

[Javaman]

93. Notice how those right wing nuts never seem to unite under one

banner to revolt? that's not an accident.

Two things prevent a modern revolt.

1) the internet. so many people go on the net to vent their frustrations. Very rarely do any of those people take it to the next step. Why? because they are comfortable at home bitching and complaining rather than doing. It's much easier these days to vent ones opinion and out rage from the comfort of one home. Once vented, on to the next outrage. Prior to the net, people actually had to go out there in person to protest.

2) Disinformation Campaigns. It's long known that the U.S. Government has long been involved in spreading false rumors, infiltrating groups and turning members into informers. If group A thinks they are "this close" to doing what ever it is that are going to do, they are unknowingly lying to themselves. 9 times out of 10, the government already knows what is happening and has already taken measures to prevent it.

The most successful nuts out there are usually loners or groups of 2 people maybe 3. Beyond that, a groups foot print gets way to large and is immediately picked up on the governments radar.

A lot of these fools that love to play Nathan Hale, usually chicken out when it comes down to the nut cutting. Why? They have bills, a family, a house payment and lots of other things that depend on them. Once those things are put in jeopardy, the nut usually backs down.

Life comforts is something the average American is not quick to sacrifice.

[dionysus]

60. it goes no farther than refusing to vote for any dem other than dennis and writing in him or nader,

and plenty of complaining on an internet message board.

[MineralMan]

64. If that's the case, it will be a harmless thing, indeed.

[anonymous171]

90. Refusing to vote is a terrible idea, since low turnout hardly influences change

The more effective method is voting for 3rd party.

[dionysus]

116. neither option is effective, but one is better than the other...

[anonymous171]

118. Explain to me how not voting helps anything. nt

[dionysus]

122. it doesn't. voting third party is only barely more effective than not voting. i advocate neither.

you are responding to my idea of the extent the keyboard commandos will "revolt". threatening not to vote and whining on the internet...

[Common Sense Party]

63. I think one of the main goals is free doobie. n/t

[MineralMan]

66. I think that's the Libertarian Revolution that has that as its goal.

It's so hard to keep the various revolutionary ideas straight.

[MagnaChucka]

82. I'm just a nerd

Who thinks the idea of the U.S. splitting up into a bunch of little other countries is neat. Haha. That's why I peruse the independence movement websites so often. It's like an alternate history come to life. That's what having a history degree does to you.

[Javaman]

88. The only revolution that will happen is one were we are once again lulled

into submission.

the corporations with their marketing genius's will forgo a hot war because that would cut to much into overhead, thus effecting their bottom line.

They will let us vent for a while until the manufacture some sort of pacifying sense of unity of false achievements.

Or

They will short circuit any "revolution" via disinformation to fracture any coalition or "army".

It will be shorted out before it even begins.

We don't control the transmission, we don't control the message, we certainly won't control the movement.

Like I have written before, the only thing that people will get pissed off enough to revolt about is when gas goes above 5 bucks a gallon. Until then, get the Cheeto's and watch the 101st internet keyboard commando's whine.

[ShortnFiery]

110. ... yes, they've won.

Hey, it's over and The American People have lost.

[arcadian]

129. Bread & circuses

As long as the power elite can provide that, the masses will be happy.

[MineralMan]

227. What do you care? You've already stated your decision to

withdraw from the fray. Why are you still posting in this thread?

[rucky]

126. Prolonged, isolated acts of RW terrorism.

fueled by teabagger & FOX rage - until the media is held accountable. Then we can return to relative sanity.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

128. I don't actually WANT a violent revolution, since they tend not to turn out well, BUT...

the powers that be, in their reckless disregard for the little person, should not be surprised if some sort of violent revolution ensues.

Unfortunately, given 30 years of constant right-wing propaganda, this revolution will probably be fascist rather than leftist in nature, and thanks to 30 years of the Democratic leadership buddying up to the wealthy and the military-industrial complex, the right-wing propaganda will resonate, and Democratic elites will be the scapegoats.

[ShortnFiery]

131. I'm beginning to have no love lost for the corporate-loving "democratic elites"

To me, they are not what I believe should be part of "the big tent." :shrug:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

132. I have no patience with the Democratic "elites" either

but because of their constant sucking up to corporate and military interests, it will be easy for the right-wingers to blame them when our society collapses.

We already got a preview of this in 2004, when the Republicans said that Kerry had no credibility on the subject of Iraq because he had voted for the IWR.

[StarfarerBill]

130. This is an excellent question.

The post-revolutionary world will look...quite different from what the vast majority of us have imagined or can imagine. Probably a few will foresee it correctly, but only by sheer luck.

For myself, I don't see much change of any positive kind until citizens become cognizant not only of what's truly in their and their fellow citizens' best interests, but also become knowledgeable about the ways this can be attained and to work themselves to achieve it; progressive change can only come from below.

I like the idea of David Schweickart's Economic Democracy as a transitional movement from capitalism to socialism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Schweickart

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[berni_mccoy]

135. How about answering the very good questions about the purpose of Revolution that the OP poses?

I haven't seen any serious answers.

[Voltaire]

140. Purposes

Personally. . .wealth redistribution, strict enforcement of the laws that regulate the market, salary caps, single payer health care, the dissolution of the War Powers Act which in effect allows the Executive to plunge this nation into wars that we have not the blood or the money to pay for, a foreign policy that demands cooperation instead of exploitation, public financing of elections to take all corporate money out of the elective process.....lots of stuff. But first you have to clean out the stable and you won't do that by asking nicely. And you won't do it in increments. We've tried that, we've talked about trying that and look where we are. The suits in charge WANT us to keep it peaceful, that keeps them safe and in control. Oh, never mind, we are fucked anyway and I am ranting to a goddamned wall.

[Odin2005]

219. oops, wrong post.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

143. A strong proponant of murder and violence are you?

[Voltaire]

144. Yes, Yes I am

To all the entities that have turned this republic into the politically and financially bankrupt sham that it is. Call it what you want, I call it giving back the same thing to those that have been doling it out to us for centuries. Why people don't get that I don't know. I am as peaceful as any person on this planet, but enough is enough. Sometimes you have to speak to these bastards in what has proven to be the only fucking language they know.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

148. "I'm as peaceful as any person on the planet"

You sure about that?

I'm pretty sure I can think of at least 10 other people who would not be for murdering political enemies.

[Voltaire]

151. I am absolutely positive about my peaceful nature

But I am for justice meted out to the perpetrators of the crime, this obscenity to human decency that this nation has become. AIG will not stop doing what it does if you ask them nice. Neither will the defense contractors, or the corporations, or the shameless, crooked politicians. This we know. But if you kind of enhance your tactics, it will be amazing how a little one-on-one tends to focus the mind. Call it what you want, when nothing else works and your innocent life and the innocent lives of others are in the balance, it is CRIMINAL to allow this situation to continue unabated. Or we can sign a petition, whatever.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

154. Who decides when it is OK to take a life?

In your opinion, AIG members deserve death. But if someone else's opinion is that someone else deserves death, who is right? The guy with the bigger stick?

[Voltaire]

159. For once, the meek will decide

right before we inherit. Like the Bible says. . .

[SemiCharmedQuark]

189. So you are ok with assassinations?

As long as the murderer believed that the victim posed a threat to his life?

[cali]

204. lol? justifying your desire to kill with the bible?

how original.

[Voltaire]

207. The actions of the Corporates is justification enough

I would hope that such drastic steps would not be necessary. But if they are, that will be a decision ENTIRELY of their own making.

[MineralMan]

230. I don't think that's what Jesus had in mind when he spoke the

Beatitudes. Nope. Again, you speak in generalities. Speak in specifics, can you?

[berni_mccoy]

175. I find it completely hypocritical of posters at DU who proclaim to be proponents of Peace

turn around and promote a violent overthrow of our own country, even as the protest escalation of a justified War we are currently engaged in.

[Voltaire]

181. The country need not be overthrown

only the cancers removed from it. Or are the suits merely misguided white guys that can be brought back into line through reason?

[cali]

152. you are them.

no difference really. you're someone who wants to see blood. you are like too many people on this planet.

[Voltaire]

156. Not about blood at all

If there was a non-violent way to get some positive movement I would be all for it. But I ain't seeing it and neither is anyone else. If there is an effective way, I am all ears. If there be blood, it is because the sociopaths and the psychopaths that run this world could not and would not listen. I am NOT the same as them. I'm just not all about suffering and dying at their sick hands any longer.

[MilesColtrane]

172. Tim McVeigh felt exactly the same way.

http://www.digital-exp.com/doco/TimothyMcVeigh.html

Other "checks and balances" likewise proved futile: media awareness and outcry (the major media failed in its role as overseer of government ally); protest marches; letter campaigns; even small-budget video production; etc. - all failed to correct the abuse.

When violent action thus became an option, I considered, among other things, a campaign of individual assassination...

[Voltaire]

180. He should not have been indiscriminate

He attacked innocent people and he should not have done that. I would never propose such a thing. And I am not privy to what his mental process might have been for taking the action he did. What I am talking about is removing control of parasites, sociopaths and psychopaths from the body politic. No kids in daycare or innocent government employees involved. Just the perps. I think we can agree who they are and what they have done, they're in the news all the time. But not to worry, it ain't going to happen. We have been sufficiently dumbed-down and chickenshitted out of it to ever let such a thing happen. No worries.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

196. Who decides who the perps are? James Earl Ray thought MLK Jr. was a perp

John Wilkes Booth thought Lincoln was a perp. If some teabagger who thinks Obama is a perp murders him, will you be cool with that?

[Voltaire]

210. We shall know these perps by their actions

John Wilkes Booth was a racist idiot as are most teabaggers. Ditto (heh heh) for James Earl Ray. But we KNOW that the head of Aetna is a perp. We KNOW that the titans of Wall Street are and always have been from their inception, PERPS! Do you defend their actions? They are not criminals against the good of humanity they are criminals against the good of humanity by any objective standard. They have this nation on the brink of bankruptcy and continue their destructive and rapacious actions for their own twisted ends. And you would compare me with those racist dimwits of yore, cute. But doesn't answer the question of what we are going to do to survive as a nation with these people in it. Doesn't matter though, its all over but the shouting for America. Because we would rather crawl on our bellies than stand up to the people who are strangling us to death.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

218. Those people thought they knew who the bad guys were.

You disagree. They might disagree with your choices.

[nemo137]

244. You sound exactly like Scott Roeder or a RW militiaman.

Exactly. Why are you so willing to adopt their methods?

[Odin2005]

220. You should change your username to Robespierre.

We all know how his life ended, after he ordered the death of thousands of others.

You are no Democrat. You are a vicious, bloodthirsty Totalitarian.

[MineralMan]

229. So, start naming the names of those who have done what you say.

You're being very glib with generalities, etc. But, you seem bereft of details. Lets have your details. Who goes under your fantasy guillotine? Be specific. Who are the "bastards?" Who has been "doling it out for centuries?"

It's easy to speak in generalities. Almost anyone with half a brain can manage that. Getting down to the specifics is a different matter.

You talk a good revolution, as do the morons on the right end of the spectrum. How do you plan to carry out this "Revolution," or do you plan to let others do it for you, while you watch on the sidelines?

I grow very weary of this crap. I really do. What have you done? What are you doing? How are you helping produce progress? Answer me those questions, in some detail, and I'll start listening to you. Do not answer them, and you are just another noise in the wind.

[MineralMan]

228. I'm pretty sure that you haven't the heart to use the

guillotine. You only want it if someone else uses it. Be careful with that. Many, during the French Revolution ended up under its blade, to their short-lived surprise. Be careful about what you wish. It may come to pass, and you may be on the block.

[TBF]

136. You're absolutely right cali, we should all go back to checking our stock

prices and watching the war coverage on the teevee. :patriot:

:eyes:

[Name removed]

146. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TBF]

165. Hit a nerve, huh? Actually I have a pretty good memory and recall

you going on & on about your father's patents. No worries when you're an heiress. I have no doubt which side you're on.

[cali]

182. I'm not an heiress.

Yes, I grew up in a well to do family. I now have very little money. I don't expect I'll ever have money through an inheritance. So you're wrong. Try again.

[TBF]

187. OK, I don't know what all that stuff about "patent royalties" was about during the campaign.

But, fine, your investments crashed and you're broke now. We'll try that argument. Why on earth do you defend the status quo if that is truly the case?

[cali]

191. my investments didn't crash because I didn't have any

My car is 12 years old and I bought it used. I've been on my own for a long time. I don't defend the status quo I just don't believe that a bloody revolution is the solution. You know, there are lots of great leaders who didn't think that was the answer. I'd rather take my cues from Gandhi and MLK than Robespierre- and some of the people in this thread sound way too much like Robespierre.

[TBF]

197. For years I agreed with that approach -

it's hard for me even now to advocate any kind of violence. Personally I favor mass strikes and sit ins. As far as MLK, he did advocate organizing, and it was when he started talking candidly about class differences that he was assassinated. I doubt that is simply a coincidence.

[Bonobo]

137. Cali, do you think history has suddenly died in the short span of YOUR life?

Revolutions have always occurred.

What on Earth would make you think that the 'blink of an eye' 70 or 80 years of your lifetime would suddenly become the exception?

[cali]

147. huh? I didn't say a revolution couldn't happen here. I simply posed a

few straight forward questions. Want to give it a shot and actually address the questions I posed?

[Arkana]

138. I don't know but DENNIS KUCINICH FOR SUPREME OVERLORD OF THE UNIVERSE!

[Tailormyst]

150. I would like to put my name in for Seamstress to the Supremely Hot OverLady of the Universe !

[H2O Man]

142. A sale on

new & improved dish soap at Wal Mart.

[cali]

155. The most interesting thing about this thread to me is the number

of people who rail against war who want their war and the people who are against the death penalty except for the people they think deserve it.

Lots of cognitive dissonance.

[ShortnFiery]

161. I can fully agree with the foregoing perspective ...

Well put fellow DUer. :thumbsup:

[cali]

162. thanks SnF

knowing how passionately you feel about things, that means something.

[anonymous171]

168. Self-defense is different from the death penalty. Killing people who are trying to kill you is fine.

Same thing can be applied to war.

[cali]

171. you sound just like the wingnuts. just like them with your free and easy

and wrong definition of self-defense. This is exactly, to the tee, the same argument they use.

[anonymous171]

186. Hitler and FDR both waged war. Stalin and Truman were both heads of state

So of course, FDR was just as evil as Hitler! Same with Truman and Stalin! :sarcasm: Just because two things share a certain quality does not mean that they are morally/ideologically the same.

[apocalypsehow]

194. Big, huge, honking Strawmen must be your specialty, huh? Learn to reason logically, or crawl back

to the board-that-shall-not-be-named.

[anonymous171]

208. That was not a strawman. nt

[apocalypsehow]

237. Then you haven't the foggiest notion what constitutes a "Strawman" - Google is your friend. n/t.

[anonymous171]

238. So you really don't know what a strawman is then. nt

[apocalypsehow]

239. "I know you are but what am I?" - Lord, how the childish and moronic are ever with us. n/t.

[anonymous171]

240. I know the feeling. nt

[Voltaire]

188. And if this is not self-defense

then the term is meaningless. There are people out there killing us, not trying to kill us, but killing us, for profit. Y'all good with that?

[MineralMan]

184. Cognitive Dissonance is the mark of those who

do not think things through to their logical conclusion. Like you, I have noted the same phenomenon. It's a sad thing not to use the mind you were born with, I think. So much time; so little thought.

[Voltaire]

209. The Conclusion is

That you will accept the status quo and try to effect change with these feeble attempts at achieving comity with the cretins that have soiled this planet, or you will try something different, give them a taste of the medicine that they have forced us to swill down all these years. But save me the snark, we are doomed as a nation because we are too fucking chickenshit to change. This is a wasted academic excercise we are practicing here this evening.

[MineralMan]

222. You are not Voltaire. That much is certain.

Your cynicism is toxic, in my opinion. So, I will simply ignore it and go on doing what has produced results in the past. If this is a wasted effort, I'm surprised that you are spending so much time trying to fight it.

I suggest that you read some of your namesake's writings. Really. I further suggest that, if you consider this nation in the light you describe, you begin searching for a better place that will accept you as an immigrant. And good luck with finding such a place. In that regard, I further suggest that you mask your cynicism when communicating with that nation. It's unlikely to be welcome.

Voltaire you are not. He was capable of logical thought.

[apocalypsehow]

192. Spot on and exactly right. It's the "b-bu-but th-that's different!" justification. n/t.

[Better Today]

217. and the list goes on. They want personal

health choices, except when it comes to vaccinations;

want everyone to be mad and distrustful of big Pharma, except when it comes to vaccinations;

they want an end to H1N1 visas, but support illegal aliens coming in for hard labor and outrageous work conditions,

The good thing is, Democrats are not unanimous about much of anything. The bad thing is, Democrats are not unanimous about much of anything.

Individual hypocrisy is rampant in America, regardless of party.

[onenote]

166. I think it looks like this

You say you want a revolution
Well you know
We'd all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well you know
We'd all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out
Don't you know it's gonna be alright

You say you got a real solution
Well you know
We'd all want to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well you know
We're all doing what we can
But if you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you'll have to wait
Don't you know it's gonna be alright

You say you'll change the constitution
Well you know
We'd all love to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well you know
You better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don't you know know it's gonna be alright
Alright

[cali]

177. that should be posted as a stand alone op

I think of it frequently in the DU revolution threads.

[JoseGaspar]

169. There will be "Change".

Whether it can be characterized as "revolution" remains to be seen.

"Change" happens when the ideology of a society and its reality come into contradiction with one another. "Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains", wrote Rousseau, "One man thinks himself the master of others, but remains more of a slave than they." Nothing in the existing social fabric of Rousseau's society could address this simple observation. Quite the contrary, all of the social instruments had evolved to maintain and not overturn the basic status quo.

In our time, it might be phrased thus: "The United States is the richest country in the world. Yet there is not a single political program or social strategy that has realistic ly been proposed to prevent the majority of the populace from lapsing into poverty."

It simply will not do to count on the lethargy or lack of active involvement of the great mass of people to forestall "Change". That is unhistorical and confuses cause with effect. It is prosperity which brought political apathy.

There will certainly be people prosperous enough to content themselves with the questions raised by the OP - Why, in place of How or When. For others, circumstances have already changed. The Republican Party has already fractured on these questions and it is entirely possible that the Democrats may as well.

Perhaps the sheeple are people after all...

[cali]

174. thanks for the response.

I don't wholly agree with you, but I appreciate your giving a real response.

[yawnmaster]

185. If its true that after the revolution...

bacon won't be available, then I'm out.

[LooseWilly]

190. Ok, I'll bite. After the revolution the unruly masses will have a seat at the table.

Let's lay out a sort of outline scenario for a possible revolution.

Credit card companies keep gouging their customers. Banks foreclose on a shitload more homes. Corporations outsource a shitload more jobs. In a gesture of "reaching across the aisle" a Democratic administration, in the name of free trade, opens the Mexican border to looser shipping regulations- leading to all importers of goods using Mexican ports & non-union dock workers, then non-unionized teamsters to ship to the border (or over the border)... effectively killing the Teamsters (dock workers and truckers unions). The public schools are eviscerated, and instead the kiddies are ushered into charter schools, run by administrators who take state money, hire on a small scale, and close up the school if the teachers try to unionize- if they want benefits for instance. The health care industry keeps raising prices, universal mandate forces everyone to pay, non-unionized shops provide no assistance, and more and more and more government "services" have to be cut to provide subsidies (to assure the profit margin of the health care industry). Selling oranges on the side of the road without a business license and sellers permit laws begin to be enforced, as cities desperately try to raise money. Corporations, meanwhile, negotiate increasingly sweet deals on tax rates and land sale rates and so on, under the threat of "moving elsewhere". There are not enough well paid corporate employees, however, to keep real estate prices reliably rising, as most of the "middle class" jobs are now located in India, Brazil, or somewhere else. Wages in the US are falling, and nearly so low that corporations are beginning to consider re-locating some factories to the US.

The middle class is gone.

LA looks conspiciously like Rio DeJaneiro, though its slums are more sprawling, and more dangerous.

St. Louis is hard to tell from Baku, Azerbaijan.

And, one day, some dumb cop pulls a "Rodney King" on some poor bastard somewhere. Rioting breaks out, as everyone, frustrated with everything, lashes out. There aren't enough little Korean Grocery Markets left to hold the attention of the rioters. The Yemeni Grocers Association has also long fled the labyrinthine slums, so there's no outlet for rage there. All the fleet-footed grocery sales entrepreneurs who've been dodging the Municipal Revenuers for years are way too slick and practiced to be caught by any unruly mob: they're gone and selling groceries to their neighbors out of a side-room shanty that's been added onto the house by their cousins and uncles as the extended family found that they didn't have enough space in the original tract house that they found abandoned and have been squatting in for so long that they've managed to "jury-rig" indoor plumbing around the Water Companies mechanisms for regulating its users.

Shit starts to burn. But there's not enough obvious targets to serve as an outlet for that rage. Somebody gets up on a car that hasn't been burned yet, and mentions the gated communities of those that still have those corporate jobs.

The security men aren't enough. The city government can't get re-assurances and guarantees of overtime for the police union, and the union officials... pissed off over all the benefits they've lost, all the pay cuts they've taken... decide to tell the rank and file to stand down... "maybe this way they will actually give us a raise to cover the increases in our health care premiums at the next round of negotiations..."

And here, you have "revolution"... as the corporate and government officials finally face the grim, grimy masses that they've been too successful at screwing in the recent past.

"Tell you what, we're going to have officials in your board meetings. We're going to have membership in the city council. Bob over there is the new City Manager."
"We're going to have membership on the county board. We're going to have membership in the State Assembly. Ann over there, she's the new governor."
"We're going to choose our national representatives. And we're going to control our electoral votes. And we're going to foreclose on the state Democratic and Republican parties, and we're going to seize all their assets."
"Or, we're just going to execute every man, woman, and child amongst you... and the Corporate HQ will have to find a different set of warm bodies to take your jobs, and the citizens (who haven't been excluded the vote because of a criminal record or unverifiable address because they're squatting...) will have to elect a new mayor and council... and the police will have to be guaranteed overtime so that they can come in here and kill us... or the Army will have to be pulled out of Afghanistan in order to come and kill us."


And the media shows up. And this makes great copy, and the local station can charge networks nationwide for access, and they might be able to forestall a hostile merger for another year or two.

And word gets out... and people in the slums around the country feel empowered... and people in the rural trailers moving from landlords unused corner of land to landlords unused corner of land like some sort of "real American" gypsies get to feeling a little inspired too.

And then it takes less of a spark for the next set of riots, and then less still for the next... until all it takes is one sneering look from some cop in Nebraska... and it's spreading everywhere.

(Or maybe it won't spread everywhere. Maybe some state does something to keep conditions from getting quite so bad. Some sort of social well being net. Like Welfare. If nothing else, to keep the fuses less flammable.)

And, in the post-revolutionary country, essentially the huge advantages built up by the rich are wiped away. Any board of directors that tries to collude with executives to try to pretend that they need to be paid 500 times what the workers are being paid- will be promptly executed for the mere suggestion. Any executives who try to hold out for that pay, will be promptly fired. Executive Nepotism will be suspected, and executives will be required to prove an absence of nepotism in all hiring.

Single Payer Health Insurance will be instituted. Business licenses and sellers permits will be priced in a more equitable manner, so that they are not prohibitive of independent work such as selling oranges on the streets.

The whole cycle will then begin again... and eventually some will succeed so well that they will have taken everything, and will be attacked by yet another unruly mob... in order to "reset the system" yet again. There will be a good long time of flourishing in the meantime.

[Odin2005]

195. Reciting the Communist Manifesto from a Lazy Boy

[MineralMan]

233. Very nicely put...seriously.

[NoPasaran]

200. Currently, we have the exploitation of Man by Man

After the Revolution, things will be the other way around.

[Hekate]

205. You've put your finger on the problem right there. nt

[MineralMan]

224. There you go. Vive La Difference, eh?

[Hekate]

206. The trouble with being an old history major--and frankly, just getting older--is that ...

... this kind of talk loses its charm and romance after awhile.

Revolutions, no matter what their stated goals are, are generally bloody and messy with noncombatants as well as soldiers getting killed and maimed. Lots and lots of property destruction -- meaning your own personal home and its contents, not the mythical Bastille, and meaning the infrastructure that we take for granted, like hospitals, roads, and bridges.

I've lost what little patience I ever had with idjits who want to talk "revolution" in this country, and on this board.

I grew up singing Irish folk songs, thanks to the late Clancy Brothers, and in the early years they included a fair number of songs of rebellion, which I heartily enjoyed. Then a funny thing happened: "The Troubles" began in earnest, and went on ... and on ... and on... for something like 30 years. When I went to an Irish folk festival in SoCal about 10 years ago someone from the audience boozily called out for one of those old songs and whichever Clancy it was on stage said, with great feeling, that he didn't think it was a good idea to sing songs about killing and dying and destruction any more, so he sang an anti-war song.

Oh sure there was a laborious peace process, and eventually it all seemed like good progress -- enough so that this year my first visit to the land of my ancestors was to Northern Ireland, where there was only one teensy "incident" where some man got beaten to death in front of his wife; and now as of a few weeks ago some group has decided to start all over again with a 400-pound car bomb in front of a police station, which thank God was a dud. This time.

From far away I saw what happened to Beirut, Lebanon when radicals decided on revolution: it went from being a modern city with a solid middle class to being completely destabilized and having whole neighborhoods turned to rubble. How charming. This went on for a couple of decades.

After 9-11 I thought of Beirut, actually. As long as there was so much talk in the air about smaller acts of terrorism than bringing down the Twin Towers--and of course a lot of hoo-rah about how "they" will never take our freedoms (no, "we" gave our freedoms up by ourselves, or our Congress did in our names), I ended up thinking about Beirut and how it was destabilized. Not flattened by an army one could fight, but wrecked over a period of years by repeated acts of violence. And I realized it *could* happen here, if someone wanted it to happen.

So how is calling for revolution in the US supposed to be different in kind from the two instances of organized terrorism I've cited? When posters call for the guillotine in such context (some of them presumably with a straight face) are they aware of how much blood and gore is involved? Did they *ever* actually read about the French Revolution and notice how badly it went once the mob got in control?

Are our modern leftists really that full of hatred and blood lust?

After long consideration, especially over the past decade, I've concluded that (a) there are not enough Americans interested in the bloodshed involved to have any kind of actual revolution, (b) a civil war might, with enough provocation, be incited, but the US government has all the big guns and armies, (c) if terrorists, foreign or domestic, really tried hard enough, they could indeed destabilize our government from the bottom up.

The result would not be a socialist workers' paradise, or any kind of paradise at all, and those who insist we could bring it about with bloodshed are indeed idjits.

Hekate

[onenote]

211. +1

[Odin2005]

212. +1. the armchair revolutionaries will flame you, though.

[Hekate]

213. Bring it on.

:argh:

[Crabby Appleton]

215. +1

[SemiCharmedQuark]

231. I'm apalled that some people look at Robespierre's life and think "Yes! That's the way!"

It didn't exactly end well for him.

[MineralMan]

235. Indeed. Those who use the guillotine often are its victim in

later years. And so it goes.

[MineralMan]

234. The leaders of the "Revolution" become the new oppressors.

So history records. I do not like oppressors from either the "left" or the "right." Both are equally abhorrent.

[Union Yes]

223. A revival of the hippie movement sounds good. How bout a peace revolution?

:hippie:

[MineralMan]

236. YES! Free love and free dope, played to the tune of the Dead!

Sounds like a plan. But, let's take it nationwide this time. I like San Francisco, but the fog...

[JVS]

241. Revolutions don't happen because of the designs of revolutionaries, they happen because...

the leadership of the existing order has come to a point where they cannot maintain the existing order. Often this inability is caused by a particular stress. A classic example is that of the post-WWI revolutions, which were ultimately a result of all the European powers getting involved in a war so demanding and disruptive to social order (too many casualties, although compared to WWII daily life for many was unchanged until shortages began making trouble) that participants in the war started collapsing under the strain. Russia is the first and best known case, but a year later under the stress of continued war and influenza Germany and Austro-Hungary collapsed. And one of the historically problematic issues at work here is that the Central Powers were never defeated militarily, but rather had been so impoverished by blockade that civil order broke down. This would lead to recriminations against supporters of democracy by the resurgent German right. But it was not only these countries that were at the breaking point in WWI. France in 1917 had half of their army in mutiny. So anyway, the point is that governments create circumstances where they can no longer maintain their ongoing actions. Now, I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not the US is approaching such a point. I'm not sure, but I also wouldn't be surprised to see us get there, as we've been in a malaise that makes that of the Carter era seem positively laughable.


Now, since revolutionaries don't create the revolutions, what do they do? They are the ones who seize the opportunity that the disorder of the revolution provides so that they can enact their visions. There can be and are competing revolutionaries in most such situations. In Austro-Hungary the revolutionaries that won out were those who promoted the independence of Austria's Slavic minorities at the expense of the Austrian and Hungarian. In Russia, the Bolsheviks were the best able to prevail. In Germany the moderate Socialists sided with the right wing to stop the Communists, only to find themselves no longer ruling the republic in several years, and then the republic was abolished by the right wing in 15 years. I suppose one could claim that the success of any particular movement when a revolution occurs can be determined by how well organized and numerous they are, but shit happens too, so maybe luck plays a role.

How this applies to America? If there is a breakdown in order, and that's a big if but not as big now as it seemed 10 years ago, then look around for what factions you think can push their agenda. If forced to place a bet, I'd say that the Religious Right is the best organized and prepared to exploit the situation. They network well, and they don't have the moderates in their ranks shitting all over their vanguard all the time, which is good for their unity. Thus I see the US as a good candidate for something akin to the 1979 Iranian revolution, if our current system breaks down.

[Hekate]

242. I agree with you about the Religious Right; the theocrats have been working for 30+ years on this...

... and they're not kidding around. When it comes to the hatred and blood lust necessary for terrorism and revolution, I think the ones who think God's on their side usually have the edge.

Hekate

[Joe the Liberal]

243. Lol I'd also like to know......

Like I said in that last post, the only revolution this country has ever had was to gain our independence and that is probably the last.

[leeroysphitz]

247. I don't know what it's goals are but it looks pissed. n/t