The American Revolution Redux

[rhett o rick]

This is the next inevitable step toward the capitalism end-game.

During the lost decade of G.W.Bush many Americans recognized the unabashed assault on our freedoms and liberty. Many tried to resist without avail. Many waited until 2008 when they thought they could throw off the shackles of corporatism by electing a Democratic president. But it seems corporatism has a firm hold on our government and mere voting isn’t working.

There are many that still live in the denial that we can vote our way out from under the tyranny of the Koch Brothers, Bloomberg, and Rupert Murdock. But the fact is they own the media, the police, the voting system, and Congress. More and more are beginning to recognize the futility of trying to work within a system that is corrupt to the core and have gone to the streets. Don’t fool yourself into thinking these people are just mad at the republicons. They are mad at a system that taxes them without representation.

Some people ask why the police are being so violent against peaceful demonstrators. It’s because our over-lords are authoritarians (bullies) and know no other way. They live to bully. They cannot give in.

This is not going away and I applaud the non-violence of the protesters. Our over-lords want it to become violent. They are ready for violence and they will win if we become violent.

Lines have been drawn this is the New American Revolution.

[Odin2005]

1. K&R

[rhett o rick]

2. I guess it isnt a popular subject. Thanks for the rec. nm

[rhett o rick]

3. kick for evening crowd

[Huey P. Long]

4. The teabaggers are COWARDS. Tools of the corporate State.

THIS is what a real Tea Party looks like.

[rhett o rick]

5. There are thousands protesting and it's growing every day. The oligarchs wont back down. nm

[Gregorian]

6. I agree. But with one exception. I wouldn't blame capitalism.

Any system can be hijacked. And most end up being more central than capitalism, if I am correct. And that means bigger problems than capitalism.

Correct me if I'm off base. I know it's debatable. We've been seeeing the arguments on this forum.

[rhett o rick]

8. Capitalism may work if regulated, but clearly is not sustainable w/o regulations. nm

[Gregorian]

9. As we're now finding out.

It's a weird time. I'm glad we're all waking up. But there's some even bigger environmental stuff looming up behind us. I hope we pull out of this nosedive in time. In time for what I don't know.

[PETRUS]

12. My observation.

We had regulations. They didn't stick. I'm with you on environmental worries, too.

If you've seen other posts of mine you probably already know this, but I'm among those questioning capitalism itself. I believe in transparency and democracy - I think if people have access to the data, and power and decision-making is broadly distributed, we could arrive at better solutions. I know we have elections, but power IS concentrated (money dominates every aspect of the political process, from candidate selection within the parties to legislation) and the powerful guard some important information and distribute misinformation.

[rhett o rick]

14. We got lazy and let the capitalists change the regulations. nm

[Gregorian]

15. Very important observations regarding civil participation and information.

I believe this is what OWS needs to address. We've been having this discussion for ages- that it's not a true democracy. And we see that it is the secrecy that is one of the ways it is failing. The only ones who even have some access to some information are a bunch of rich people who we elected. Hardly democracy. Of course it devolved, but never was truly representative. The notion of separate countries, boundaries, is one of the ways this mess is legitimized.

In terms of capitalism, I don't know what should be done. After all, competition is a kind of democratic proceess. But we know that system is in trouble. I don't think CocaCola has to reveal their recipe. And some patents are probably important. But all of that can be argued. I don't know right now what is right.


I'm replying partly because I'm wanting to see OWS into it's next phase. I assume there should be a next phase. And your thoughts are very much what I would want to see included.

[rhett o rick]

17. Thank you for the response. Capitalism doesnt foster competition. Competition is democratic but

capitalism thrives in authoritarian societies.

As far as the next phase of OWS, I am afraid it will be violence. Without a FDR to stand up for the people, there is no other outcome. The oligarchs are not going to give in and the 99% are not either. I honestly dont see a good outcome.

[PETRUS]

20. Thanks.

I've been reading lately about mathematicians and scientists using "crowdsourcing" very effectively to solve problems that have been stumping people for years, or arriving at answers fairly quickly on matters researchers normally expect will take time. Why can't we approach politics and economics that way?

Some people stop listening when I tell them I think capitalism has to go. I think they imagine I'm a Stalinist or something. Shouldn't it be possible to identify and preserve its best features, and figure out which aspects are causing problems (my chief complaints: concentration of power and unsustainability) and dump those? There are lots of really good, interesting ideas out there, but they are suffocated with piles of cash.

[Gregorian]

31. I think part of an answer can come from looking at successful European countries.

There are a few people on the forum who have experience, and knowledge in this area. I've seen their posts. They usually indicate that some combination of capitalism and socialism is what works best.

I'm just parroting what I've seen here. I know there are brilliant market analysts (like Max Keiser for example) who have a strong handle on what needs to be done. Max was a Wall Street trader. He is now an expatriot in France. His shows are very revealing. He predicted the OWS years ago.

In a way it's like we're on the Titanic. I honestly think we've painted ourselves into a serious corner with how we have ignored physical limitations of what the planet can sustain. And by that I partly mean we're married to the existing system of corporate dominance by virtue of our lifestyles. Lifestyles we cannot abandon. There won't be any hunter gatherers for a while. Not that there should be, I want to add. As much as I rant and rave about our population/ecological situation, we got here for very good reasons. This is a good life. And it was ruthless.

[PETRUS]

32. I agree we can learn things from Europe.

The "welfare states" of western and northern Europe have less crime, better education, better health, and more social mobility than the US. Also, people there report higher levels of "life satisfaction," which is an elusive quality. But if people FEEL better, I'd say that counts. That said, they are charging towards the environmental cliff, too (although I think we're running a little faster). And money is pushing things in some pretty weird directions there on other fronts, too.

I did a lot of international trade for around twelve years. (There were aspects of my work that made me feel uncomfortable. Cutting costs by sending work to places with lower labor and environmental standards, for example.) But it did give me a chance to interact with people from many different places. Most of my European friends think it's pretty weird that we don't have better public funding for higher education and that we lock up so many people in prisons. And they think our healthcare system is downright uncivilized.

[Gregorian]

33. we have what we need for a better country right here in America.

I'm thinking of people like Angela Davis. Chris Hedges. There are tons of people who just aren't part of the 1% who have the experience and knowledge. Amy Goodman, Naom Chomsky.

It seems the problem is the conservative lunatics who are always tugging us backwards.

One of our best hopes is that even conservatives (and military and police) see that they are indeed also part of the 99%. Then it's game over. And I'm hoping that is where OWS is headed. That at least yields a clean canvas.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

7. So when are you planning your constitutional convention

and how many states are lined-up to attend?

[rhett o rick]

10. Glad to see you here. Thanks for kicking the thread. nm

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. So, in other words, there's no real plan beyond rhetoric.

[rhett o rick]

13. Arent you missing Sean Hannity? nm

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. See, this is what gives me pause when asked to support OWS

When practical questions are put forward there are no practical answers forthcoming. There aren't any answers, period; just nasty little quips about how the questioner can't be a real progressive.

It would seem to me that if someone REALLY supported OWS they would have an idea about where it is supposed to go so a plan of action for getting there can distilled. Standing around in a park is not a plan of action for a supposed "revolution." It's a good demonstration but demonstrations and revolutions are two very different creatures.

Revolution implies replacing one political system with another. Maintaining the current political system but seeking to undo its corruption is called reform. I advocate the latter because the former is just so much romanticized sloganeering; as reinforced by the mound of hostile non-answers heaped upon those asking honest, practical questions.

Many OWS supporters are claiming the political system is too corrupt to participate. Nonsense. Elections will still be held next November and the first candidate to claim 270 electoral votes will be sworn-in January 20th, 2013 -- whether or not OWS is still standing in the rain. It would be a far, far better thing if OWS attempted to influence the upcoming votes, up to and including a primary challenge to Obama.

Perhaps some people have been listening to "Fernando" by ABBA too much; I don't know, but the political system in the US is not in any danger of being replaced. Certainly not by those with no practical plans for doing so.

[rhett o rick]

21. Thank you for such an incitful response. But apparently you dont get the whole OWS thingy.

You say that you suggest "reform" in lieu whatever OWS is doing. Ok, I will bite. How do you suggest we get reform? Ask the corrupt Congress to reform themselves?
You say that we should use voting to fix the system. I guess you havent been paying attention to all the efforts the 1% is going to control elections. We cant count on having a fair and free election process. Your chant of "work with the system" is the same as the 1%. The system is rotten to the core.

There are only two sides in this class war. Apparently you choose the side of the 1%, same as the TeaBaggers.

[Zorra]

23. +1

[Nuclear Unicorn]

25. If you're so sure the 1% have an ironclad lock on voting

what makes you think they give a trifle about your so-called revolution?

If anyone decides to go the Timothy McVeigh route they will end just as impotent and despised as him and may they rot in Hell just like that bastard.

I keep reading about how much Obama has disappointed progressives. Wars, tax breaks, cronyism, etc. but like the timid wife afraid of her husband sneaking out at night she demurs and feeds him one more shot of whiskey rather than demand he clean-up his act. We have corrupt politicians because we vote for them because they have the proper letter behind their name.

It's our fault. Not the Koch bros. or FOX or anything else like that.

OWS did not advertise on FOX. It was started by people moving away from traditional media and organizing on their own without corporate seed money. Now they have a public face and if they play their cards smartly they can reach people without the media's blessing. That is, supposedly, the point of public demonstrations.

Regardless of how irredeemable you believe the system to be the elections and swearings-in and other functions of government will continue and OWS will hold none of the vital mechanisms of civil authority unless they move to reform the political arena. If they can organize without the blessing or money of the PTB they can do it.

If they want.

There are only two sides in this class war. Apparently you choose the side of the 1%, same as the TeaBaggers.

"You're either with us or you're with the tur'rists." <--- Don't be this guy.

[rhett o rick]

27. Good try. It's actually the only thing that your pal Bushy said right. There are two sides, PICK ONE

[Nuclear Unicorn]

29. And so you ignore everything else

That's quite the revolution you got going there. Let me know when something interesting happens.

[rhett o rick]

30. lol. It's not MY revolution. Check out what is happening around the courntry.

http://www.ustream.tv/theother99

[Terry in Austin]

35. civil authority

> functions of government will continue... If they can organize without the blessing or money of the PTB they can do it.

Bingo, unicorn!

This is the big innovation of Occupy Wall Street, I believe. They acknowledge that power is now in the plutocracy, capital in Wall Street, and that democracy, capital in Washington, is beside the point. The change they've brought is the fact that we can talk about it now. The elephant in the room has been acknowleged.

By occupying, they make themselves visible as the governed. At the same time, they make it known that they do not consent to be governed. That's the beginning of the end of a government's hold, withdrawal of essential consent.

Washington is beside the point because it is no longer actually governing. The Republicans won't govern and the Democrats can't. So, the functions of the government (the elected government, anyway) will in fact NOT continue, and indeed haven't continued for some time now.

The people in the General Assemblies are being the change they want to see. Arguably, they are going ahead and governing, even though they don't yet have the civil authority to widely implement the policy they make. They're not waiting for the blessing of any other governing entity to proceed with the job.

[rhett o rick]

37. Good post. Governing has a bad name but really only means getting

together with others in society and establishing some rules. That is what OWS is doing. Establishing communication rules, establishing a library, having GA, are all governing.

The USofA government represents the corporations and OWS wants that changed. The poster you are responding to IMO also wants government changed but believes it can be changed by the status quo. OWS doesnt agree. And it doesnt matter because the die has been cast.

[Terry in Austin]

16. Assume nothing, imagine everything

Take your time -- this is for the long haul.

We've succeeded in changing the discussion. Washington is irrelevant, electoral politics are irrelevant. It's broken.

This is no longer a democracy, with Washington as its capital. It's a plutocracy, with Wall Street as its captital.

We can talk about it now.

You included!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

19. "We can talk about it now"

OK, so talk to me -- what's the plan for assuming political, civil and military authority in the US?

[rhett o rick]

22. Tell us what you propose if you dare. nm

[Nuclear Unicorn]

26. I asked you first

:P

[Terry in Austin]

34. And that indeed is the dialog now. Welcome to it!

> what's the plan for assuming political, civil and military authority in the US?

"The" plan... much hinges on that little article.

My take: we don't know. Yet. And that's a good thing.

"Plan" usually assumes some kind of top-down formation and implementation of policy. That's the point -- the top-down process is broken. That's what is okay to talk about now.

I'm not sure we even assume "in the US." If I were going to predict, I'd say the changes happen city by city, locality by locality -- bottom-up. This is for the long haul.

[rhett o rick]

24. Thank you. Good post. nm

[Tashca]

28. I have to agree with you.

I think the lines are being drawn also.

I longer the protests can stay non-violent, at least with the protesters, the more powerful it grows. Voting our way out of this mess is obviously not the answer. At least to anyone paying attention in recent years.

Also mentioned above a person in now questioning capitalism itself. I find myself in the same place.

Good discussion......

[rhett o rick]

38. We got lazy and let the crooks take over. It will be hard to unseat them. nm

[cliffordu]

36. K&R.

Good stuff.