HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Revolution anyone? This ...

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 09:57 PM

 

Revolution anyone? This is for those among us that think we can always fall back on revolution.


I think people take that attitude because they are basically lazy and instead of taking action today, they say, "What me worry, We can always revolt if it gets too bad" Well, about that.....apparently they know nothing of history and dream of successful revolutions where good guys replace bad.

So to those that believe in the revolution dream, tell the rest of us how exactly it will work. Who specifically will join with whom to fight the whose. I bet in your dream the masses unite and drag out the guillotines for the Aristocrats, and when we wake up we have a constitutionally controlled democratic republic. I hate to wake you out of that dream, but the Aristocracy isn't that stupid. What the Aristocracy will do is militarize the police, institute for-profit prisons, clamp down on the black communities (e.g. stop and frisk policies, etc. aimed at the black community). Lock up a good share of the black men and blatantly brutalize others. Those that are locked up will be forced to work as slaves ($2 per hour).

Unless something changes the black community will be under more and more pressure to strike back, to revolt. And the Aristocracy would like nothing better. Their goal is to turn some of the masses against others. And guess why the Powers That Be let the idiots have guns? Guess whose side the idiots will be on.

When they come for the African Americans will you stand up for them?
When they come for the Occupy Wall Streeters, will you stand up for them?
When the come for the leftist, will you stand up them?
You can bet the Tea Baggers won't.

It's never too soon to fight back.

118 replies, 19125 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 118 replies Author Time Post
Reply Revolution anyone? This is for those among us that think we can always fall back on revolution. (Original post)
rhett o rick Aug 2014 OP
TexasProgresive Aug 2014 #1
brooklynite Aug 2014 #2
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #14
brooklynite Aug 2014 #20
socialist_n_TN Aug 2014 #25
merrily Aug 2014 #28
Lurks Often Aug 2014 #35
merrily Aug 2014 #47
marions ghost Aug 2014 #33
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #65
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #34
ZombieHorde Aug 2014 #58
LiberalAndProud Aug 2014 #3
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #16
LiberalAndProud Aug 2014 #19
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #32
LiberalAndProud Aug 2014 #62
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #76
pscot Aug 2014 #4
derby378 Aug 2014 #5
sadoldgirl Aug 2014 #7
TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #12
marions ghost Aug 2014 #42
TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #69
marions ghost Aug 2014 #74
TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #86
marions ghost Sep 2014 #107
TheKentuckian Sep 2014 #111
marions ghost Sep 2014 #118
former9thward Aug 2014 #23
LanternWaste Sep 2014 #113
former9thward Sep 2014 #115
merrily Aug 2014 #26
marions ghost Aug 2014 #37
merrily Aug 2014 #38
marions ghost Aug 2014 #75
merrily Aug 2014 #77
marions ghost Aug 2014 #78
merrily Aug 2014 #79
marions ghost Aug 2014 #91
merrily Sep 2014 #96
rhett o rick Sep 2014 #99
merrily Sep 2014 #109
rhett o rick Sep 2014 #117
Lurks Often Aug 2014 #40
Adam051188 Sep 2014 #101
Electric Monk Aug 2014 #73
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #81
sadoldgirl Aug 2014 #6
NYC_SKP Aug 2014 #8
sadoldgirl Aug 2014 #10
NYC_SKP Aug 2014 #11
sadoldgirl Aug 2014 #13
wandy Aug 2014 #9
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #15
wandy Aug 2014 #22
wandy Aug 2014 #27
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #41
bhikkhu Aug 2014 #17
merrily Aug 2014 #30
Archae Aug 2014 #18
PlanetaryOrbit Aug 2014 #21
merrily Aug 2014 #31
1000words Aug 2014 #24
merrily Aug 2014 #43
socialist_n_TN Aug 2014 #29
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #36
Zorra Aug 2014 #39
merrily Aug 2014 #44
Zorra Aug 2014 #46
merrily Aug 2014 #48
Zorra Aug 2014 #51
merrily Aug 2014 #67
Nye Bevan Aug 2014 #45
Zorra Aug 2014 #49
Nye Bevan Aug 2014 #50
Zorra Aug 2014 #54
Nye Bevan Aug 2014 #55
Zorra Aug 2014 #61
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #68
Zorra Aug 2014 #70
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #72
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #64
marions ghost Aug 2014 #66
chrisa Aug 2014 #52
XemaSab Aug 2014 #53
chrisa Aug 2014 #56
XemaSab Aug 2014 #57
chrisa Aug 2014 #59
840high Aug 2014 #60
Jesus Malverde Aug 2014 #63
hifiguy Aug 2014 #71
merrily Aug 2014 #80
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #82
merrily Aug 2014 #85
Octafish Aug 2014 #83
rhett o rick Aug 2014 #87
johnlucas Aug 2014 #84
marions ghost Aug 2014 #88
johnlucas Sep 2014 #97
BlindTiresias Aug 2014 #89
marions ghost Aug 2014 #90
johnlucas Sep 2014 #103
BlindTiresias Sep 2014 #104
johnlucas Sep 2014 #105
marions ghost Sep 2014 #106
johnlucas Sep 2014 #108
marions ghost Sep 2014 #110
TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #92
BlindTiresias Aug 2014 #94
johnlucas Sep 2014 #100
TheKentuckian Sep 2014 #112
johnlucas Sep 2014 #116
BlindTiresias Aug 2014 #93
marions ghost Sep 2014 #95
daredtowork Sep 2014 #98
Adam051188 Sep 2014 #102
Generic Other Sep 2014 #114

Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:03 PM

1. When a stable system is broken

it doesn't matter if it were good or evil the initial result is chaos. Out of that chaos a stability will come but the chaos period will be violent and deadly and the end result may be worse than the original stability.

This is what the bushites could not or refused to understand when they broke Iraq.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:05 PM

2. UNREC

The notion, much less the hope, of a revolution is stupid.

But so is your vision of what "the Aristocracy" would do in response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #2)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:33 AM

14. Is your "unrec" a knee jerk response? "The notion, much less the hope, of a revolution is stupid."

 

I agree, so who are you disagreeing with?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #14)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:03 AM

20. The other part of your commentary

"What the Aristocracy will do is militarize the police, institute for-profit prisons, clamp down on the black communities (e.g. stop and frisk policies, etc. aimed at the black community). Lock up a good share of the black men and blatantly brutalize others. Those that are locked up will be forced to work as slaves ($2 per hour). " e.g., insinuating that all of society's ills are part of an organized plot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #20)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 10:53 AM

25. Nah, not an "...organized plot". Just the laws of capitalism at work.....

nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #20)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:09 AM

28. State and local police have already been militarized. And there's the National Guard and only God

knows how many government employees at all levels who are armed.

As a Boston resident, militarization smacked me right between the eyes during the 16 hour or so hunt for Dzohar Tsarnaev. I am ashamed I didn't realize it sooner (though I have always suspected Homeland Security).

It hit America between the eyes during the demonstrations following the killing of Brown.

The police have always clamped down on African Americans and they certainly haven't stopped. Events of the last month demonstrate that amply.

Call it the aristocracy, the plutocracy, the PTB, whatever you want. They are much nmore ready for us than they are for Al Q'aeeda. Unlike Al Q'aeeda, though, we are not armed (well, most of us are not) or trained.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #28)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:51 AM

35. You were basically under martial law during the search for Tsarnaev

 

even though nobody used those exact words.

As for the law enforcement behavior during those 16 hours of martial law, all you'll here is second and third hand rumors, but the ones I heard it was mostly Federal law enforcement that was going into homes without warrants if the resident refused consent for a search.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lurks Often (Reply #35)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:19 PM

47. Yes and no. I did break off from "sheltering in place" to go out and buy lunch.

No one shot me, or even questioned or arrested me, which probably would have happened under actual martial law. However, being something of an insomniac, I was riveted to the TV screen from 1 am until the police said it was okay to stop "sheltering", which was somewhere around 5 or 6 pm.

Black, tank-like vehicles going up and down streets in Cambridge and Watertown, with cops in black, helmet to boot carrying rifles. It was quite the wake up call for this ostrich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #20)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:45 AM

33. We are already there

Militarized police
For-profit prisons, outsourcing in general
Clampdown on blacks and minorities
Slave wages for many who are NOT locked up
Limiting access to voting

-------

Re. "insinuating part of an organized plot" -- However as you well know there ARE conservative masterminds following an ideological agenda--so let's just call it the Koch Brothers pow-wowing with the Heritage Foundation...
OK don't call it a "plot", but it is a negative agenda that has nothing to do with Democratic principles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #33)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:28 PM

65. Those that deny conspiracies do so because they can't handle it.

 

The world of economics and politics are loaded with conspiracies. The Koch-Heads are a good example. When they have their secret pow-wows, what do people think they do? Play bingo? They conspire.

All of what is happening is not part of a single conspiracy (organized plot) but when the members of the Aristocracy act in harmony for THEIR best interest, it amounts to a conspiracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #20)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:46 AM

34. Because you think I am "insinuating" conspiracy, therefore, none of what I say can be

 

happening, because we all know that conspiracies (an organized plot) never happen.

If you believe that conspiracies never happen, then further discussion is pointless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #2)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:57 PM

58. Except for the $2/hour part,

"the aristocracy" is already doing this in the US. Leave the US and they're paying less than $2.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:08 PM

3. Fall back on revolution?

I think you trivialize the very notion. Revolution will come only when all other avenues of reform are closed to us, Bundy's little temper tantrum notwithstanding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #3)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:39 AM

16. I would love to hear what will happen when this revolution you are referring to comes.

 

Who will align with whom? I don't trivialize anything, but I do think the so-called "revolution" has already begun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:55 AM

19. I don't pretend to prophesy.

I have no idea what would happen if or when such a thing would occur. Although we are witnessing some amount of civil unrest, I don't think it qualifies as the onset of revolution.

Are you engaging in hyperbole, or do you truly believe that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #19)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:38 AM

32. I guess I stumbled trying to make my points.

 

First, those among us that believe a revolution would solve our problems didn't pay attention to their history lessons and are living in denial. Historically revolutions destroy a lot of the property of the masses, and merely succeed in switching one tyrant for another.

Second, continuing down the roads the lower classes have been taking for the last 30 years will lead to civil unrest but it's not likely the lower classes will unite against the Aristocracy. Most likely the rednecks will fight the minorities. IMO we are already in the first stages as the police (arms of the Aristocracy) have been persecuting the Black Community by harassing them, arresting them, and murdering them in the streets. How far down this road can we go before the Black Community says "enough"? If the Black Community does take a stand, who will support them? Certainly not the well armed Tea Baggers that will side with the police and Aristocracy.

While I might agree that there isn't a specific conspiracy by the Aristocracy, I do believe that the members of the Aristocracy act in harmony for their common interest, which IMO amounts to a conspiracy.

Some here say that things aren't so bad, and if we just keep our heads down, support the status quo, then maybe things will get better. That thinking hasn't worked for the last 30 years.

We must regain control of our local police and our elected representatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #32)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:09 PM

62. While I agree with much of what you say,

I don't think the police are acting on behalf of the Aristocracy in these situations, nor do I think the bad behavior is new. I think it may be exacerbated by the fact that our president is a black man. I think many of these cops are war vets, whose experiences have changed them for the worse. I think the bad behavior is encouraged by haters who are given 24/7 microphone over our airways. The propaganda spouted on nearly every media outlet is designed to feed the fires of division that have always burned. I think it is magnified by exchanges on social media.

What it is not is the beginning of a doomed revolution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #62)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 07:25 PM

76. I am not saying that the police are knowingly acting on behalf of the Aristocracy.

 

But their aggressive actions are playing directly into the hands of the Aristocracy.

More of the Black Community are being targeted (forgive the horrible pun) for harassment, arrest, police abuse, prison, and outright murder in the streets. I see this as a trend and wonder where it will go. You predict, "What it is not is the beginning of a doomed revolution." And I predict we are headed for civil unrest unless we have a major change in society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:21 PM

4. Revolution in America would look like Bad Leroy Brown

We'd never find all the missing pieces.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:24 PM

5. That's why you've got to arm yourselves, people...

Not every revolution can be as bloodless as the Czechoslovakian uprising. God, if only they could be.

If you can't or won't purchase a firearm, at least get something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #5)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:30 PM

7. No, this is not how Ghandi succeeded. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #7)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 11:09 PM

12. Gandhi succeed in getting Indian overseers and that is about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #12)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:00 PM

42. Not true

Gandhi laid down a message for the ages about how to achieve conflict resolution without war. Leaders of today do study it, even if we are far from realizing the potential of his teachings and experience.

Gandhi's message IS appropriate for the next millennia--along with the teachings of Martin L King and Mandela--ie. the inspirational leaders on non-violence who laid down their LIVES.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #42)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 04:31 PM

69. Sounds nice but the actual people are sleeping under sewing machines after 16 hour shifts and

out picking cotton to generate wealth for the same interests as before and scrounging to find day housing and to feed their families in the exchange making the "victory" cosmetic and symbolic, the British left but the people are still working for them in no small part even now it seems to me.

"and then you win" seems to be heavily dependent on what conditions are expected for victory as well as how defeat is defined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #69)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:55 PM

74. Gandhi couldn't live forever

and his message was meant for future generations. It's up to the living to pick up the torch. I agree with you that in reality things haven't changed enough--not in India and not in many parts of the world. However I think most Indians would say that India is better off, though problems remain.

This backsliding doesn't mean that Gandhi failed. Kinda like saying the teachings of Jesus failed because of the fact that those who call themselves Christians rarely succeed in living the principles. I'd rather see it that the implications of Gandhi's message remain as a challenge to the world, not only for India.

The point in this thread is that Gandhi left a blueprint for how to negotiate with oppressors without resorting to war, called Satyagraha. More bloodshed would not have solved anything at the time.
It is not a passive philosophy--it is a different kind of fighting. People often make this mistake about Gandhi--they think he just sat down and refused to fight. Not at all. He was a tireless fighter, but he conducted a mental and spiritual war. He tried to appeal to the higher good in the self and in society, what he called the common sense of "truth" --winning out over forced domination and war-making. You don't change the ancient human urge to correct things by fighting and bloodshed overnight! It's a matter of behavioral evolution.

In America these days, the forces against social justice and democratic government are strong. It's a good time to look back at the principles that Gandhi lived and died for. If you're talking about creating a climate for real change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #74)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 01:14 PM

86. It isn't an issue of immortality. It was little different at the moment. It just didn't work and

impacts have ever been overstated for philosophical reasons and what can be gleaned is not universally useful. You really think these tactics would work on a Hitler, a Stalin, or say the fundamentalists sweeping through the middle east?

I know you want to believe yes. I get that you hope yes but I find it nearly impossible to believe that you actually DO believe such.

Even against less utterly repressive powers all that has ever happened that I can tell is reorganization of oppression to make it more palatable and even that is a fat nothing burger in a vacuum as there must be the realistic threat of disruption and skin being pulled into the game that doesn't want to be there to create the space needed to make negotiations with more passive resistance preferable to chaos or they just crush the irritant.

The model has never really worked and has only even had the appearance of effectiveness when conscience can be prevailed upon and then only to the minimum degree possible to allow the oppressed to stand down and be oppressed with minimal disruption of exploitation while alleviating the guilt and shame of their population that must be kept in a waking dream to maintain the system least they wake up and join the oppressed.

I want peace and tranquility, even desperately but that doesn't lead me to a place where I think any strategy or tactics are universally functional no matter how much I might wish they could be. Sometimes one needs an Allen wrench, sometimes a tape measure, sometimes a screwdriver, and yes sometimes a hammer is required to do the job.

To be honest, I think the people most adamant about the universal nature of these tactics have probably haven't too often been on the wrong end of cruel brute force aka you haven't really had to deal with bullies dedicated to kicking your ass every time they see it.
In the real world there are folks who will never relent unless you brutally cave their asses in and that is that. You try other methods and sometimes they will work before it escalates to the endpoint but in the end some people cannot be negotiated with and if you had taken enough asswhippings for no reason from those that want to dominate and abuse then you'd get it for sure but I believe you'd probably get it without getting busted up on a regular basis just because IF you could be honest about history.

Sometimes there are no better angels to appeal to and no hearts and minds to win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #86)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 01:02 AM

107. You have a false assumption about Gandhi

Gandhi said this:

"I do believe that where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence I would advise violence.
I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor.
But I believe that nonviolence is infinitely superior to violence, forgiveness is more manly than punishment, forgiveness adorns a soldier. But abstinence is forgiveness only when there is the power to punish, it is meaningless when it pretends to proceed from a helpless creature. A mouse hardly forgives a cat when it allows itself to be torn to pieces by her. I do not believe myself to be a helpless creature. Only I want to use India's and my strength for better purpose.
Let me not be misunderstood. Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will."

---

The United States today is on such a militaristic trajectory that we have forgotten that there are other ways of resolving conflict. At the same time that we would defend ourselves from attack we also need to give commitment to solutions that avoid bloodshed. We have not made that choice enough to even say that we've tried it. If you don't believe in the principles of nonviolent resistance, of course you can't apply it in a real situation.

Our wars for profit in recent decades are not honorable wars in any sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #107)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 02:14 PM

111. What is this false assumption? You refuse to admit that the tactics are not always workable.

Further, you insist on pretending something was effective when in practical application it either wasn't or had vastly different goals than I find substantial value in and essentially run away from any point I make seemingly because of ideological or philosophical fixation.

I'm I a proponent of our wars? Fuck no and to pretend such is beyond absurd, I don't know how I could more clearly be in opposition to the our military adventures.

Maybe you can respond to what I have stated rather than misdirection, misinformation, and hitting talking points and we can have an honest exchange.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #111)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 04:40 PM

118. Maybe you could ratchet down?

Nothing I've said is in any way meant to insult you. I am always speaking in general on DU and have no desire to fight useless battles with any individuals. I never said you personally support any US wars.

A common false assumption that many people have is that Gandhi's non-violence meant that he did not support military self-defense. He did, but only as a last resort after the radical form of negotiation that he advocated failed. A lot of people don't respect Gandhi because they think he was a push-over peacenik. Not at all.

I see I am failing in making this point, so let's just practice avoidance. You are probably right that my "fixations" are philosophical but I'm not sure what your point is. I have no idea why you are annoyed. BTW I have been on the other side of brute force and injustice and I still believe in a different way of negotiating with people (provided they are not completely insane, like some notorious monsters you mentioned).

donut?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #7)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:16 AM

23. Oh please.

India was freed from Britain because after WW II the UK was exhausted from the war in both resources and manpower. They no longer could hold their colonies. The UK was on food rationing until the mid 50s for god's sake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #23)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 02:55 PM

113. Post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

It appears your premise is merely an accurate illustration of the fallacy, Post hoc ergo prompter hoc (as Britain kept and in some cases fought for, colonial territories they believed to have a positive cost/benefit ratio).

Actual and objective information contrary to your shaky premise may be found in:

India After Gandhi by Ramachandra Guha
Rise and Fall of the Great Powers by Paul Kennedy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #113)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 03:12 PM

115. India is not Singapore or Hong Kong.

It is a vast country with a vast number of people and the UK had no capacity to keep it after WW II. Its economy was in shambles and as I said before people were on ration stamps 10 years after the war ended.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #7)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:00 AM

26. This is a very different time and a very different scenario.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #26)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:52 AM

37. Yes it is but

we would do well to study Gandhi's ideas--in the larger sense he was speaking to generations of the future. His thoughts did not just apply to his own battles for freedom (in South Africa and India). We have yet to fully understand or benefit from Gandhi's message, especially regarding non-violent negotiation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #37)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:58 AM

38. Just as an aside, Ghandi acknowledged that his ideas came from Thoreau's Civil Disobedience.

Thoreau refused to pay taxes to support a war and was imprisoned as a result. A relative paid bail and Thoreau was sprung and supposedly furious to be so.

Anyway, I have no problem better understanding Ghandi or Thoreau or Martin Luther King. I do have a problem with people who assume that what worked--or at least appeared to work--- in a certain era and under a specific set of conditions is going to work a century or a half century later in a totally different time, place and set of circumstances, without accounting for any of those differences.

I say appeared to work because many also tend to assume that, if X happens, then Y occurs, X must have caused Y or Y must be the result of X. It ain't necessarily so.

For example, I am not one of those who believe that demonstrations for 10 or 11 years ended the draft in the US. I think neocons ended the draft. I get pelted every time I say or post that, but it's what I believe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #38)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 07:20 PM

75. You apply it differently of course

sure these are different times but the principles remain the same. Gandhi was trying to lay down a challenge to the world-- to get beyond violence in resolving conflict in socio-political situations. Thoreau made a statement in a personal situation and Gandhi took it to the macro level. Like Thoreau, Gandhi worked on himself --but at the same time he rallied others. So yes, they had the same vision of a society that is not based on war. We have not come far with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #75)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 07:32 AM

77. That is all I am saying.

For example, we are in a time now when lobbyists dominate in Washington and so does greed. The stakes are huge. It's more like House of Cards than Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #77)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 08:42 AM

78. Right they have stacked the deck

and we must oppose them in every way we can.

But it requires coming together. I think most of us around here probably already work on ourselves and are aware of the magnitude of the stakes and the forces against us (or we wouldn't be here --we'd be watching the cooking channel or comedies from Netflix (not that there's anything wrong with recreation except when it becomes an escape from a scary reality).

The coming together to take action is the hard part. There are different ways to do that, and today in this complex time there are lots of options in fighting for the same ends without violence. It may be more successful to have a lot of different strategies and methods, not just one. There are so many fronts in this struggle. But the populist activist groups (whatever you want to call them) must come together to gain more political power. I see the beginnings of that effort to unite. IMO that is what is needed.

I envy people who live in countries where struggling for what is right against formidable forces is not a part of daily existence. Americans have resentment about this--in other words, why should we have to? And this causes paralysis and denial. Easier to pretend we are not being abused. So the rich corporates take full advantage of our inaction and continue to plunder and get even richer. Why can't we be like countries where power is checked and the government really works for the people, not only for the rich? That is the goal I think. But it will be a lot of work to get there. I have to think it can be done. But we have to put some real effort into it.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #78)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 08:45 AM

79. AGREE! Great post.

Lose the naivete; be aware; be active; strength in numbers. Could not agree more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #79)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 05:00 PM

91. thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #91)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 12:03 PM

96. You're welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #79)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 02:47 PM

99. "Lose the naivete." I think a lot of the so-called "naivete" is just plain denial or cowardice. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #99)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 03:32 AM

109. Food for thought.

Denial is healthy sometimes. It can help when you are in pain. But, as a long term strategy, its usually not a good idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #109)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 03:50 PM

117. I absolutely agree. But to be in denial and then to argue like you are aware is crazy. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #7)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:59 AM

40. Ghandi succeeded because the British administrators in India

 

were, in general, decent people. Many who moved into British government service were British Indian Army officers who had served with and commanded Indian troops and liked India.

Under a communist or fascist or totalitarian government Ghandi would have been fairly quickly taken out and shot in the back of the head for causing problems.

It is naive to think that a Ghandi could succeed in today's Iran, North Korea, Syria, China, etc or in the Soviet Union, Japan or Nazi Germany during the time Ghandi was alive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #7)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 05:39 PM

101. what happened to ghandi again? i forget....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #5)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:12 PM

73. If you believe you must own guns in order to fight the US government...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Electric Monk (Reply #73)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 11:32 AM

81. Those that fantisize that owning guns will protect them from a tyrannical government

 

didn't learn the lessons of Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:28 PM

6. Yes, I am all for a velvet revolution, but there are serious problems.

1) You cannot have one for only one race, that is very divisive. It has to have to involve most of the population.

2) It can come from different populist groups (T-party was a start on the right, as well as the gun nut militias). I have yet to see an equal enthusiasm from the left. The words: "watch what you wish for" come to mind.

3) Successful revolutions were never started from the bottom, rather from an intellectual elite that had the knack to turn populist.

4) I know of no supervision by any state as the NSA, even though it seems to screw up now and then.

5) Weapons alone could not stop it, but intense propaganda installing fear and appealing to the lowest human instincts can. And this is what he have now.

Yes, again I am hoping for one relatively peaceful one, but don't see it coming in my lifetime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #6)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:43 PM

8. Mother nature will beat us to it.

 

As a species, we are flawed in too many ways under current circumstances to ever have a shot at overcoming the consequences of our choices, on this planet, as a species.

The subject is moot, we are toast, by the time we recover, if ever we do, we'll be rebuilding cultural and political systems virtually from scratch.

My approach is to give comfort where I can and hope to the young who will inherit our mistakes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #8)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:48 PM

10. Unfortunately I think you are correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #10)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 11:04 PM

11. And why we both have Warren siglines.

 

There isn't time to have a celebrity president, we need fighters.

More accurately, our future generations need fighters.

Turn this around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #11)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 11:20 PM

13. You are soo right,

but as long as money dictates our elections, she would have a tough time. Still, for once I would like a president who concerns herself with the economics of the people.

I forgot in my first blurb to mention that looking at history the immediate result after the revolution is dictatorship, but in a way we have that already from the 1%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Fri Aug 29, 2014, 10:44 PM

9. What the Aristocracy will do? Will do...........

Militarize the police.
Check.
Institute for-profit prisons.
Check.
Forced to work as slaves ($2 per hour).
Check.
Clamp down on the black communities.
Check.
Stop and frisk policies.
Check.
Turn some of the masses against others.
Check.
Let the idiots have guns.
Check.

May I offer a name for your science fiction novel.

American exceptionalism 2014.
A tale if Teapublican Democracy.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wandy (Reply #9)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:36 AM

15. I don't understand your calling it science fiction. Please explain. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #15)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:25 AM

22. Gallows humor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #15)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:02 AM

27. Two more chapters you can add...........

Corporate media portrays the oppressed (Mike Brown) as the villein.
Check
Corporate media portrays the idiots (Bundy Cow-Pie Vigilantes ) as heroes.
Check
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025464889

Dark fiction, worthy of Philip K. Dick, written on the pages of the daily news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wandy (Reply #27)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:59 AM

41. Yes, well put. I tried to explain my point better in post 32

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:43 AM

17. We can always fall back on kindness

I still believe most all people are basically good and deserve a break, the benefit of any doubt, and, basically, to be allowed some dignity and treated with kindness. In the face of all the rotten things that go on, it seems pathetically small, but I don't know what else I can do.

Looking at history, revolutions turn into meat-grinders all too often.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bhikkhu (Reply #17)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:30 AM

30. In the short term, yes.

How much change do they effect, though? Or do they just swap out one set of plutocrats for another?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:44 AM

18. Every damn decade I hear about "The Coming Revolution..."

Moody Blues said it best.

"Revolution never won, just another form of gun..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:06 AM

21. Godwin's Law, eh?

"When they come for the African Americans will you stand up for them?
When they come for the Occupy Wall Streeters, will you stand up for them?
When the come for the leftist, will you stand up them?
"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PlanetaryOrbit (Reply #21)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:33 AM

31. Who cares? Who the fuck is Godwin, that he should determine what is okay for anyone to say

forevermore? We can't make one comparison to anything at all in Nazi Germany without being terrible poeple who are trivializing the Holocaust? Bullshit.

What a great "law" to protect bad people and bad government practices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)


Response to 1000words (Reply #24)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:04 PM

43. If it is simply an idea whose time has come, how is it a revolution at all?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:15 AM

29. Most people, even educated people, don't really understand the....

actual social science of revolution. That's why it always appears as a surprise to a large portion of the population. Why would a bus fare hike lead to massive unrest? Why would another shooting of an unarmed black kid lead to massive arrest in one case and not in any previous cases?

Revolutions have to be planned for. The spark for revolution is always unknown, but before the spark happens, the tinder is prepared. Prepared by systemic oppression, but also prepared by revolutionists who take the job of preparation seriously.

To have a socialist revolution, it must be working class based and it will involve primarily strikes, unplanned, wildcat, and occupations, leading to a general strike involving a large part of workers who simply stop working. And of course stop paying the bills to the owners. I would estimate that it would take six weeks of a general strike and mass demonstrations to bring capitalism down. Of course well before that six weeks are up, the owners will have their cops, militias, and mercenaries out cleaning out the occupations and putting down the demonstrations, so yes I expect things to get violent. And you can count on a counterrevolution even if workers survive and stay strong through those six weeks. As in all revolutions, the military is the key and especially the grunts. No revolution is ever won without, at least, the neutrality of the military. And it would be better if the lower ranks of the military actively participated on the side of the working class.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialist_n_TN (Reply #29)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:51 AM

36. I don't see a socialist revolution in our future. In fact I don't see a "revolution"

 

per se in our future. I made another stab at making my point in response 32 above.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5465098

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 11:58 AM

39. General strike and boycott. A massive organized economic attack is

our best hope of overthrowing the oligarchs and corporations that control our government.

Solidarity, no violence. Don't work, don't buy anything, for one week, and we will bring the dragon to its knees.

The dragon feeds on us in order to survive. If we stay away from it, the dragon has no power.

It's up to you and me. No leader is going to slay the corporate dragon for us. We either do it ourselves, or the dragon will continue to feed on us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #39)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:08 PM

44. I agree with a lot of that. It may take longer than a week, though.

A strike on paying taxes is another possibility. If enough of us do it at the same time, they can't and won't put us all in jail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #44)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:18 PM

46. A week is just a demonstration of our power. Then we offer to negotiations.

When they accept our offer to negotiate, we formally present our terms for surrender.

They have absolutely no power if we don't play their hunger games.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #46)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:23 PM

48. I thought were not supposed to negotiate with terrorists?

I kid.

Good strategy. But either before or after negotiations it may take more than a week. I'm ready.

I posted something to that effect a year or two ago and someone whose parents own a small store went ballistic because his or her parents would get hurt. At first, I immediately backed down and said small stores should be excluded. But, those small stores are buying from giant vendors, so I don't know what all to do about that. Any thoughts?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #48)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:37 PM

51. "There are many causes that I am prepared to die for

but no cause that I am prepared to kill for". ~ Mahatma Gandhi

Bringing constructive change through non violent direct action will require sacrifices by everyone who believes that the change is necessary to their future happiness and quality survival. I have lots of thoughts on the subject, but Gandhi already expressed the primary ones.

"We must become the change we want to see in the world." — Mahatma Gandhi


"I shall not fear anyone on Earth...
...I shall not bear ill will toward anyone.
I shall not submit to injustice from anyone.
I shall conquer untruth by truth. And in resisting untruth, I shall put up with all suffering."

- Mahatma Gandhi

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #51)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:35 PM

67. Very nice. Yes, I often think of buying a bullet proof vest, but never of buying a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:17 PM

45. Why not run for office and persuade people to vote for you?

Surely the democratic process is better than violence and bloodshed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #45)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:24 PM

49. Because the oligarchs have all manner of means to prevent that from happening.

They control our political process with their wealth.

There is no genuine democratic process. It is an illusion.

The US is an oligarchy, not a democracy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024819356

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/04/14/us-oligarchy-not-democracy-says-scientific-study

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #49)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:27 PM

50. I guess the Oligarchs met and decided they didn't want Mitt Romney.

They preferred Barack Obama because they wanted Obamacare, with its accompanying tax increases on dividends and capital gains, and they also wanted the top rate of income tax restored to Clinton-era levels. Or something.

I also find it interesting that the Oligarchs chose to install Jerry Brown as Governor of California.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #50)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:43 PM

54. No, they simply didn't care if Obama or Romney was President.

They knew neither one would significantly change the economic status quo.

Subcomandante Marcos:

"The global power of the financial centers is so great, that they can afford not to worry about the political tendency of those who hold power in a nation, if the economic program (in other words, the role that nation has in the global economic megaprogram) remains unaltered. The financial disciplines impose themselves upon the different colors of the world political spectrum in regards to the government of any nation. The great world power can tolerate a leftist government in any part of the world, as long as the government does not take measures that go against the needs of the world financial centers. But in no way will it tolerate that an alternative economic, political and social organization consolidate. For the megapolitics, the national politics are dwarfed and submit to the dictates of the financial centers. It will be this way until the dwarfs rebel..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #54)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:48 PM

55. Surely the Oligarchs would have preferred Romney to Obama, though?

They would have saved trillions in taxes by this point if they had got off their Oligarchical asses and installed Romney instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #55)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:07 PM

61. Probably, but maintaining the illusion of democracy is far more important to them than

saving what are nothing but a few pennies to them in taxes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #61)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 03:57 PM

68. I agree with this post and your above posts. Well put.

 

I have over used the boiling the frog analogy. The American public appears to be ok with getting cooked slowly (maintaining the status quo). I think the American Aristocracy is content with not raising the temperature to a full boil, at least not yet. And some among us are smart enough to realize that the American Aristocracy can raise the temperature whenever they want, and yet these people are afraid to fight it.

I think the presidential race of 2016 is a turning point. If we allow the American Aristocracy to dictate another president that will not upset the status quo, we are toast. We may be anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #68)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 04:38 PM

70. Agreed. What the Aristocracy is doing is consolidating power in all areas, with the

intention of have all the bases covered should people decide they have had enough of illusory democracy and rule by oligarch. They won't turn the heat on full blast until they have consolidated their control of all our systems.

Even then, they probably won't turn it up all the way unless/until people rebel en masse.

I don't think it is possible to run a candidate for Prez who is not owned by the 1%, but I'd help do whatever it takes to run one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #70)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:08 PM

72. I agree that it's most likely not possible to run a candidate in the general that isn't

 

owned by the American Aristocracy, but it's a delusion that I allow myself.

As far as a revolution goes, I don't think it's possible. I tried to explain my idea here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025463511

It wasn't a great effort so I tried again here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025463511#post32

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #55)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:25 PM

64. So if you are making me guess your point then here goes: If you are saying that

 

the oligarchs are not exercising Totalitarian control, I will agree. But if you are using that to indicate that the oligarchs aren't in control of this country then I don't agree. Do they let us vote? Sure, but are the votes effective? Not so sure. Do we get to choose who we vote for? Not for the presidency. Do our elected representatives represent us? I don't think so.

The fact that the Aristocracy doesn't exercise 100% control doesn't mean they aren't exercising 80% and it doesn't mean they can't go to 100% should they so choose. I think they realize that many Americans will accept 80% where they might not accept 100%.

It's like the frog in the pot story. The American Aristocracy thinks that the slow boil works better than the fast boil. And those among us that accept the status quo are figuratively saying that the water isn't tooo hot.

Over the last 30 years the American Aristocracy has been stealing the wealth of the middle and working classes. They would like it all but are in no big hurry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #64)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:33 PM

66. Agree

it's a fabulous power trip for the oligarchs. And we are letting them do it. But maybe the frogs aren't as stupid as they think. I keep hoping.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:39 PM

52. Usually the "revolution" people tend to be gun-humpers who dream of being able to finally shoot

people without repercussions. They badly want to live out their Rambo fantasies. Either that, or they're young and think Call of Duty is real.

Nothing's stopping them from doing anything, yet they whine about the "lazy sheep" that refuse to bring their violent fantasies to fruition (which makes them good people, of course - someone who advocates killing other people is very trustworthy and should be listened to). As always, "You first!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chrisa (Reply #52)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:42 PM

53. You left a word out

"colored"

Somehow the shambling hordes in those fantasies rarely have names like Billy Bob and Lurlene.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to XemaSab (Reply #53)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:48 PM

56. Actually, I've never seen someone advocate overthrowing the government who wasn't a dumb, rifle

toting redneck whose idea of a "revolution" is trolling comments sections with bad English and logical fallacies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chrisa (Reply #56)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:51 PM

57. You misunderstood me

I was saying that people who have fantasies of a violent revolution where they get to go around shooting people are rarely picturing white faces at the other end of the barrel.

Look at the bullshit along the border for proof of that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to XemaSab (Reply #57)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:57 PM

59. Yup I did, and agreed

"Revolution" really just means "Putting minorities in their place" to them. It's the ugly underbelly of Libertarian bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:02 PM

60. Most people sit on

 

their arse and type.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 01:15 PM

63. We are in the midst of a revolution right now.

The players are robotics, geolocation, 3d printing, genetics and the cloud.

In the end there will be millions of casualties, as the reality of permanent unemployment and "surplus populations" take shape.

Technology doesn't care about the worlds politics and it's advancement cannot be stopped.

The new economy probably does not have a place for you or me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 04:49 PM

71. John F. Kennedy's words are as true now as the day he spoke them.

 

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 09:19 AM

80. No revolution; no violence; but when they come for them, "Will you stand up for them?"

I realize the knee jerk and politically correct response would be to say, "Of course!"

And I really would like to say that, but could you be more specific?

Haven't "they" already come for people of color and Occupy? People of color have been turning up dead for no good reason for centuries. Members of Occupy were maced, jostled, their belongings tossed, etc. and a few landed in the hospital. And, aren't they always coming for leftists?

Or, are we talking about armed jackboots, rounding up people to jail them and my solo, nonviolent resistance?

What is the likely outcome of that?

Do I think all leftists should come together for strength in numbers? You bet.

But I don't think we should rule out anything.

I am non-violent. However, if the left comes to the point of uniting for revolution, I wll probably support them, but I personally will not kill anyone. I'll buy a bullet proof vest and a helmet with a face visor and hope for the best.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #80)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 11:54 AM

82. Of course "they" have already started "coming", and they've been "coming" for the minority

 

communities, OWS, and whistle-blowers. So far we have not done much to "support them". I see the first step as telling our police depts that they work for us and we don't want the status quo to continue.

We also must stop accepting the manipulation of the Aristocracy. We must support progressive candidates and shun the "lesser of evils" manipulation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #82)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 12:02 PM

85. Very good point about police and I think that starts with Governors (state police) as

well as mayors and councillors. And police commissioners, of course. And state houses.

I support traditional Democratic candidates and liberal candidates and would love it if everyone did. However, unless the DNC and the big money people support those kinds of candidates, too, I am not optimistic.

I am specific about wording because the term "progressive" confuses me. For one thing, Will Marshall left the DLC to start the Progressive Policy Institute and signed the PNAC letter urging Bush to invade Iraq. And both Hillary and Obama have described their policies as progressive.

So, I think the term "progressive" means different things to different people. And when one word means different things to different people, the risk of mis-communication is very high. (Basically I think we need a new word because 'Liberal" also has a so-called free trade connotation, esp. as used abroad.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 11:57 AM

83. Rebellion is all that is left for us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #83)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 02:49 PM

87. Yes rebellion but not violent revolution. And for a rebellion to work we must get the

 

lower classes to unite. The American Aristocracy is encouraging the lower classes to fight amongst themselves and arm the least intelligent among us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 11:58 AM

84. Power Is Liquid. No entity is invincible

 

Last edited Mon Sep 1, 2014, 12:29 PM - Edit history (2)

That which was formed can be unformed.
That which was made can be unmade.
That which was assembled can be unassembled.

Revolution fails because it doesn't understand human nature & its flaws.
It's easy to get a bunch of people riled up & ready to fight.
But what do you do once they start fighting?
They're not trained fighters & they'll fight the wrong things in the wrong ways.
Emotion takes over reason since reason is in a weaker part of our brain to begin with.
And in the end all it leads to is a war zone of destruction which naturally will be ruled by a incoming warlord.
This warlord most likely ends up being just as bad if not worse as the regime before.

Also what do you do when it's time to STOP fighting?
Warriors only know war. How do they handle peacetime?
Fighting sends strong hormones through our systems & you can get addicted to battle.
Yes our bodies work by drug addiction. It leeches onto substances & won't let go.
That's why after mass movements make breakthroughs certain members start fighting anything & everything simply because they don't know how to stop fighting.
Eventually their fighting wrecks the movement they were supposed to be fighting for in the first place.

In a capitalist system you beat them with their own game.
BUSINESS is how you change this dumb country.
Don't make appeals to people's conscience because that's limited.
It works but it's so slow & ineffective on a large scale. Only works on certain individuals.
Keep it as a side strategy, sure, but don't depend on it.

Instead of promoting a product with a "Save the Trees" mentality, just use the same marketing techniques every other business uses.
Just sell the product like anybody else would & use the revenues to fuel your cause.
You'll never get a nationwide strike or a nationwide boycott because Americans are bred to be Consumers.
They SHOULD be Customers but they have been programmed to act as Consumers.
Consumers eat anything in front of them like Pac-Man, Customers make reasoned thoughtful decisions on what they take in.

Instead of fighting this reality, go with it.
Just have them consume something useful.

You have to beat them at their own game.
You have to OUTCAPTIALIZE the Capitalists.
You have to buy up more media outlets then they do.
You must be more ruthless in your business aims then they are.
The only trick is making sure that you remember why you're playing this game.
You must detach yourself from the worship of money & materialism.
You have to be fine with living on $20,000 to $50,000 a year not seeking excess.
All of the business's money is for the cause, not for your enrichment.

We cry when they buy up media outlets & public resources & food producers but we don't do the same to prevent them from doing it.
We just sit back & talk shit.
Outbuy these suckers. Put 'em out of business.
If Citizens United further empowers the rich to have control over the government, then just outrich them.
Then when YOU'RE the rich guy or gal, you can decide the fate of the country.

Don't hate the Player, don't hate the Game even.
Just beat 'em at it.

Power Is Liquid.
No hand can cup a liquid without little drops seeping between the fingers.
It might seem that a foe is invulnerable but there's ALWAYS a weak point somewhere.
They can be tough, they can be formidable, but they can always be defeated.
The Revolution is fought in the strategy not the violence.
John Lucas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnlucas (Reply #84)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 04:21 PM

88. Something happens in this society

when people get money...where are the antidotes to the Koch Bros? Shouldn't they be evident by now?

I don't really agree with the "beat em at their own game" here. It's difficult to be that ruthless and money-grubbing to compete with them--and also try to retain any integrity. You have to be careful when you take on the behavior of your oppressors. I'm not sure it works.

The one thing I do agree with is that they can be defeated. Those of us who have no hope of "outcapitalizing" anybody -- only have clout if we work together. If our organizations are strong, we can always hope that some liberal capitalist of your dreams will invest in us. But we'd better not count on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #88)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 02:21 PM

97. That's why I said that's the trick.

 

Michael Moore is rich from selling those documentaries but he still highlights the injustices in this nation, doesn't he?
And the truth is you really don't need as much money as you think you do.
But it depends on how dependent on money you are.

If you're comfortable living in a $50,000 a year or less economic status, then those millions & millions can work like those guys' billions & billions.
If you're fine with a simple house or even renting a place while you use the grand majority of your money to fight for the cause, then you can do this.
The mistake people make is the indulgence.
When you build mansions & ranches & other things that take a LOT of financial upkeep.
When you start living like Robin Leach's Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous.
THAT'S when you have the problem.
Now you're concerned about upholding your lifestyle & that runs counter to the reforms you were aiming to make.
You become compromised & eventually live up to that limousine liberal stereotype.

*************************************************************

Me personally? This is EXACTLY what I'm going to do.

I don't like the money system. It's a bad game.
It's a finite system that CREATES poverty by its very design.
Human beings get it backwards on the idea of value.
We value what is rarer. And I'll tell you why that is.
We simply can't recreate certain materials in our limited human state.
We can't just up & create water out of the blue. We can't create life by putting compounds of carbon together.
If you lose an arm, that arm is gone forever & what they replace it with is really not the same & not nearly as useful.
We can remix & recombine but we cannot recreate.

So because of this limitation we try to preserve what can't be recreated & value it highly.
This is how we assigned high value to rare things. Like first edition baseball cards or comic books or even paintings.
But that idea is absolutely backwards.
There's nothing on Earth more valuable to human beings than air, water, food, shelter, belonging.
The Maslow Hierarchy.
Air is abundant, water is somewhat abundant too, so is food.
Just because they're plentiful does that make them worthless?
Of course not. Because value means USEFULNESS.

If you're dehydrated & starving abandoned in a desert, what is more useful to you?
A pack of gold bars from Fort Knox or cold water & a hot meal?
I can't eat gold. I can't drink gold.
People created the money system putting value on these less valuable things to make trade easier.
Universal Trading Pieces, I call them. Ears of corn ain't equal & neither are farm animals.
It's a go-between & its power only comes from the trading of it, the EXCHANGE of it.
The value is the product or service we buy with those pieces.
Money is just a middleman getting in the way of value.
At best it's only OPTION power. But it's ultimately useless by itself.

Problem is we're all born into this bad money game & the things that are valuable are barred to us thanks to this middleman.
And certain individuals want it that way so they can wield their Option Power against us.
Just like every other animal in the animal kingdom, human beings love to play these dominance games.
Money acts as a bouncer at a club & we all trade our livelihoods for the chance that the bouncer lets us into this VIP room of value.
Those left out of that VIP room get cold out there in the streets waiting to get past that bouncer.
The trick is not caring about getting into that club.
What's the purpose of the bouncer if nobody's trying to get into the club?

The other trick is those that had access to areas in that VIP room bring some of that value out to people cold on the streets.
Get inside to bring it outside.
What can the bouncer say? You're a VIP member.

I don't need much to live on.
I can be comfortable with $30,000 a year.
I'll DAMN SURE be comfortable with $50,000 a year.
Money after that means nothing to me because I will have everything I value.
So if I make $100,000,000 in a year, where do you think most of that money is going?
Take away $30,000 & you got $99,970,000. Take away $50,000 & you got $99,950,000.
Both of those numbers are effectively the same as $100,000,000.
I will use that money to beat these suckers at their own game.
I'm not bound by the worship of money & wealth & I will infiltrate that club to destroy it from within.
And to help others overrun that bouncer so they can destroy that club from the outside.

*********************************************************

And by the way, integrity ain't getting us nowhere.
These guys are not playing by the same rules as you & me.
They have less holding them back so OF COURSE they're gonna go further with their aims.
So bully the bullies is what I say. Give 'em a dose of their own medicine.
Remember Elite means Few. They're outnumbered.
Without their rings of protection & persuasion, they're nothing.
They change the rules to put things in their favor, they can't be mad when we change the rules & put things in our favor.
Algebra. What is done to one side, must be done to the other.

They wanna be ruthless? Show 'em how ruthlessness is REALLY done.
They'll cry foul & that's when you hit 'em harder.
Eventually they'll stop crying. A bunch of a big brats who no one ever puts in check, that's what these guys are.
You try to keep integrity & these guys keep running ramshackle all over you.
So next time they run, put your leg out & trip these sons of bitches.

************************************************************

And about that 'working together' thing. It doesn't work. Not effectively anyway.
If it did, why do we have the SAAAAME EXACT problems for millenia on end?

Human beings are FRACTIOUS.

I learned from the cartoon Garfield & Friends that no two people can ever agree on the same toppings on a pizza.
That allegory means that human beings will always fracture somewhere somehow.
That's how religious sects get started. That's how sects in political movements get started.
What IS Christianity? What IS Islam? What IS Feminism?
Like I told you I'm not making the mistake of disregarding the truth about human nature.

I DON'T have confidence in human beings to hold anything together. It's not what we are. It's not what we do.
Anything good that came out of this world was MANIPULATED & MANUFACTURED into being.
Some wise person came up with an idea & arranged people & things to make it happen.
Sometimes they arranged people to temporarily align as a movement, sometimes they manipulated the machinery of society itself solo.
But it wasn't started by the masses themselves.
More people means more problems.

The three universal rules of humanity you must know are these:
#1 People Are Selfish.
#2 People Are Lazy.
#3 People Are Weak.


These are not good or bad things in themselves. Each has a beneficial aspect & a detrimental aspect.
On #1 People Are Selfish:
No person will ever look out for a person more than that very person himself/herself.
When a group of people are having fun playing Russian Roulette & telling you to join the fun, you have to look out for yourself & say no. They're not gonna be as invested in your well-being as you will be.
So you must be Self-focused to preserve yourSELF.
But this is the same exact thing that causes the fractiousness in human beings.
Everybody is ultimately in it for their own personal interests. Self-focused.
We don't even relate to other species unless it reminds us of ourselves in some way.
Why does a jackrabbit named Bugs Bunny stand upright, hold a carrot with a thumb, & talk with the facial expressions human beings have?
Why do we see the roach-like Alien from the Alien movies as a monster?

On #2 People Are Lazy:
Human beings have limited energy in their bodies.
They only can do so much before the reserves are depleted.
That's why people are always looking for the easiest way to do something for themselves.
The more personal energy something takes up, the less a person is going to want to do it.
But this rule actually keeps human beings from destroying each other more than they already do!
It cancels out the bad effects of Rule #1 People Are Selfish.
Without that laziness, everybody would be Son of Sam & the BTK Killer.
They use the least energy-drawing way of showing that selfish maliciousness: insults & nasty glares.
It takes high emotion (MOTION) to drive people to do things past their lazy limits.
That's why the best way to defuse fights is to separate the participants in the passion of battle.

On #3 People Are Weak:
Even when we HAVE the energy our forms are limited in what they can do.
Human beings are less effective on their own & are forced to cooperate with others to get bigger things done.
When one individual gets too autonomous from the rest of the group, that individual has no ties to the group & won't reciprocate favors. There has to be some weakness somewhere to keep this person working with others.
The upside of tragedy is that it has a chance to bring compassion.
You gotta be weakened to care about somebody more than yourself.

***************************************************

You have to balance these truths to get the most effectiveness out of a movement.
Sometimes that means moving in small groups that will have less chance for fractures.
Sometimes that means assembling a large group temporarily as a show of force.
Sometimes that means working in loosely aligned cells almost solo by solo.
But there's always a master plan & somebody manipulating, orchestrating things into being.

An organization is just a strategy of many strategies.
You can't depend on the organization itself because it's made of human beings.
It's a miracle when a music group can stay together for a decade.
Why do you expect any better from a political organization?

The truth of the matter is that Martin Luther King Jr. should not have died.
The truth of the matter is that the hippies should not have been arrested, beaten, & detained.
And for political movements to be a success, we have to get away from the martyr sacrifice mentality.
We have to review the movements of the past & see their flaws so that we can improve on them.
March on Washington was a STRATEGY & it's not the only one.
Just walking out into the streets & chanting with signs is not quite the answer to solving the problem.

The masterminds behind the movements must get smarter so that the movements get smarter, so that the movements get more effective.
We must use game theory MUCH BETTER than we're doing now.
This is a game of power & we're not using our power effectively.
That's why we sit on the sidelines & whine when they score yet another goal on us.
I'm done with HEART. It's time to get SMART.
Heart makes you feel good but what is it solving?

Media is a big piece of this puzzle & we need to monopolize media.
You see the joke Jon Stewart made about buying CNN on the Daily Show right?
It's not really a joke. Jon Stewart works through Viacom to send a powerful message.
He takes the veneer of satire parody news show & actually becomes the news!
What happens if more like him actually OWNED bigger networks to broadcast an even more powerful message?

We let these regressive assholes take over radio & look what has happened.
Remember I told you that People Are Lazy.
It takes much less energy to let someone program your thoughts & feed into your base emotions than it does to do research & check the other sides of the story.
So the antidote is to buy so many networks that these assholes don't have enough places to broadcast those bad messages.
You shape minds by bombardment.
How many anecdotes are on here with posters' family members slowly being brainwashed by Fox News & other outlets like that?
Since most people are never going to do the research on their own, you have to bombard 'em with a better message until they let YOU program their minds.
Sad to say but that's how it works.

Whatever we do it's gonna have to be ACTIVE.
This Liberal/Progressive/whatever contingent is too damn PASSIVE.
They don't have the balls to stomp the opposition.
They're waiting for the arc to bend towards justice instead of physically bending that arc towards justice themselves.
Any action they DO take is poorly thought-out & feeble.
That's why they lose or only win occasionally.

I'm taking a realistic look at people & how they work to get change done on a much larger scale much faster.
And I won't WAIT on that "liberal capitalist" to come save us, I'll BE that liberal capitalist.
ACTIVE not PASSIVE.
John Lucas

P.S.: Thanks for enduring my long rambling post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnlucas (Reply #84)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 04:24 PM

89. Nonsense post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlindTiresias (Reply #89)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 04:49 PM

90. Yeah

maybe just a complete put-on? Extreme cynicism takes many forms....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlindTiresias (Reply #89)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 06:10 PM

103. Nonsense you say? Power IS Liquid

 

Playing nice guy ain't gon' getcha nowhere.

Start bullying these bullies.
They take advantage of you because you let them.
You won't use their tactics on them because you don't have the killer instinct to do them.

The so-called King of the Jungle, the lion is not too keen on tangling with a honey badger.
Honey badgers are so badass they get stung trying to enter the honeycombs of African killer bees! They pass out then simply wake up later to finish eating the bees' honey.
Venomous snakes bite them & they STILL beat the snakes' ass for biting!
After killing that snake, they pass out from the venom then simply wake up later to go about their daily business.

We gotta think more on the lines of these wolverine relatives.
We must make the King of the Jungle bow down.

And that means you gotta have the stomach to punish & pound these opponents into submission.
Show them that they have no idea what ruthless means.
Destroy their empires by playing the game they created better than they did.
And when they beg for mercy destroy them further.
They're not playing fair so why should you?

What's nonsense is this pitty-pat approach we take to these injustices.
We're whining, they're winning.
We went to the protest, they win the contests.
It's pathetic!

No more HEART. It's time for SMART.
No more feel good. It's time for real good.
Approach this thing with a mind for game theory & do what it takes to win the game.

Power is Liquid.
They are FAR from invincible.
John Lucas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnlucas (Reply #103)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 06:27 PM

104. Well, for starters

In order to out-capitalize them you would need to engage in the same terrible behavior or worse. It becomes a contest to see who can destroy labor rights and wages and cut corners better, faster, and more aggressively. How is that going to lead to a good outcome if the end result is an even more rapacious capitalism?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlindTiresias (Reply #104)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 09:30 PM

105. Not necessarily

 

Last edited Tue Sep 2, 2014, 02:23 AM - Edit history (1)

You assume that I say our businesses should be run like their businesses.
That's not what I'm talking about when I say ruthlessness.

What is needed is a chief who is not attached to money to make this work.
He/she can live on very little personally & the money his/her business brings in is for the cause he/she fights for.

Isn't Costco an example of business being run the right way?
Let me know if I'm using the right store. I forget if it's Publix or Costco.

You don't HAVE to mistreat your workers to achieve your aims & your business will be a living example of that.
And here's the thing. There are so many people abused by this system that you would have legions of people willing to build this business.
Hell, just recruit outside of every unemployment office & temp agency.
Straight up pull people off the street. Hire 'em from a homeless shelter.
The people are there & they are legion.

Because of those legions you can spread your businesses throughout the country quickly.
Word will get out how great the conditions are at your companies & you can't KEEP people away.

Better yet train your staff to start their own businesses following your model.
It will be a sea change within the country as your way of doing business more & more becomes the norm.

The ruthlessness I'm talking about comes from crushing those businesses (and the people who run them) that operate the bad way with your sheer numbers.
To force buyouts. To shrink them in the market so severely to perform hostile takeovers.

What would happen if someone could force a buyout on Monsanto?
To force Rupert Murdoch to drop News Corp.?
To have the Koch Brothers sell off stakes in their leagues of businesses for pennies on the dollar?
And to poison their chances to start elsewhere?
To take these assets & use them in a BENEFICIAL way?

Using Business in this Big Business-run society to reform that society.
Economic & social revolution.
No need for picket signs & protests.
Create a vehicle that will actualize the change right before your eyes.

They complain about socialism?
Run your business the socialist's way & outdo their capitalist businesses.
And each time they come out with talking points, you show them that balance sheet full of sales & profits.
Shut 'em up with the facts.

This is also why we need to get more control over media.
That way they can't brainwash people against their own interests.

I'm not so concerned about the behavior towards ill-behaved business types.
I'm concerned with the results.
And that reluctance to beat 'em with their own tactics is why we remain on the outside looking in.

I'm not buying that 'meek will inherit the earth' claptrap.
TAKE the earth from these suckers!
ACTIVE not PASSIVE.
John Lucas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnlucas (Reply #105)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 12:16 AM

106. Have you ever tried to start a business?

Fine to try to run businesses better, more fairly, more democratic-socialistically. But you have to make mega bucks to compete with the fat cats. And when it's all about the bottom line, it's very hard to stay pure in intention. Look at all the alternative small businesses that are now megalo-maniacal. And don't really do all that much to change anything, tho they try to convince us they're doing their part. Where's the progressive answer to the Kochs?

I agree with you about getting more control over the media. And I don't believe the meek will inherit the earth either. It's time to fight, past time. To fight in a business kind of way isn't a bad idea--but the system is so corrupt and the oligarchs are so entrenched that trying to beat them by direct competition seems far-fetched. Do you really think they're going to accept domination? You are assuming these people play fair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #106)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 02:20 AM

108. Not yet but I am aiming in this direction when I do

 

Oh I know they ain't gonna play fair & that's where the ruthlessness comes in.
I EXPECT them to do the dirtiest of tricks but I know that we outnumber them in the end.
I can poach their staff. I can poach their suppliers.
I can orchestrate a media campaign that makes people not want to buy anything from their companies.

It's gonna take master strategy but it can be done.
One thing I know about systems is that we made them so we can alter them.
Any system can be altered & manipulated.
They're just virtual machines. You just gotta know what cogs to move.

Hiring is easy & if you go to unemployment offices & start picking up people off the bat no resumes needed, they will work hard for your company.
They will be dedicated to you because you helped them in their moment of need.
Hang out at the temp agencies & even go on the street corners & hire homeless folks.
Go back to teaching people on the job.
Word will get out so fast that this company is helping people, they will be FLYING through the recruitment centers.
Cross-train the people & advance them to other fields.
It allows you to open more businesses.

It DOESN'T have to be about just the bottom line.
It's all in your mentality on how business should be done that governs this.
You invest in your people & they will return the benefits to you.
Ask Nintendo that game company.
Smallest staff of the big game console manufacturers & yet it is one of the biggest companies in all of Japan.
The CEO of the company preferred to cut his salary by 50% instead of fire his workers when the company struggles.
Microsoft made $21 billion IN PROFIT last year & fired 18,000 workers.
Nintendo has staff that goes back to the early 1970s back when they were just more of a card/toy company.
One of those old staff members was one of the braintrust behind the Wii console & its design philosophy.
Wii was that megahit as you know.

I'm brainstorming as I write these posts.
It's gonna take me awhile to come up with surefire strategies that account for every angle.
But I know I must outthink them & outplan them.

What I really want to happen is that the staff working in any startup I create get enough to start their own.
I don't really WANT them working for me all their life.
I would use this business game as a chance to create more businesses in the model I set.
And the sheer numbers of people working in this capacity eventually will overwhelm these oligarchs.
The oppressed always outnumber the oppressors.
I will ALWAYS consider physics in my plans.
These sheer numbers will be overwhelming.

Right now I work in a 9 to 5 trying to make ends meet like everybody else.
I plan on one day starting something that sparks the wholesale changing of how this country operates.
Once I build enough savings to get started I will begin my plans.
And it might not be overnight but one day what I start is going to change this miserable ass country.

I don't care about mansions & fancy cars & fancy clothes.
I'll probably STILL drive this 24 year old car I'm driving now.
Can't live in that much house & wouldn't want to (who's gonna clean it?).
I can only drive one car at a time.
And what am I gonna do with all those clothes?
I'm FORCED to care about money because of necessity but I don't need much more to live on comfortably.
With that out of the way every single dime goes to this mission.

I'm gonna put Ujamaa into practice & dominate with it.
Cooperative Economics is the Revolution that will transform America.
Play the money game just like a videogame & beat 'em at that game.
John Lucas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnlucas (Reply #108)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 09:22 AM

110. I admire your confidence

--coming from a family of small business owners I know it does take that high (some would say manic) level of motivation to start any business. Vision and determination, also flexibility. You have to like shooting the rapids.

I do agree that "we outnumber them" but they hold way more of the cards. It is not a level playing field. So that's what makes me a skeptic unless you have a more favorable political climate occurring at the same time. In any strategy to turn this around we need to realize we have the numbers. We can do much more together than we can in isolation. I'm for all efforts in the right direction, operating synergistically. When you create enlightened business, you do change attitudes and this can generate receptivity for new ideas in the same vein and it can snowball in time--but takes awhile....

Your vision of a business that people WANT to work for is a good one. I particularly relate to that goal. So many business owners of companies large and small --think the way to get ahead is to turn your people into under-compensated robots. It is the absolute worst way to run any business. Unhappy people don't do good work. And they go through like a revolving door--you don't get loyalty unless you create such dire conditions in society that it becomes slave labor. Then you get forced loyalty. Wage earners are happy for any job (or two or three) and will put up with the worst of conditions. We have that now. I take hope that the fast food workers can unionize and I support their struggle for being treated like human beings instead of machines. But the product needs to change too--many fast food places are dishing out food substance that causes major health problems. Change the attitude toward the workers and toward the product and you could revolutionize that industry anyway.

So I do agree with the "invest in your people" plan--it's what is sorely missing in American business models-- tho there is a lot of lip service to it, it's usually lacking in reality. I don't know how you deal with the fact that automation and robotics makes a lot of jobs obsolete, but I guess we have to be more creative about what constitutes a job. What is really needed for humans to do. What is valued. I don't know how you make people less greedy. It infects the best of 'em when they get some money--I've seen it many times. Then they start to operate from the principle that there's never enough. It takes more and more and more money like a drug. They start to fear loss of it, instead of feeling the benefits of sharing the excess. They become miserly Scrooges. I have seen it happen. "I got mine" (in people of average means as well as the wealthy) is a disease that is crippling this country and destroying civil society.

Cooperative economics, Ujamaa I hear ya. Noble goal of course. But many have tried and failed. You express your ideas clearly--so keep writing, brainstorming, visualizing it--and write a book when you get down to the actual details, the reality. The devil is in the details.

Good luck with it. Report back when you get the model working...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnlucas (Reply #84)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 05:16 PM

92. Delusional. There are no such available resources and there is no actual capitalism

just corporate, authoritarian communism dressed up to sell the rubes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #92)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 06:26 PM

94. No

It is capitalism, just the end game of it which involves extreme wealth concentration. Adam Smith was a pollyanna.

The only requirement for capitalism to exist is for an individual or group of individuals to own a productive or financial enterprise and seek profit from it. Thats it. Competition is an ideal within that but the track record really hasn't demonstrated this to be a true component, as it is easier to monopolize and cheat than compete, so that is what people do instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #92)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 05:31 PM

100. If the Business Class runs the society, then how do you suppose that society changes?

 

Check this out.
If your name is too obviously "ethnic", your resumé gets tossed into the trash heap.
If you have dreadlocks & cornrows, those hairstyles aren't considered professional attire.
If you wear nose rings, your appearance is considered inappropriate for the workplace.

So how do you remedy these discriminations?
By doing the long slog of getting legislation passed in favor of those groups only to find it has no teeth...

OR

...Starting a business yourself that hires these very groups?

If your business is successful being composed of a bunch of "ethnic" named, dreadlock-wearing/cornrow-wearing, nose ring owners, then more businesses will start hiring these types of groups to stay competitive.

You will have effectively changed the culture & no longer will these artificial barriers be acceptable.

A business culture that says women have no place in executive positions?
Make a business that SPECIFICALLY has female executives & run the other one OUT of business.

These artificial rules are in place to keep certain groups of people out of the Command Center.
To keep them poorer & more powerless in society where they have limited influence on how society is shaped.

Instead of picking "acceptable" names, cutting your hair, & taking out your nose rings, change those phony rules with your OWN business.
Make those who live by those ridiculous tenets eat their words.

I'm starting to believe that EVERY change in America happened because some member of the business class decided things should be done differently.
The motive might have been greed but the effect still changed how things were done.

I'm starting to believe that the only reason women were encouraged to join the workforce is because some greedy businessman wanted 100% of population grinding in those workfields instead of 50%.

Corporations haven't just started to run this country.
Corporations have ALWAYS run this country!
The original U.S. flag was the same exact flag as the East India Company.
Looks like Britain's Business Class wanted to overthrow Britain's Royal Class.
Is that REALLY what the American Revolution was all about?
Merchants overthrowing the King so they can be their OWN Kings?

OK. If that's how the game works.
I'll just use my business to destroy your business.
I'll use my business to give other people control of the Command Center.
If the politicians are bought & sold, I'll just buy & sell 'em MY way.

The only reason the Civil Rights Movement got to shape people's views is because these media corporations wanted a juicy story for their headlines with the ratings & subscriptions that come with it.
"Get a shot of those cops spraying people with the hose! That'll make great ratings!"

It's all a game so just outplay 'em.
John Lucas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnlucas (Reply #100)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 02:32 PM

112. We don't have the resources or the power the deck is way beyond stacked.

If we play the game we can only lose because they wrote the rule book, modify it at will, and have such a resource and power disparity that all you state is practically impossible.

You suggested we buy more radio channels than them. My question is how and with what?

You say to make them eat their discrimination and exclusionary practices and I ask by what means? They have the resources.

You say to buy the politicians our way? I ask with what currency?

You say you will use your business to destroy their's. I ask by what lever will you make such a move when they write the rules?

Buy radio stations? Right now I'd be hard pressed to buy a fucking radio, John.

I'm all for going funky Presidents on them but you have to have some means to buy the land to raise our food like the man and the man has set up conditions where it isn't plausible to do so at the required scale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #112)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 03:16 PM

116. You're looking at the current state. I'm looking at the future state

 

I understand what you're saying here.
It's easy to have vision but you want to see actual practice.
That's the kind of mentality I like to hear.
Not just what sounds good but is actual tangible good.

And that's where our planning has to come from.
Strategizing is where the Revolution takes place.
The rollout of those strategies are just the aftereffects.

The deck IS stacked & we will point the gun at the dealer for fixing the cards.
That analogy is not for violence even though I did use a gun metaphor.
It means we will call the dealer out on his crooked game.
We don't HAVE to play with his fixed deck.
And maybe we'll slip our own cards into the deck to mess up their scheme.

No matter how powerful a regime gets it can never have it all.
Genghis Khan couldn't do it.
The British Empire couldn't do it.
The Spanish Empire couldn't do it.
The Roman Empire couldn't do it.

I know that Power Is Liquid.
You can only push so far before the inevitable pushback.
That's how Luke 16 from France got dealt with.
That's how Caesar Nick 2 from Russia got dealt with.
That's how Aristide from Haiti got dealt with.

The tighter you squeeze your fist around something the more stuff that seeps out between your fingers.
The regime over USA knows this & that's why they concede from time to time.
That's why chattel slavery was outlawed.
That's why women's right to vote was conceded.
That's why Frank Roosevelt cooled the tension with the New Deal concession.
That's why the Civil Rights Act was conceded.
That's why opposition to gays marrying is conceding.

The rulers of America know better than to go full Iron Fist so they squeeze more gently with a Velvet Glove.
At first it doesn't feel uncomfortable that you're being squeezed because of the soft smooth material.
And if the squished object really starts to bite back at that glove, they'll loosen that grip just enough.
It is in those periods where you leech a little more of that power from them.
It is in those periods where you slip your own cards into that fixed deck.

This internet we use everyday was put out here to spy on & track all of us.
And the government left it to the private sector so that people would feel more free to share their life details.
You're not gonna tell all of your business to the U.S. Information Network but you'll blab all your secrets to silly names like Google & Facebook & Twitter.

Yet this tool meant to spy on us ALSO gives us the ability to better communicate, network, & create countermedia ourselves.
Everything's a double-edged sword. It cuts both ways.
Think of it in sexual terms.
The penis penetrates the vagina & it seems that the man is in control.
Problem is once he's inside the woman controls him as her vagina locks his penis.
The more he thrusts & "attacks" that vagina, the weaker & more vulnerable he gets.
He has 1 major orgasm, she can have 100. That penis really can't beat that vagina.

Power dynamics.
I'm studying power dynamics.
I'm studying them in mathematical physics-based terms.

We hack their game, that's what I'm saying.

I laugh when people get all scared of "The Illuminati".
First of all why are we spelling that name with a capital 'I'?
Spell it lowercase 'illuminati' & recognize that these are not invincible mastermind lords we can never hope to challenge.
But that these are just flesh & blood frail weak human beings that have to pee, poop, & bleed just like everyone of us.

I don't see any of these entities as unbeatable.
I see them as challenging. I see them as formidable.
But I don't see them as unbeatable.
That which is made can be unmade, I don't care WHAT it is.

If we strategize correctly we will figure out how to leech more & more of that power out of their hands.
We will stack that deck more our way.
And we'll beat them at their own game.

All the real work goes into the strategy.
The actual practice is just following the groove already set.
Think of what WILL be a little more than what IS.
John Lucas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnlucas (Reply #84)

Sun Aug 31, 2014, 06:24 PM

93. I mean

You do realize these people control the majority of the wealth, right? And that it would be impossible to outrich them? I honestly don't know where to begin with your nonsense because the whole thing is wrong on every level possible, it literally has not a single good point in it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlindTiresias (Reply #93)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 09:51 AM

95. Well said

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 02:42 PM

98. Has Spontaneous Revolution Ever Broken Out?

I hate to put air in the windbags of any the arrogant (usually white male) elitists who screech on about the need for "Leadership". (Usually proposing that they or their cronies be in charge).

But if you do take a look at history and what people actually do, revolution is often guided in some way. Many factors go into it. There are leaders and interests - intellectual as well as political. The "groundswell" isn't spontaneous at all.

One thing the leaders have to do is understand and work with the actual needs and aspirations of their followers and realize that, while leadership might be necessary, "political will" isn't merely imposed from above. One of the things that killed the Oakland Occupy movement was the way multiple "leaders" tried to hijack it for their own revolutions. First there were the people who kept trying to provoke the police to turn it into an anti-police revolution. Then there were the people who kept dragging us down to the Port of Oakland to support a labor strike there. Then it merged with some International worker's holiday and somehow became about Immigration issues.

All of these splinter issues were important domestic policy matters in the U.S., and I don't want to downplay them. But people had come out on the streets because of the financial meltdown and mortgage problems - and fear of losing their housing had raised the visibility of the homelessness problem. These problems had given the movement enough *focus* to get people out on the street. But then the "leaders" with the bullhorns failed to acknowledge and attend to these problems. Instead they said: "Hey, can I borrow you crowd of people for this Revolution over here while we haven't actually done anything about YOUR problem yet?"

That's what dispersed the Occupy crowds. That's why the Revolution failed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Sep 1, 2014, 06:09 PM

102. a revolution needs a positive objective. more than one is good.

 

something like....all americans are entitled to enough housing, food, water, and basic medical care to live comfortably.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 02:57 PM

114. I have been a saboteur in enemy territory my whole life

I think that is a quote from Ralph Ellison's The Invisible Man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread