Posted: 8/30/2002 3:14:11 PM EDT
|
Does anyone think that a revolution will be the only way to change this country? NO! You can't take 33% of my paycheck anymore(considering there was a time we didn't even have a federal income tax), or tax my overtime or unemployment. NO! You can no longer give money to other nations when we need it ourselves. NO! All of these Enron guys are not getting off scot-free. NO! We do not need the approval of our allies to invade a rougue nation making chemical and biological weapons. NO! The U.N. will never have command of U.S. troops. Just to make common sense decisions like these? It just pisses me off. |
|
The central system currently in place is ENTIRELY immune to a Revolution of any kind. The protections afforded the government against foreign attack apply equally to crushing a brave handful of souls who think they are tough with a few AR15's. Revolution was viable when "government" and "people" ere a synonym. Back in the 18th, up to the mid 19th centuries. But anymore, they are 2 seperate, identifiable things, only one of which has all the good resistance tools. And i'll give ya a hint. If you think your AR is enough, you'll be the first to be buried. |
|
Quoted: The central system currently in place is ENTIRELY immune to a Revolution of any kind. The protections afforded the government against foreign attack apply equally to crushing a brave handful of souls who think they are tough with a few AR15's. Amen. We would not be revolutionaries or freedom fighters. We would be right wing gun nuts. And the news has been showing a lot lately about how we are to be treated. I think the greatest real hope is the Free State Project. But the biggest problem is to get all these independent freedom minded people to agree on one place and then get everyone to move there. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: The central system currently in place is ENTIRELY immune to a Revolution of any kind. The protections afforded the government against foreign attack apply equally to crushing a brave handful of souls who think they are tough with a few AR15's. Amen. We would not be revolutionaries or freedom fighters. We would be right wing gun nuts. And the news has been showing a lot lately about how we are to be treated. I think the greatest real hope is the Free State Project. But the biggest problem is to get all these independent freedom minded people to agree on one place and then get everyone to move there. I don't agree because of two factors. The military is made up of people, brothers, sons, uncles, cousins and they would eventually be forced to choose. Second. The American Revolution was sparked by guerilla tactics committed by a few patriot revolutionaries. This forced King George's hand and he cracked down on the general population. The crackdown caused unrest with the people who were originally apathetic. Once they were forced into a corner, they had to fight because British soldiers and martial law were creating a highly repressive environment. The general populace was sucked into a larger conflict that started as "terrorist acts". |
|
Post from ratters - But the biggest problem is to get all these independent freedom minded people to agree on one place and then get everyone to move there. I'm sorry, but they must have taken the vote while you were out of the room. It's Texas. Yesiree! That's right, Texas. Now when are y'all coming? That's all we want to know. Eric The(YeeeHaaawww!)Hun[>]:)] |
|
Quoted: [b]I don't agree because of two factors. The military is made up of people, brothers, sons, uncles, cousins and they would eventually be forced to choose.[/b] Who are subject to extrordinary punishment for "not following orders". [b]Second. The American Revolution...[/b] At this point, I realized everything that was about to follow was going to be totally irrelevant to the topic of Revolution in Color Television and SUV America... But what the hell. I'll dance. [b]was sparked by guerilla tactics committed by a few patriot revolutionaries. This forced King George's hand and he cracked down on the general population. The crackdown caused unrest with the people who were originally apathetic. Once they were forced into a corner, they had to fight because British soldiers and martial law were creating a highly repressive environment. The general populace was sucked into a larger conflict that started as "terrorist acts".[/b] They are smarter than that. Our opressors will gain compliance with comfort and ease rather than blows and bloodshed. Those who resist will be labled "crazy right wing so-and-so's", and summarily crushed. We wouldn't even win in the court of public opinion. We might garner the attention of the masses, but only until 8:00, because that's when "The West Wing" is on... [rolleyes] |
|
Quoted: They are smarter than that. Our opressors will gain compliance with comfort and ease rather than blows and bloodshed. Those who resist will be labled "crazy right wing so-and-so's", and summarily crushed. We wouldn't even win in the court of public opinion. We might garner the attention of the masses, but only until 8:00, because that's when "The West Wing" is on... [rolleyes] Human nature has not changed since 1774. You are correct, the resistance will initially be labeled crazy right winger terrorists. But that is not where it stops. Eventually the repression in the name of security will become so great that the apathetic will similarly be forced into action out of their even lower pain thresholds. As much as the masses whine today about things, I can only imagine when a military crackdown comes rolling into the suburbs where there was previously no acts of terrorism. The wildcard will be the length and severity of military crackdowns/searches/etc... The harder scenario would be roving units who hit suburbia, but then move on. It's discomforting for a short time, but they soon forget. The easier scenario will be in areas where military rule is sustained for longer periods and the masses are subject to severe restrictions. If you need a point of reference, look no further than the five counties in northern Ireland. |
|
Quoted: Post from ratters - But the biggest problem is to get all these independent freedom minded people to agree on one place and then get everyone to move there. I'm sorry, but they must have taken the vote while you were out of the room. It's Texas. Yesiree! That's right, Texas. Now when are y'all coming? That's all we want to know. Eric The(YeeeHaaawww!)Hun[>]:)] I think Texas was one of the front runners due to the fact that it supposedly has a secession clause in it's constitution??? I would prefer some place less humid, but whatcha gonna do. Ben- The govt. has use of the media today to ostracize us as they already have done pretty much. Plus all the kids are getting brainwashed in school that govt. is good, capitalism just destroys the world. I'm a teacher, I have seen it. People and society are different now. McUzi has it spot on that the govt. isn't going to come down hard on most Americans. The soccer moms will be just as happy as anyone to see the blood of revolutionaries flow. Now what about Oregon? It's relatively temperate and has costal access. Too many hippies though, I guess. |
|
MaQZ this is one time I'm in agreement with you. The roundup in Houston last weekend is the straw that broke my camel's back. If the local LE guys on the ground can't sort thru that bit of stupidity and stop it there's NO HOPE they won't shoot innocent civilians if ordered. Arock |
|
Ratters, I think you and McU severely underestimate the quiet, almost forgotten masses living in the expansive midwest and plains. I grew up in a county where probably every single able bodied male would fight and die if some government agency rolled in to disarm them by force. Those good ol' boys are quiet, but they are anything but pushovers. There really are places left in the USA where the television is regarded as the idiot box and conservative values reign supreme. That is why the liberal media is trying to wage the war in an effort to capture the minds of those people. But they don't buy it. I work in county government where entire county commissions are gun toting rednecks who would just as soon shoot a blue helmet than cooperate. It is dangerous for the coastal, liberal media to ignore this fact and underestimate us hillbillies. We aren't going out to look for the fight, but we will stand and hold our ground if you try to bring one to us. Just remember that there's a lot of land with a lot of gun owners in between Maryland and Kalifornia. EDITED TO ADD: You guys talk like you are already defeated! If all is lost, then why don't you just head down to the local precinct and turn over your firearms? Look alive soldiers! |
|
Which revolution are we talking about? A) The one the reparations bunch is asking for? You know, land and money in "payment" for slavery? If they don't get it, they are going to "revolt". B) The one where the Hispanic population is going to throw the Anglos out of the Southwest? According to them, all that is their land after all. C) Or the one being discussed here, where the "gun nuts" plan to have their rights restored by violent action. As this country continues to fracture along lines of special interests, a civil war is more likely. Expect it occur along the lines of race. Outside foreign parties might work within the ranks of one or more of the groups to bring this about. The Chinese supplying weapons and support to the Hispanic elements, as one example. When this takes place, look for UN troops to be brought in as "peacekeeping" elements. At that time, the "United" States will be finished both as a country and world power. The replacement world powers will be China in the Pacific Rim and the European Union, centered around Germany, in Europe. Maybe I am wrong, but it will be only the details, not the concept. |
|
Quoted: Ratters, I think you and McU severely underestimate the quiet, almost forgotten masses living in the expansive midwest and plains. I grew up in a county where probably every single able bodied male would fight and die if some government agency rolled in to disarm them by force. Those good ol' boys are quiet, but they are anything but pushovers. There really are places left in the USA where the television is regarded as the idiot box and conservative values reign supreme. That is why the liberal media is trying to wage the war in an effort to capture the minds of those people. But they don't buy it. I work in county government where entire county commissions are gun toting rednecks who would just as soon shoot a blue helmet than cooperate. It is dangerous for the coastal, liberal media to ignore this fact and underestimate us hillbillies. We aren't going out to look for the fight, but we will stand and hold our ground if you try to bring one to us. Just remember that there's a lot of land with a lot of gun owners in between Maryland and Kalifornia. EDITED TO ADD: You guys talk like you are already defeated! If all is lost, then why don't you just head down to the local precinct and turn over your firearms? Look alive soldiers! Yep, you make a valid point. But it misses one significant detail. By the year 2009, the white majority you speak of will be a minority. Further, these "good ol' boys" are getting older by the day, and the availability of abortion is reducing the number of replacements daily. Demographics are going to be the undoing of your scenario. There may be a sufficient force available to hold on to a portion of the former country, but the sheer numbers of the other groups will overwhelm whatever "fierceness" advantage you put forth. Certainly they will be able to carve out at least some of their respective goals. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The central system currently in place is ENTIRELY immune to a Revolution of any kind. The protections afforded the government against foreign attack apply equally to crushing a brave handful of souls who think they are tough with a few AR15's. Amen. We would not be revolutionaries or freedom fighters. We would be right wing gun nuts. And the news has been showing a lot lately about how we are to be treated. I think the greatest real hope is the Free State Project. But the biggest problem is to get all these independent freedom minded people to agree on one place and then get everyone to move there. I don't agree because of two factors. The military is made up of people, brothers, sons, uncles, cousins and they would eventually be forced to choose. Second. The American Revolution was sparked by guerilla tactics committed by a few patriot revolutionaries. This forced King George's hand and he cracked down on the general population. The crackdown caused unrest with the people who were originally apathetic. Once they were forced into a corner, they had to fight because British soldiers and martial law were creating a highly repressive environment. The general populace was sucked into a larger conflict that started as "terrorist acts". Brother against brother? I wonder where that has happened before? Hmmmmmmm............... AB |
|
BenDover. This is true, and no one is contending this. The mid-west, the south, much of the west... The majority body of gun owners. The question was revoloution. If you examine the goings on in the Balkans and the already cited Ireland (To use 2 recent examples), inner strife and political division as a facillitator of revolution never leads to a conclusive end. It leads to a few blown up Federal buildings, many dead and arrested "Patriots", and a Peace Treaty in the end where the "revolutionaries" lay down their arms in exchange for not getting their asses kicked anymore. With Federal Governments being established, and armed, it's impossible anymore. This isn't the days of the muskets and the "able bodied" male militia. The government is it's own animal as the founders lamented against, and to try and fight it is like sending a toddler with a fork to fight a Grizzly bear. The only recent exception to this is Nicaragua, but I don't think even the most idealist "freedom fighter" would use a 3rd world fruit producer as a model to base a fight against the worlds stalwart global super power. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Ratters, I think you and McU severely underestimate the quiet, almost forgotten masses living in the expansive midwest and plains. I grew up in a county where probably every single able bodied male would fight and die if some government agency rolled in to disarm them by force. Those good ol' boys are quiet, but they are anything but pushovers. There really are places left in the USA where the television is regarded as the idiot box and conservative values reign supreme. That is why the liberal media is trying to wage the war in an effort to capture the minds of those people. But they don't buy it. I work in county government where entire county commissions are gun toting rednecks who would just as soon shoot a blue helmet than cooperate. It is dangerous for the coastal, liberal media to ignore this fact and underestimate us hillbillies. We aren't going out to look for the fight, but we will stand and hold our ground if you try to bring one to us. Just remember that there's a lot of land with a lot of gun owners in between Maryland and Kalifornia. EDITED TO ADD: You guys talk like you are already defeated! If all is lost, then why don't you just head down to the local precinct and turn over your firearms? Look alive soldiers! Yep, you make a valid point. But it misses one significant detail. By the year 2009, the white majority you speak of will be a minority. Further, these "good ol' boys" are getting older by the day, and the availability of abortion is reducing the number of replacements daily. Demographics are going to be the undoing of your scenario. There may be a sufficient force available to hold on to a portion of the former country, but the sheer numbers of the other groups will overwhelm whatever "fierceness" advantage you put forth. Certainly they will be able to carve out at least some of their respective goals. Sorry to butt in, but it's likely that the largest portion on the "other groups" you mentioned will not be active combatants, being brainwashed by public schools and all. They may be on the side of the JBTs, but it's unlikely they would get involved unless forced to. |
|
... All it would take is one, relatively small catastrophe in this country to stir the now quiet hornets nest. ... One city without water or power for an extended period, true economic collapse, a medical plague or so on. ... Another event that would awaken the giant would be an outright ban on weapons via some martial law. ... There are a lot of fed up citizens that have had it with the rape of the US Constitution and its intent. ... The other day it was either [b]McUzi[/b] or [b]Imbroglio[/b] (I forgot) that turned me onto a good read for you all; - [i]Patriots: Surviving the Coming Collapse[/i] - Rawles James Wesley. So far this is a good read. ... Bottom line is most of us are [i]just comfortable enough[/i] in the "boiling pot of water" with our SUVs, big screens and morning cappuccino to revolt. ... When (not if) something bad happens to America, the People will rise again. For now it's suicide to organize any larger than neighbors, families, co-workers and friends do. Although it is can be viewed as sedition by politicians we know better: It's done to preserve the [b]US Constitution[/b]. ... [b]God[/b] be with us. |
|
Quoted: BenDover. This is true, and no one is contending this. The mid-west, the south, much of the west... The majority body of gun owners. The question was revoloution. If you examine the goings on in the Balkans and the already cited Ireland (To use 2 recent examples), inner strife and political division as a facillitator of revolution never leads to a conclusive end. It leads to a few blown up Federal buildings, many dead and arrested "Patriots", and a Peace Treaty in the end where the "revolutionaries" lay down their arms in exchange for not getting their asses kicked anymore. With Federal Governments being established, and armed, it's impossible anymore. This isn't the days of the muskets and the "able bodied" male militia. The government is it's own animal as the founders lamented against, and to try and fight it is like sending a toddler with a fork to fight a Grizzly bear. The only recent exception to this is Nicaragua, but I don't think even the most idealist "freedom fighter" would use a 3rd world fruit producer as a model to base a fight against the worlds stalwart global super power. DarkFuture brought the valid point into the discussion that there are several 'revolutions' brewing. In your example of the Balkans, the iron fisted rule of Tito eventually degenerated into ethnic infighting. Now, where there was one unified country ruled by a strong central government, there are several ethnic states. A revolution would certainly degenerate into a civil war, where brothers fought against brothers and races against races. You have to consider that the federal government is relatively small in manpower compared with the combined state, county, and municipal governments. The only strength the federal government has is the key to the bank vault. If the money stops flowing, so does their relative ability to fund an extended campaign. The civil war would be largely waged in metropolitan areas, which are the centers of commerce and ultimately taxation. As each metro area falls under the force of one or another faction, the financial resources will be redirected. It's pretty hard to sustain a large scale, centrally coordinated military campaign at the federal level when the money runs low. Look at the Russian Army with regard to Chechnya. If a soldier isn't getting paid, their politics go on the auction block as loyalties are redefined. I said before, the wildcard will be the intensity and length of crackdowns. The Fed only has enough money to sustain itself at full bloat for a finite period of time. When the regionalized cracks start to chip away at the cash flow, the cash dries up even faster. There are many dynamics here to take into consideration, and armed conflict isn't the only or even the primary means of resistance. I see the economic jihad some minority groups are waging right now in my own city. This town is financially crippled from economic boycotts. What I don't believe is that truckloads of Black Panthers will decide to load up and roll into the soy bean fields to fight against the farmers. Ultimately, multiple conflicts raging in different regions will probably be resolved in a coalition of regional governments similar to your Balkans example. I have significant doubt that should that be the case, the Fed will be preserved as it is today. |
|
Quoted: Sorry to butt in, but it's likely that the largest portion on the "other groups" you mentioned will not be active combatants, being brainwashed by public schools and all. They may be on the side of the JBTs, but it's unlikely they would get involved unless forced to. Really? [url]http://www.webspawner.com/users/nnae/[/url] REFERENDUM ISSUES 1. I believe that the Provisional Government should continue to help create a powerful movement to win Reparations for Afrikan people in the United States of America for slavery and racial discrimination! Yes_____ No_____ 2. I believe that the Provisional Government should continue developing and implementing an independent Foreign Policy and gain recognition by the United Nations! Yes_____ No_____ 3. I believe that the Provisional Government should continue to work to Free All New Afrikan Political Prisoners and Prisoners of War! Yes_____ No_____ [url]http://www.asetbooks.com/Us/Nationhood/RNA/Philosophy.html[/url] The RNA asserts that Black People in Amerikkka are not legally U.S. citizens. History is quite clear on this point. In 1865, the 13th Amendment [to the U.S. Constitution] recognized the freedom of the New Afrikan (Black People) and left Us as an unattached political entity rightfully settled on land that was claimed by the U.S. Along with freedom, according to international law, came four choices as to what Our political destiny would be. Number one, if We wanted to, We could seek admission to citizenship in the Amerikkkan community. Number two, if We so desired and if We could afford to, We could return home to Afrika. Number three, if We so desired, We could emigrate to (re-locate in) another country where We preferred to live if that country did not object. And, number four, if We so desired, We could and had a right to set up an independent state [Nation] of Our own, and could legally do so on land claimed by the United States. We had the right to do so because We had lived here long enough, worked here long enough and fought here long enough to satisfy the requirements laid out by international law. Additionally, establishing an independent nation where We were was Our most logical choice because (1) We had experienced self-government in this land before, (2) We could not trust Our welfare and government to the people who had enslaved Us and dreadfully exploited Us, and (3) most New Afrikans [Black People] were unwilling and/or unable as a practical matter to emigrate to another land or return to Afrika. Land in this country where the ex-slave had already contributed his labor and blood, all as a result of wrongful kidnapping, wrongful transport and wrongful exploitation was the only logical and practical option left [url]http://www.pvbr.com/Issue_1/aztlan.htm[/url] [img]http://www.pvbr.com/Graphics/AZTLANMAP.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.diversityalliance.org/docs/Chang-aztlan.html[/url] A result of all that is the failure by Chicanos to be fully assimilated into the larger American society and culture. As Earl Shorris, author of Latinos: A Biography of the People, observed: "Latinos have been more resistant to the melting pot than any other group. Their entry en masse into the United States will test the limits of the American experiment...."15 The continuous influx of Mexican immigrants into the United States serve to continuously renew Chicano culture so that their sense of separateness will probably continue "far into the future...." [url]http://clnet.ucr.edu/research/docs/struggle/aztlan.htm[/url] We are free and sovereign to determine those tasks which are justly called for by our house, our land, the sweat of our brows, and by our hearts. Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops and not to the foreign Europeans. We do not recognize capricious frontiers on the bronze continent Raving of fringe groups? Perhaps. I choose to see it otherwise. [img]http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/sadness.gif[/img] |
|
BenDover- I am not going to beak down posts word by word anymore, because they always decay into incohearent rambles on both sides, and the core issue is invariably lost. Here's my basic point. Hypothesis is always fun to play around with, because it's of no consequence. But we have to take a realistic, practical of [b]WHAT'S GOING ON[/b] in order to effect a valid plan. The tennants of your theory of "Americans resisting" rests on a certain level of recalcitrance towards the government, the consequence of which is the loss of everything they hold dear. Their jobs, houses, things. Even families. Again. We are talking "Revolution". Revolution is concerted. Not simple inner-conflict, which is spontaneous. Americans, who since day one have been indoctrinated that your worth as a human is determined by your "things" won't be willing to give up their comforts for the sake of a idealogical fight. Of course, some will. But not enough to make a difference, and that's my entire point. At that level, it isn't a revolution, as much as it is "faction control" |
|
I understand McU. And I don't COMPLETELY disagree with you. In my opinion, we haven't exhausted the capabilities of the original framework established by the founders. Politicians can be replaced and entire agendas be disrupted. We have an opportunity twice a year as the polls are open every March and November. Last November, my county had a dismal 22% voter turnout. The solution is to educate people on a local level and increase voter turnout. I am a contributor to several grassroots newsletters and on the larger scale, I have volunteered to become a regional coordinator for the Liberty Committee (Ron Paul - another great Texan). The founding fathers set it up for us to revolt in mass without firing a single shot. My revolution is waged by educating and winning over the minds of the apathetic, ignorant fence sitters. Violence will always be the ultimate, final resort. No, we aren't going to instantly change the Federal Government and reverse some ignorant laws and trends. But the electorate is local. I am local. Get my drift? |
|
Being old enough to have lived thru a time when the idea of revolution was at least spoken openly, the possibility of it happening today is so remote as to be amusing. I have some history. I was one of the folks who took over the Texas State Capitol in 1970. There was a protest downtown, the place got emptied with a bomb threat, everybody including the cops ran out and it was a breeze to walk in and chain the doors. It was interesting watching the cops outside that didn't want to shoot up the capitol building. We held it for a couple of hours then made our way out thru one of the tunnels. Back then there were many semi-DISorganized groups all over the country. We had popular support in a number of areas. NOTHING came of it. Few banks got taken down, few folks got shot but there wasn't any bigger picture. There's nothing of the sort in the air today. No rallying call. No chance of popular support. And except for the tiny number of people like a FEW here, nobody willing to take a chance. Read it and weep. |
|
We have a revolution in this country every four years (and to a lesser degree, every 2 yrs), it's called the election. It may not go the way we want it, but it's what those patriots you spoke of earlier gave us. They also gave us the Constitution. We don't like people screwing with the 2nd amend., we probably shouldn't screw with the Articles that give us our leadership. You speak of the quiet masses. As long as their taxes don't go up, they'll sit on their asses like they've always done. Only 3% of the people stood up in the 1770's. Do you think 3% could pull it off today? At what point is enough,enough.Many of us think the things going on in Cal. and other places is terrible. How many are kissing their families goodbye, grabbing their rifles, going to the hot spots and saying "Let's get it on?" You speak of outlasting the government. I don't see that as a realistic option. Remember, the patriots took on the Brits with "weapons of the day", They had muskets, cannon, and ships. We had muskets, cannon, and ships. They had more, but the same type of weaponry. Let's see now, I've got a couple of rifles and some ammo. They've got tanks, airsupport, arty, satellites, thermal imaging, eavesdropping, a huge navy, and a slew of other goodies. I seem to be fresh out of cruise missiles. Ya,ya,ya the V.C. didn't have a pot to piss in and look how that turned out. Well they had the NVA, some countries to go and hide in and 2 super powers backing them. What do we have? The will of the people? The media has made us the enemy. The will of the people would be for us to disappear, not the current govt. There will be those from "my cold, dead hands" types out there. The "enemy" won't come knockin' when it's convenient for you. They'll kick down the door at 3a.m. or while you're at the dinner table with your family. And they'll waste anything that moves. The smart move would be to cover the kids if possible and be VERY compliant.I don't want "cold, dead kids". There will be people toughing it out in groups, like Valley Forge, but times have changed. In 1775 they used to meet in secret at places like the Green Dragon, now people talk of this on the world wide web. You don't think the government has already read this thread? We've got the Fatherland Security Act now, they can do what ever they want, and the people will let them. |
|
I haven't read but half this thread yet. Whoever the winning side is MUST have the superior propaganda network. It is absolutely impossible to dominate a conflict such as this if one does not demonize the enemy and propularize your side at an intensity that is superior to the enemy's effort do do the same to you. I have read that the most basic manner to meet enemy propaganda is to spray paint a line through it, and next to it, spray paint [red][size=5][b]LIES[/b][/size=5][/red] Thus, you open the door for the people to question what they are being told. |
|
Quoted: The media has made us the enemy. And this is the core problem that would have to be solved before any hope of success could be obtained. What do you really think Rush, Sean Hannity, O'Reilly, or even Mr. La Pierre would have to say about a "pro-gun patriot revolution"? (Trust me here: it wouldn't be called that!) And remember, these are the people who we like to pretend are on OUR side! And these are the "right-wing minority"! If someone has some idea of where the media support might come from, I'd be interested to hear it. But, no, most folks will grudgingly submit to whatever laws are passed, a few will try to hide the banned items, and a tiny group would fight, only to be branded "terrorists" and killed. Sad to say, that's probably true these days. Most of the people alive today who believe in any kind of "cause" are liberals. Most everyone else is just concerned with themselves. -Troy |
|
[>(] weeping, weeping [>(] Its true. We are outgunned, outmanned, and outspent. Should we seek refuge? Hide? Hope to avoid detection by the technomonstrosity we currently communicate through? I for one will stand to say its failure to my country to let it happen. But Revolution? not a chance. I have no Idea how it will come to pass. I am in one of the places where the Constitution has already been infringed and the politicians have literally and openly commited treason against the law of the land. Should we march on the Capital? Oust the traitors? Who will be with me? McUzi is right. I would be nearly alone. I would be jailed, and accused, and prosecuted out of existance, and the local sheeple would say "what a nut". Rebellion is a wonderful concept. The reality is it would yeild ostracism, and loss of all I have worked for. We need to oppose through the same incrementalism that is being used against us and the Constitution we believe in. Membership in Conservative and Constitution supporting PACs, NRA, ISRA, and indeed, this board, are essential steps. Continued political pressure on the "representatives" of our local districts, and "squeaky wheel" philosophy- hopefully it will lead to not just "grease" but a change of the wheel causing the train to derail... |
|
Quoted: Quoted: The media has made us the enemy. ...Sad to say, that's probably true these days. Most of the people alive today who believe in any kind of "cause" are liberals. Most everyone else is just concerned with themselves. -Troy That's the corner we're painted into... We have the means to at least attempt to enforce our will but we're the CONSERVATIVES... the ones least likely to act for a Cause. That's not what a CONSERVATIVE does. But it is what an activist does. |
|
The French, as the other "super-power" of the day, were critical to the success of the American Revolution. Foreign assistance would be needed again. The idea of overcoming the armed forces and police agencies with a few rifles is far-fetched. As for what would work,well...[devil] Elections will become pointless soon, if they are not already. Immigration, both legal and illegal, coupled with "bread and circuses" will exacerbate the socialist trend. Watch the next election cycles carefully, 02 and 04 will decide the issue IMO. |
|
Those who live in the metropolitan areas have the most pessimistic view. For your encouragement, the FBI estimated if 5% actively resisted the gov, it would fall. the last time I heard, the estimated amount of resisters was about 4%. Then we had 9/11. I think it will be more like a Balkans-type conflict, along regional/racial lines, with various alliances of convenience. The city raised sheeple and the soccermoms will suffer the most. Those of us blessed enough to be out in the open country, will be the fighters. We won't have much choice, it will be fight or die. An economic disruption will likely be the trigger event. I truly hope that I am wrong about this. Revolutions are violent bloody things, and civil wars are anything but. Big city riots are beginning already. (see Cincinnati) All I wanted to do was get old and be bored to death. |
|
Quoted: MaQZ this is one time I'm in agreement with you. The roundup in Houston last weekend is the straw that broke my camel's back. If the local LE guys on the ground can't sort thru that bit of stupidity and stop it there's NO HOPE they won't shoot innocent civilians if ordered. Arock We Veer yust follink ordares. Nuremburg - 1946. Bill |
|
When we are typing on is the best weapon we have. The Internet is the equivalent of a B-52 to Statist propaganda. A Statist does no fear a rifle. They fear the Truth. The more counter intelligance is produced vs their lies. The more they will have to capitulate. Dont think of it in terms of Physical combat, but mental combat. This is why we lost the Cold War. We beat the Soviets, but not marxism. A "Psywar" if you will. Every word is a bullet, Every column a magazine. A book a rifle. E-mailing your local representatives is incoming mortor! ______________________________________________ In physical combat, the greatest threat is from helicopters and APC's. I dont understand why your worried about the navy. Alot of those weapons are designed to break large expensive things. Not a single man and his rifle. They cant send in tanks and drop bombs from aircraft without looking too overzealous or extreme themselves. Not to mention killing their supporting "soccor moms" in collateral damage. Besides, why would our own LE and Military be shooting at us? The very first thing you do in a revolution/rebellion is to acquire weapons. Steal what you need. Anti-tank rockets, Anti-air. Disperse. Snipe, Disperse. During WW2 the Russians were largely ill-equipped against the Germans. The Russians did a lot of their killing by sniping. The French marquee were outgunned, but that did not stop them from harrassing a foe with tanks and airpower. Dont stand out in a street blasting. Snipe/hide/evade/return home.-get arrested [:)] |
|
Quoted: They can't send in tanks and drop bombs from aircraft without looking too overzealous or extreme themselves. Not to mention killing their supporting "soccor moms" in collateral damage. Besides, why would our own LE and Military be shooting at us? One four letter word... WACO. Bring anything to mind??... |
|
Quoted: BenDover- I am not going to beak down posts word by word anymore, because they always decay into incohearent rambles on both sides, and the core issue is invariably lost. Here's my basic point. Hypothesis is always fun to play around with, because it's of no consequence. But we have to take a realistic, practical of [b]WHAT'S GOING ON[/b] in order to effect a valid plan. The tennants of your theory of "Americans resisting" rests on a certain level of recalcitrance towards the government, the consequence of which is the loss of everything they hold dear. Their jobs, houses, things. Even families. Again. We are talking "Revolution". Revolution is concerted. Not simple inner-conflict, which is spontaneous. Americans, who since day one have been indoctrinated that your worth as a human is determined by your "things" won't be willing to give up their comforts for the sake of a idealogical fight. Of course, some will. But not enough to make a difference, and that's my entire point. At that level, it isn't a revolution, as much as it is "faction control" McUzi - I have alway suspicioned that you were purposely playing the fool. You have now confirmed my suspicions. I like what I am reading tonight. Bill |
|
Quoted: Quoted: They can't send in tanks and drop bombs from aircraft without looking too overzealous or extreme themselves. Not to mention killing their supporting "soccor moms" in collateral damage. Besides, why would our own LE and Military be shooting at us? One four letter word... WACO. Bring anything to mind??... Yes, sitting ducks, which I never intend to become. Bill |
|
Quoted: Being old enough to have lived thru a time when the idea of revolution was at least spoken openly, the possibility of it happening today is so remote as to be amusing. I have some history. I was one of the folks who took over the Texas State Capitol in 1970. There was a protest downtown, the place got emptied with a bomb threat, everybody including the cops ran out and it was a breeze to walk in and chain the doors. It was interesting watching the cops outside that didn't want to shoot up the capitol building. We held it for a couple of hours then made our way out thru one of the tunnels. Back then there were many semi-DISorganized groups all over the country. We had popular support in a number of areas. NOTHING came of it. Few banks got taken down, few folks got shot but there wasn't any bigger picture. There's nothing of the sort in the air today. No rallying call. No chance of popular support. And except for the tiny number of people like a FEW here, nobody willing to take a chance. Read it and weep. Arock, I'm not trying to be funny -- are the statute of limitations up, on that neat little escapade? Bill |
|
Yeah. Made certain of that. We of course had nothing to do with the banks etc. The point I am making addresses the fact that there's no focus to drive any large number of people into that kind of activity and anyone who did would be pilloried in ALL the mass media. Gov't controls media by doing things like allowing corporations to own multiple media outlets in the same market. In Dallas one corporation that already owns TV, radio and newspaper was allowed to buy the only OTHER major newspaper. The FCC winked at that one. Now you know a multi-hundred million $ organization is gonna turn right around and bite the hand that just fed it. No tinfoil here, just smart media control on a gross level. I imagine that goes on other places too. And those media are going to paint anyone associated with anti-government as baby-rapin' cretins. So you figure how to get on the good side of those sweetheart business deals. Not enough people are motivated to do ANYTHING about govt today. The only ones who do are protecting the govt tit they're attached to. And those people aren't gonna change anything you'd like. |
|
One idea that I have been struggling with for some time is fact there is no articulated vision for a replacement to the status quo. Revolution (in the polls or the streets) should never be the goal. It's the means to the end, but the end isn't clearly defined. That's where the sectarianism starts to show through the idealism of the various disenchanted factions. I recount the French Revolution wherein the commoners were disenfranchised with the bourgeois. Hordes of peasants stormed the palaces of the nouveau rich with the goal of executing them. When it was all over, thousands were dead, the government was disrupted, and the nation languished in purgatory for many years because nobody had considered the fact that something would be needed to relace the status quo. Whereas, no matter what kind of “distant and strange” government you start with, for example, such a splendid try at “limited government” of a nation as our own Constitution, in time you will always end up with a system something like our present regime (or worse), where the total real tax rate is coasting 50%, where regulation of the activity of citizens now fills a 26-foot shelf of volumes of the Federal Register, and where our federal leaders and legislators are tremblingly near total corruption – while many of them are so morally obtuse as to not even be aware of their wretched condition. The idea of a protective state and state protection of private property is based on a fundamental theoretical error and that this error has had disastrous consequences: the destruction and insecurity of all private property and perpetual war. As soon as you grant the state anything, you have given it everything. There can be no such thing as limited government, because there is no way to control an entity that in principle enjoys a monopoly of power (and can simply expand its own power). Democracies are ruled by a cadre with a very high rate of time preference. They wish always to maximize the immediate return they get from government. (Think pay – and reelection – and pork to assure the latter) The distant future is a time for them when they will all be dead, and few envision their own heirs as being part of the government apparatus in that distant future. Thus NOW is the watchword. What can we get NOW – myself and my family? And the situation is, if anything, worse with the mass of voters. Give us all we can get now, and we don’t care where it comes from. Grab it from those richer folks. The payola (government handouts) flies around. Taxes rise and rise. It's a very difficult problem to tackle and one that will surely dilute the effects of regionalized resistance. The factionalism works against us here as there is no cohesive "goal" other than not liking how things are operating at present. The various revolutionary minded parties all have a different "goal", whereas in 1776, there was a common goal. Today, latinos want their land back, blacks want reparations, gun owners want their RKBA, and so on. The only common threads that will tie all the groups together is the desire for change and the unilateral desire to keep as much material wealth in their pockets as possible. I continue to ponder. |