If there was a revolution tomorrow, what would you do? Would you fight for the status quo/global regime? Would you fight with the revolutionaries to regain economic sovereignty, a chance for real change with national interest at the heart? Would you sit on the fence, wait to see who looks like they are going to win and then join in? Or do you just deal with the circumstance and choices of whomever is in charge and call it a life?
I know there is a large older demographic on PF, and that you made your fortune when America was doing good and don't want to lose your comfortable lifestyle. This is understandable. This is more of just a curiosity thing. Gauge responses. Myself, I would prefer to get genuine America 1st rightist and leftists in control to work out problems, verses praying people who see the world as one will fix stuff, when they repeat constantly Americans "have enough already". I myself lean more towards the capitalist side, even though I'm still just a worker. I haven't given up hope of becoming more, and don't want to see America destroyed economically before I get a chance to realize it.
Thanks for responding you 2. I genuinely think Americans have zero representation in Washington, unless subjects like "gay marriage" are truly that important to you. I also truly believe that globalists set it up how they have because they know true revolt can't be fought unless money is on the side of the revolution, so elite leftists get whatever they want, elite rightists get what they want, and the rest of us are stuck with the crap of both of their ideals and the benefits of neither. I'd rather have people in charge of America who make their money here, and can't simply move to their villa in France if crap hits the fan. I see the need for nations to be friends, but destroying the ones with more for the sake of your own pocket, or to benefit those with less, the two faces of globalism, is just as wrong as robbing someone with more to give it to a bum on an individual basis. Even if you can justify it because you are making a healthy profit on the redistribution.
One of my friends in the military brought that up as would be the decision of most. He said basically revolutions don't happen unless people are starving as a whole. Very hard to orchestrate. He is more of a fan of the coup, and believes the majority of Americans would just fallow the law of whomever is in charge.
I think something that is important for you to appreciate is that, if set up all your views as a party plank, the majority of Americans are simply not going to agree with at least one of your views. So the sort of revolution you'd support would be a realtive small cell trying to overthrow the government through violence. So not only are you likely to lose horribly, but perhaps more importantly if you give the people the freedom of choice...they'll just vote you out immediately. And if you're looking to try and be military tyrants well...sic semper tyrannis and all that. If you did have a strong majority on your side, than you wouldn't need a violent revolution. So you don't need to go on a shooting spree in DC. Your problem is with your neighbors who vote and think of themselves as citizens of the world.
Ahhh...but the majority of Americans don't feel represented by either party, while the majority of Americans are against globalism(outsourcing/free trade,etc.). 2 things kept the global regime in power for decades. A high standard of living, and no common denominator to make a common evil to all. Without those 2 things, upheaval is inevitable. There were unsuccessful pushes before the original revolution ever took off as well. One thing is for certain, my perspective is growing in leaps and bounds. The brainwashed are disappearing left and right.
Hmmmm While it's very unlikely an indiviual would be in perfect lockstep with any party outside of the Theocracy or something, I believe most Americancs are still registered for one of the big two. I suppose it depends exactly what you put under "globalism". However I don't think many Americans look to North Korea as a role model. Also outsourcing is great as long as unemployment is low. Why would you want to have a crappy on an assembly line when you could instead be the boss of a bunch of shoeless asians doing the work? But you are right in that if unemployment rises than you're actually losing jobs as opposed to upgrading them. Regardless, as times change so do the big two parties. Obama for example is trying to inflate the dollar until American workers start becoming cheap. Not what I would have done, but it serves as an example. And if anything Libertarians seem to be the group that's growing among the independents. And they're vastly more in favor of outsourcing and free trade than either of the big two.
Libertarian, for the most part, is an extremely loose term. Look at the PF libertarian group. As many collectivists as free marketeers. As many crony capitalists as market socialists. Most people either like libertarianism because of the removal of the state on social issues, or because they think somehow they are fighting the current economic problems. As soon as they realize by supporting libertarianism they are in effect pushing for globalism, which is the bridge to world government, they will quickly change their tune. Like socialism is the bridge to communism, globalism is the bridge to one world. People don't feel represented when their capital is a few thousand miles away. Just wait 'til they find out it's 20 thousand miles away.
I would most likely remain on the sidelines, defending my family and property from the irrational mob and its misdirected, incoherent populist rage. As it stands, the vast majority of Americans are too base and ignorant to effectuate a morally righteous and intellectually justified revolution against our government. It would likely descend into chaos and amoral barbarism, with a neo-marxist government led by despotic populist demagogs arising from ashes.
I disagree. I think those who make up the best and brightest of the working poor through middle class would be the ones, if things get any worse, who want more enough to fight and actually have the get-up-and-go to do it. The "wanna be" Marxists don't have the resolve in America to do more than riot and/or protest for a few days. Gays, hippies and feminists aren't going to kill anything. The "lazy Marxists" are those the government would FORCE to fight for the global regime. Mainly the college ones, but still. Not very scary.
Regardless, I do not think a revolution is warranted at this point. All of our problems could be easily fixed by employing democracy.
Remember y'all, sometimes standing on the sidelines simply isn't an option. If there is a major push to regain national sovereignty, the globalists will show their true colors and be ruthless. Expect foreign troops who will see you as bugs helping them. When the choice is helping your countrymen fight, or watching foreigners kill them, you'll know what to do. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnGpwNmF430"]The Patriot Mel Gibsons son dies - YouTube[/ame]
If foreign troops step onto our soil, you better believe I'll revolt. It all depends on the circumstances of the revolt. Generally speaking, though, I would remain on the sidelines.
Some folks around here have taken to referring to themselves as "big L" or "small l" libertarians. As, in the US, there is an actual Libertarian party with some size and influence, and their beliefs are comparatively documented on their website. Those would be big L Libertarians. Small l seems to be more popular as it retains that "nobody has any idea what we're actually for or what we'd do, but we're sure it'd be awesome!" mystique that utopists like to cling to. I highly encourage you to make a thread specifically calling libertarians out on this issue in order to quickly change their tune, be sure to put libertarian in the title so some of them will notice it.
Yea, ya know, democracy should really be given a chance in this country. But the right has built in a million protections against 'mob' rule. I don't know if the American people can get any stupider.
I'd consider anyone who would attack our government as a threat and I'd do what I must to defend against them. We have non violent means of bringing change to our country. And because of that I could never support a violent uprising. Even if the group offers things that I agree with.
I can see a point where the government is simply a tool of six or eight elite boardrooms (if we haven't already). At that point I might be ready to revolt in a non-pacifistic way.
I'd consider a violent uprising in the event that we got something like military Junta making a power grab or something like that. But I think that would be obvious, and we aren't anywhere near there yet. However I contend that we ought to maintain our second amendment rights so nobody gets any bright ideas. Obviously a rifle isn't going to stop a tank or jet fighter. But millions with rifles would be able to completely devestate anything resembling a supply line. I think the extent to which the government is a tool of boardrooms is roughly equal to the extent to which Americans vote for the guy who airs the most commercials on the most popular shows. Sadly, that extent is pretty far already. But I blame the voters not the boardrooms. ...though I suppose maybe what most Americans really want are good TV shows, and by basing their voting habits on commercials I suppose that helps ensure dollars for the best shows. So maybe in a dysfunctional way the system works.
America and the United States Govt. are two different things. Violence isn't necessary to bring down the US Govt. In fact violence would be counterproductive. The US Govt. has internal inconsistencies and flaws that can be exploited. Besides, I can't think of a single democracy in all of recorded history that hasn't ultimately committed suicide. No polity is forever.
