Once in a blue moon John says something sensible. Since I agree that revolution doesn't depend on rights he will probably withdraw the statement or change it into something else. Revolution happens over loss or lack of rights.
What kind of revolution? If you mean one in which the entire political and governmental system would be uprooted and changed, then no, I don't think that it can be bloodless. I also don't know if that will happen anytime soon. I think that America (like very country) needs a revolution so that corruption cannot settle in too firmly.
Too many anti revolution tools in place, too many sheeple. You really need to be hungry to revolt, peaceful or otherwise. Too much contempt from one side towards the other, the haves would quickly put down any dissent from the have nots.
As said before and seems like lately these days everything I say have said before,Graham Greene's book and movie 'Our Man In Havana', expressed it quite succintly with the police chief in Havana saying to the affect: In the south we have torture. We don't care what the people think so long as they do what we say, and if they don't - we torture. In America you are not allowed to use torture (or weren't then), so to get the people to do what you want you have to control their minds. That is the difference between us and you.
A revolution can happen without violence. Coup D'etat. The internet and the www were that revolution. Things have changed. Sometimes we take it for granted. We are at the threshold of the "information age". Secrets were hard to keep before...now, not so much. Things will continue to change....it is unstoppable. The real question is: Who will ultimately hold the reins of power?
I wish you were correct, but I disagree. I see individual rights disappearing. Want to own a gun? You're a potential enemy of the state. Want to keep the money you yourself earned? You're greedy and selfish. Want to donate money to the "opposition?" You're called out and demonized by the "Dear Leader." Publicly voice opposition to the regime? The propaganda arm (a.k.a. "free press") will mobilize the usefulless idiots to silence you with whatever means they deem necessary.
Good to know. But why? Potential threat? Yes, but only the irresponsible ones. This is a common misconception. Political BS to distract. This has been an ongoing problem for as long as media has been around. It's all about ratings and manipulation.
Anarchy? Do you really want some of the idiots running around in the world to think for themselves? Think about it. If they're allowed to do as they please, they will inevitably effect your life and you will need to respond. You may think you're thinking for yourself but in fact you will have been prompted into doing something to defend yourself. The circle will then be complete. Whether we're fighting against the machine or the individual, they'll be no real living for yourself until the planet's population gets it's head on straight. Can only be done with love. There is no other way. John Lennon had it right (at least in his song). So did Mother Theresa.
Humans don't have to change their nature. Their nature is ever changing, just like everyday life is a change from day to day. The closed minded and/or narrow minded are the only ones who think so. So, I guess I don't have to point out what that says. Hmmm...
On a side note, those who are unable to see a path to peace I have come to associate with the same people who don't understand their own life. Because, if more people truly understood their own life, then they would realize a path to peace, then proceed to make it happen.
Not only would they achieve peace of mind for themselves, but they would be doing the entire world a favor, showing off the fact that they truly do understand that life truly is about other people- love, compassion, forgiveness, tolerance and trust in oneself to discern truth.
I don't know WHY you're unable to see a path to peace, but I know it is solely based on the individual person being completely responsible for their entire life. Those who are not are the ones making the mess of the world. And, don't nit pick that one cannot be responsible for their entire life because they cannot be responsible when a baby. You get the point of the sentence, don't bring in semantics.
Cags - I'm really impressed. I've never seen this side of you and I agree 110%. Understanding through love is the path to peace. When we understand ourselves we begin to love ourselves because we only want to be better. Same with others. Understanding them is the beginning of learning to love them.
Loving ourselves and others leads to a life of less greed and want. Things become less important and people more important. When we know where we've been, we know who we are ane where we are going.
"but I know it is solely based on the individual person being completely responsible for their entire life"
Therein lies the biggest problem we see today. This country is already seeing a revolution, albeit a very slow one, more of an evolution than revolution, to a nanny state paid for by someone else.
The plebes found out long ago that they can vote themselves bread and circuses, that the good Uncle Sam will take care of them from cradle to grave and that revolution is continuing and gaining speed today. There is no recognition that we are responsible for our own lives; the govt. is.
We are in the midst of the biggest ponzi scheme ever perpetrated on the world by our govt. They have already enlisted every worker in the country to pay for the scheme by robbing our retirement fund, they enlist the unborn future generations by spending their income for today's wants and desires, and we now see a large outcry to go after the 1%, whatever that means. It is all being done to pay for those that won't pay for themselves or recognize that they can't have what they can't afford - they obviously can have it by taking it from others. In time it will be realized that this is not the road to peace, but it will take many years and will ruin the country before it is discovered.
I would go so far as to say that when it is understood it will be denied. As long as people can legally (and ethically, under their own twisted concept of ethics) take from one to satisfy another the "revolution" will continue or start all over again.
It can and has to if it has any chance of staying power. A revolution is required but has to be revolution of the mind and spirit. We have to learn to live in a world without violence, and that means removing it from our daily lives.
"Murder the murderer, but you haven't murdered murder"
If we're just going to use the same methods of the aggressors then there's no point in a revolution. It is why the dictatorship of the proletariat is as much of a tyranny as the bourgeoisie.
The REVOLUTION needed here is not political or military: It's attitude.
1. The U.S.A. is the most heavily armed country in the world. WE ARE KILLING EACH OTHER ALL THE TIME! Only countries with active revolutions have higher murder rates than us, which leads us to #2.
2. The real terrorists are not Islamic extremists, but US! Yes, I know we don't fly airplanes into tall buildings, but we live our entire lives in fear of each other here.
3. Many people in this country think that small time theft (shoplifting) is OK. They compare themselves to Robin Hood. If you fall into this crowd, know this: Robin Hood was honest until declared an outlaw (traitor) by the government. He had no choice, but to steal to survive. Shoplifters cause all of us to shop under the constant scrutany of cameras.
4. People hear have their own brand of snobbery with language! No matter where you go in Europe, you can EASILY find someone who speaks English. I have more than once heard people here say that THEIR CHILDREN don't need to learn any other languages.
5. People here always forget the cost to the opposition. We lost several thousand men in Iraq and Afghanistan: they lost tens of thousands (Iraq), and a Hundred Thousand (Afghanistan). Maybe we should have followed the army up with the Peace Corps.
6. Maybe we all should remember the Bible phrase:
Get the plank out of your own eye before taking the splinter from mine.
Though #4 is true because English is now the language of commerce, just as Greek was back in the day, the attitude is wrong. It behooves no one's children to keep them from learning other languages. Once again, this goes back to understanding other cultures and peoples and making a better world.
I'm not sure a revolution can come in America at all. Americans are too divided to unite on what to revolt against. Even the Occupy movement isn't unified in what it is protesting.
Here's how I see it: "Take up arms, ye citizens!" "Hell yeah! I'm mad as hell! I'm not gonna take it anymore! Hand my my gun! Ok. I'm ready for the revolution! Oh wait. I forgot. What are we fighting for again?"
Perhaps the problem is that we don't feel that these issues affect our lives enough to unify us. It's not like the French Revolution where all of the peasantry was starving. Not all of us are starving, and even if we agree with the ideals, we're scared of risking our security to make a stand. I think there's always an issue over what people are actually fighting for.
It's really hard to get excited about a revolution when you're competing with Dancing with the Stars The Bachelorette Jersey Shore Real Housewives of __________________________ And the new and improved Fear Factor
I think, when you look at other so-called revolutions, the element of violence is there to simply facilitate those who have a plan. In most cases, those caught up in the violence really do not have a plan other than to just disrupt the status quo...that is the measure of their results achieved. Once disruption reaches a high enough level, those who would manipute things one way or the other step from behind the curtain and start the wheels turning. As we see in Egypt, sometimes that intent and the outcome are quite far apart. The American Revolution was different in many ways in that it was driven by a mass of people seeking freedom from the oppression of European rulers. That common bond was a focus from the start...freedom and liberty was the desire and the goal. There were really no hidden agendas. A revolt against the current government would offer little in the way of improving people's lives in that the current government has already promised a chicken in every pot. A revolt today would be more likely to come from those who look to the government for everything to realize that the government can no longer afford to give it to them...as in Greece. Our ignorance as a nation shows greatly when we argue over providing things we cannot afford even if we take everyone's money...our spending has reached outrageous proportions and the only answer is to change that...which may cause a revolt or at the very least riots in the streets as well. The politicians of America have put the nation in a terrible position in the name of buying votes...it is a lie we can no longer afford to live. WB
Click on the links above. Iceland have sacked their government, taken over the banks, put the bankers into jail and re-wrote the constitution without shedding a drop of blood. Oh! And they unanimously refused to pay their debt to England and Holland. Informed people can take action for themselves and don't blame anyone for a given situation.
PS: The revolution issue is not just within the USA, it is a global issue.
Elimination of corrupt politicians and replace them with the peoples bureau?
This is still the best system of govt in the whole world. The only problem is the lack of involvement by most Americans. If you do not like the rich politicians we have in office, replace them with poor ones that would change the laws to favor the less fortunate.
Unless we Americans get off our asses and vote, no revolution would correct apathy.
Well, that's for me to know and others to find out at a later time. Nope. No need for that. This isn't the answer either and wouldn't create equality anyways. Not sure what you mean by this- explain? Untrue. America in it's original foundation premise, sure. As it is right now? Wrong. There's a reason for that and the underlying problem is those who are already in office, taking action to ensure that less people actually know and understand the actions of those in office. Meaning, politicians say one thing and do something else, which most of the time, is NOT in the best interest of society. Not exactly what I have in mind and as you described it, it wouldn't work. Oh, and election process is so appealing and fair, right?
Why did Khrushchev come to power after Stalin's death?It makes no sense that on the one hand Josef Stalin was an overarching dictator who controlled every aspect of life in the Soviet Union, he supposedly...