It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The ONLY solution is US Revolution.

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 01:13 PM
a reply to: AphoticJoe

It has often been said "there will be no revolution until the people are starving"

The American Secession from the British Empire might be the only exception.

That is the reason for Bread and Circuses.

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 02:19 PM
The System of the 7 masters should be implemented. it suited the people of Bhakaratini and Aremo X3 and people of the lost continent of Mu and Atlantis for hundreds of thousands of years.

The first step towards this is lowering the income of politicians to that of small banks manager. Read Thiaoouba and you will know the wisdom on how to run a planet properly.

edit on 22-8-2014 by Thiaoouba Prophecy because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 02:19 PM
Sadly, I suspect the evil 9-11 terrorists concluded they could do far more harm to our country by not attacking a joint session of congress. Tom Clancy’s Executive Orders, describes a process to refresh the country, but it required a good man at the right place and time. Good men and women in politics seem absent. We will never see this Tom Clancy book in a movie.

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 04:10 PM

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: AphoticJoe

It has often been said "there will be no revolution until the people are starving"

The American Secession from the British Empire might be the only exception.

That is the reason for Bread and Circuses.

Well stated. I agree.

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 06:04 PM
a reply to: CokeIsNotCool

I completely understand your views.

I believe there is another solution. A far less bloody one.

Dissolve the Union.

Let each state go it alone, if they so choose, join other 'like' states, be they left or right.

Agree to disagree. Peacefully. Get rid of the mechanism of the federal gov't completely. Zero 'federal' laws...of any kind.

This world existed without a League of nations or a U.N.. At least some of the member states in the Union can survive without a federal gov't.

Much preferable over revolution, IMO.

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 06:35 PM
I think people forget the generations of ideologies, infiltration of all walks of life, global networking, ad nauseam, that TPTB have behind them. Please show me a revolution that wasn't funded and/or fomented by TPTB to fulfill an agenda. Also, Ron Paul is as much a part of the system as the next guy imo, just do a little research into him and the connections become clear.

Sadly, I have no solutions of my own to share.

Something to add: This isn't an American problem, it's a global one. The US didn't start it either. It's been around for a long time and governments are just one of the many veils the true PTB hide behind.

edit on 22-8-2014 by WakeUpBeer because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 06:46 PM
a reply to: CokeIsNotCool

A war like this would only bring in full blown tyranny if it were lost. Much worse if it were won as in factionalized nation.

Only solution is to try with all measure to wrestle our country from the hands of the 5th column through the political process. LOL he said as he threw up on the kitchen table and then went out and tossed himself under the grind stone.....the great George Washington Phallic erection as the grate bronze bitch of a whore looked on from many miles away.

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 07:15 PM
This is what resolve looks like in case you're wondering what I mean...

"To write the new constitution, the people of Iceland elected twenty-five citizens from among 522 adults not belonging to any political party but recommended by at least thirty citizens. This document was not the work of a handful of politicians, but was written on the internet. The constituent’s meetings are streamed on-line, and citizens can send their comments and suggestions, witnessing the document as it takes shape."


End of Corruption

"A new collective of leaders will be assembled. Free-thinkers… All walks of Life. This will be accomplished via town hall meetings, and overseen by conferencing in every State. There will be no voter error, chads, no repeat of the past because it's all seen on broadcast. The media will be utilized, and instead of pumping out commercials and game shows, we're going to see resolve "Live." This requires people pay attention. Background checks, drug tests, and evaluations of moral character will apply. This effectively does the trick (an on-going procedure for elections)."

edit on 22-8-2014 by Americanist because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 07:24 PM
Every time I see a call for this kind of change, I shudder in fear of what will come after and who will actually be put into authority over the country. In all of this talk, there is never a discussion about what happens after the dust has settled, no discussion on the cleanup, no discussion about what the general outcome and the kinds of change that people are wanting, or the solutions, both easy and painful that would need to go into effect.

The general population is lazy, fat and in short content with their way of life. Not one of them are willing to step up to the plate, to be a leader, or make the argument that would even get the general public to support such an action. Such actions are doomed to fail from the get go, due to the fact that those who would advocate such actions, while the espouse the founding fathers, fail to realize that the actions that the founding fathers took, did so with certain ideas behind it.

The first idea, is that they were willing to stand up and lead, not sit back and let someone else lead, but lead from the front. They were leaders, and people of learning first and foremost. The Declaration of Independence was more than a document to King George III and the parliament of England, but also a document to explain to the known world and the European powers, why an illegal action was perfectly legal. It outline in English and language so plain, the arguments could not be refuted. That any legal minds who were to read such, could say yes the colonies had a valid complaint and that the United Kingdom was in the wrong.

Even in the history of the USA, the protests of the past era, such as the civil rights movement, there was a leader, who spoke with one voice for all of those who followed, whose goals were something simple that it hit the majority of the country. Those who would throw the first punch, often lose the argument and support from the very people they need.

Take what is going on in Ferguson, if they did not loot and riot, then the general public, those who are not in that area, would have more concern and the demands for justice would be more unanimous. But as those who are calling for such, within their ranks are calling for more violent extremes and it is making the public pull away.

There are several problems that affect this country, the first is the lack of people willing to vote, to be involved in their civic duty. In the eyes of many, there is nothing in it for them to vote. And often they are uninformed, and failing to do the research to make an decision and be confident in such. The next problem is the very mentality of the general public of not in my back yard. It is never my rep or senator that could be the problem but the other states rep or senator’s problem. And far too often those who get elected, tend to get comfortable in their chairs, and it takes an upset public to get them out of office. If you want change, then there needs to be politicians like in the old days, there for one term and then they move on.

Judges need to be appointed, to be not political what so ever, so they may do their job, not worried about having to run for re-election. Far too often many judges below the federal level, have to go with popular opinion, rather than what is right. Far too often that often leads to an imbalance in the justice system, where sometimes those who are more affluent get off with crimes, where others who do the same crime tend to end up with the book thrown at them.
If you want to change the country, it has to start with the people, and then watch it spread.

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 08:23 PM
I have pondered this issue to a significant degree, and have even come up with a militarily-viable strategic plan for revolution by the US citizenry, but the conclusion I have reached is that violent revolution is not necessary at this point. Something needs to be done for certain, but inciting a violent revolution at this particular junction would serve a more negative effect than it would another time. A better plan at this particular point in time would be massive public outcry and protesting. Hear me out on this. If you can only get a small fraction of the people to care enough to want to protest for change, then you will fail miserably during an armed revolution. If people don't care enough to protest then certainly they will not be willing to risk their lives and kill others for the sake of the Republic.

There will be more people willing to protest than will be willing to take up arms, and for this reason revolution is not viable until massive numbers of people are seen protesting. And you must think...Americans will only get one shot at revolution. After that there will inevitably be a crackdown on firearms. Another consideration is the fact that most people only see the problems with America when the media puts these problems in front of them. There are many people at this very moment who think everything is peachy, and this is precisely because they do not question what they are told. Ignorance is bliss I suppose. The government is not going to out its own shortcomings and corruption, and the media has not shown itself worthy of the title. There are probably fewer investigative journalists dealing with government related topics than at any other point in modern history. It is much easier for the government of today to hide things from the people, which is counter-intuitive considering we have instant mass communications, but it is true. Perhaps they've just gotten better at it.

One of the major problems I have noticed when it comes to mass communications on a grand scale is the filtering of information. It makes it much harder to know what the truth is in many instances, because you have so many people spouting garbage and making claims. Anyway, back to the point, there is another great benefit to protesting on a massive scale. The government would be more inclined to realize that the people are not going to stand for certain things, and they might change them. But if they don't, the blame for revolution lies much more on their shoulders. They will be the ones burdened by the fact that they knew the people have had enough, yet they did nothing to institute change. So if revolution breaks out, it is much harder to claim it is the sole responsibility of the revolutionaries, rather than the government bearing any of the responsibility.

And do not underestimate the importance of blame. When people start dying in the streets on a massive scale, and urban centers are turned into warzones, blame will have major importance. Most sane people would start to think to themselves "why didn't we try a non-violent approach before instituting violence?" Such questions are natural when you see the horrors of war. But if the people know that they exhausted their peaceful methods of instituting change, they will be able to stomach the idea of revolution a bit better. And public support is everything. And the dividing lines will have to be drawn at some point, and at this particular moment there are too many divisions among the broader population. It would be extremely difficult to unite the population against the government because the lines are not drawn. You have liberals versus conservatives, race considerations, etc...The people are not united is my point. Revolution becomes much more feasible when the population is united by an underlying cause, a cause that is more important than anything that might divide them.

So these divisions need to be fixed. There needs to be a unification among Americans for revolution to be more feasible in my eyes. Perhaps the government has done more to this end than they realize, pitting the US against terrorists or whoever else is the enemy of the year. But we are not united to any significant degree at this point in time. It is true that such unification could come later, but there is another problem that is quite apparent throughout history. Say you defeat the US government in a people's revolution. Then you will have a really hard time uniting people in instituting a new government. The divisions will be quite apparent at that point. Someone will be left out in the cold because we do not think of all Americans as being Americans, or one of us. Whether they realize it or not many people place people of other races in a different group than themselves. All races are guilty of this. And trust me, race will be a prevalent issue before, during, and after a revolution. But the US has come a long way already where race is concerned, and future problems could be worked through. But short of everyone thinking of everyone else as their equal, whether it is race-based, political-based, or whatever else, uniting everyone becomes an issue. And pleasing everyone becomes an issue.

And there will be plenty of political problems aside from everything else, both during and after a revolution. I am not convinced that, even if the people could succeed in a revolution, of the end product being any better than what we have now. It would likely be worse. My point is that it would be much easier to fix a broken system than institute a new one from scratch. We know what is broken with our system because we have seen it in action. A new system will take decades and decades, perhaps centuries, to fix. This is evidenced by the fact that the laws of the US have been vastly improved in many instances since their inception. So at this point in time revolution would face too many problems. The people would be much better off, and would have to give up much less of their quality and style of life, if they tried other solutions first. And the first solution is educating the people.

You are not going to educate the people with conspiracy theories. It will take facts and facts alone. And it will not be easy by any means. But it is a necessary first step. The only time it would be necessary would be if the government got really Draconian on us, forcing action on our part. But they have restrained themselves in that regard, and much of what they do to undermine our rights is done behind the scenes, or is instituted so slowly that people either don't notice it, or they don't think it will get worse. I believe that the majority think the US government would not do anything to harm them or their rights. But the NSA alone has proven that the US government has no regard for our rights. It will take waking people up to the facts. And then there is the idea that most people have not had their lifestyles changed at all. You can bet that people will be much more open to "fixing" the system when their lifestyles must change considerably. This is true for America at least, and other countries could theoretically be different. But any country where a certain quality of life has been maintained for a long time is ripe for unification amongst the people, if that lifestyle is changed on a massive scale.

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 09:24 PM
a reply to: JiggyPotamus

Great post.

(post by ChesterJohn removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 11:06 PM
a reply to: JiggyPotamus

I fully agree read the thread I linked to above.

posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 11:39 PM

originally posted by: Fylgje
a reply to: CokeIsNotCool
This is the conclusion that I've come to as well.

I think the government needs to be redone from the ground up. No more dual citizens in the US gov.. That needs to be stopped immediately. There are loads of Israelis who are in important positions of power in our government. It's a scary thought and would shed light on why the US has been turned into a war monger.

All taxpayer money needs to be monitored. Every last penny of it. The people should be able to vote on what they want done with the money. We also close off known loopholes in the law. The Federal Reserve needs to be disbanded and all those criminals should be arrested. Wall Street should be cleaned out as well. No more greedy speculators -keeping inflation high, such as gas and food prices. Many of them should be arrested for human suffering and crimes against humanity and for being traitors.

Many laws need to be changed. People should vote on what we want to keep and what we want to modify. We the people should be in control. Not they the crooks. All politicians should be held to a standard and if they aren't doing their job then they get sent packing. It's time for the people to watch the gov very closely and hold people accountable. There shouldn't be no more wars for Israel. There shouldn't be no more training terrorists and arming them. Revolution, we need.

Good luck trying to disband the federal reserve. JFK attempted to back US currency with silver and allow the government to print their own money. He was assassinated 5 months later. Our government doesn't even control their own currency. The FR keeps printing money and we have nothing to back it's value. The politicians don't have any real power, do they? Our food, water, and vaccines are poisoned. We are destroying our planet. Any technology that can help our environment is muffled if takes away from the petrodollar or large corporations. There are 1500 newspapers, 1100 magazines, 9000 radio stations, 1500 TV stations, and 2400 publishers, all owned by 6 corporations. So what do we do? We need action.

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 06:46 PM
I'm with you, but how would we start? We need leaders ourselves for a revolution. We need funding, and a lot of it.

posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 05:47 AM
You know I agree to an extent, but I'm still not convinced we can't improve some parts of the system. For example these small things could make a big difference..

-It should result in removal from office if while running a president makes a promise to do one thing and does the opposite once elected. Things like "I support Isreal" and then cutting military funding to them wouldn't count, but if he says "I will repeal the unjust executive orders of _____ the first day I'm on office" and doesn't, dudes gone. No false promises, if you can't keep it don't make it and don't blatantly lie. If this seems dumb because things change, they need to be honest and realistic and explain that. ex.Q. "How soon will you bring all of of our boys home from Iraq"
A. "Overall, I feel our top priority should be bringing troops home from Iraq, and my decisions will be based on this underlying veiwpoint. However, war is an unpredictable, volatile bitch and I can't be sure when it will realistic and responsible to have every soldier out of Iraq"
People can only be properly represented if the person they voted for does what he said he would. If most people want less taxes, they vote for a representative that wants less taxes. If the person decides to raise taxes while in office the whole purpose of voting is gone.

-Give people the people power to vote yes or no on proposed bills, congressmen represent themselves not their constituents nowadays.

-Give districts/states power to call a vote for removal their congressman. Maybe make the process a petition that needs some percent to call the vote. They need to be accountable to those they serve.

Just some things that I came up now. I know it isn't a perfect system but it might be salvagable without completely burning our Nation to the ground. Why not improve a system that has been beta tested for 300+ years instead of something brand new? Not to mention one way could happen without destroying infrastructure, killing millions, losing key allies world round, and giving the Jihadists a defenseless country to run rampant through?

As this approaches a tipping point the time may come when people demand change no matter the cost. When it does our collective cooler heads mustmust prevail. We're not talking internet tough guy talk here or debating fantasy, millions will die and our way of life may end for good if people follow the path of violent revolution.
I tthink some people think it isn't a realistic possibility, so they go on their favorite site, type a long call to arms for revolution and then power down the computer, watch some tv, and fall asleep feeling completely content and have no real anger. They have no desire to take to the streets, but it's kind of fun to talk to big and act like you're that passionate if it isn't going to really happen anyway. They don't consider what could be the outcome. They don't consider the pissed off kid who just got beaten by a cop who reads this and truly believes revolution is the only way. No thought is given to the hundreds of people who are angrier than themselves and out looking for a way to make things better. Ten years ago I wouldn't have said a word against revolution talk because I didn't think it could ever happen for real. Today the people of this country have a different look in their eyes. The room often gets quite when Obama is brought up, people feel violated by the NSA in a very personal way, they're angry over the trade, the IRS, scandal after scandal. I feel like people are past being angry, they're kind holding their breath waiting to see if the system will reign itself in or if it needs to be put down like a rabbid dog.

posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 06:04 AM
a reply to: teamcommander

The ballot box does not work in the US. The candidate with the most money gets in. Nothing short of a revolution of heart is going to save the USA...


posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 08:06 AM
You know the industrial revolution worked pretty well. Then the technical revolution created a lot of work and opportunity. Why can't we do something like that again?

posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 11:18 AM
If there was anything to change, it's how "representatives" are choosen. Right now it's mostly a process of having media support and a popularity contest. You need money and backing by those with money, so only the interests of those with money needed to work this process gets supported. This is why we only see rich lawyers or businessmen for candidates with the occasional bit of political nepotism thrown in.

To be honest though, that sucks. I'm not being represented by any of them.

I think candidates for legislature should be picked by a lottery process, something like only a handful of people from each district being represented. This would be much more representative of the public than the current status quo. Just like selection for jurty duty it could be you, me, the guy down the street, etc. Yes, we don't always agree on everything and some people hate each other's guts, and the potential candidate chosen by lotto could still be just another rich lawyer. But the odds would be much in the favor of the public. And the public would then have people from the same situation and class to vote into office.

Think about it. With a lottery system, some guy being screwed over by the cable or phone company that doesn't own any of their stock has a fair chance of getting into office. And another candidate might have been screwed over by the banks. Now who are they more likely to represent? Also the lottery would throw in new candidates every time, so would it be worth bribing them (if possible) just for what may be one term?

Shame the controlling interests wont allow this to happen, but if revolution ever happens, this is one of the changes that should be pushed for in order for the interests of the people to be truely representative by those making governmental decisions. Anyhow, the rest of the existing constitution is fairly sound, this is the only major fix that's really needed.

posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 08:33 PM
a reply to: nwtrucker

I'm curious (not poking holes) what would protect us from foreign opportunists when our entire military is dissolved. Militias? Local police forces (I like there odds more and more everyday)? I fear this wouldn't be safe if it was done through a vote. In reality it would more likely be done only by war, war that would be crippling. What's your take on my concern if you don't mind?

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in