Why Revolution Inside USA Is A Strategical Mistake

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

What's a hero anymore? I find most of the time when I can't find a moral symbol I end up having to be one.

originally posted by: ObjectZero
a reply to: Krazysh0t

True, but I'd take it over what we have right now, and it would lay the the ground work for something better...maybe.

No, it would be a step backwards instead of forwards. Direct democracy is what Athens tried to use in Ancient Greece. We need to take what works with our system and improve on that. Take the things that are prone to corruption and get rid of them or alter them. Discarding the whole system is a bad idea. We can make it work if we try.

We have only a kind of winner take all system in place, a few states don't use it. But I'm still kind of on the edge at the vote counts being reported. One of the reason I'd like to see it redone, I think they're to many holes in the system to be abused.

There will always be holes in any system we design and implement. We just have to be honest enough to recognize and address the holes. Direct democracy would be open to exploitation from mass manipulation from the media. Look how easy it is for the media to rile up the American populace over non-issues. With a direct democracy, the people who own the media, own the country (that may be what we have now as well, but it will be more obvious with your suggestion).

I'd also like and "No" or "none of the above" option added to all ballots. If select by enough they don't get to run again. No more of this picking the lesser of two evils.

We need term limits for any political position and we need to open the doors to allow more than two parties to represent our public. The system is designed to benefit a two party system and leave out any other contenders. That needs to change. It is what creates the "lesser of two evils" thing.

a reply to: Krazysh0t


My money is still on humanity perfecting space travel be for we ever perfect ruling over each other.

originally posted by: ObjectZero
a reply to: Krazysh0t


My money is still on humanity perfecting space travel be for we ever perfect ruling over each other.

I'd bet on that too. I don't for a second believe that we are going to be united in peace when we enter the cosmos. We will be as divided as ever and as soon as we can escape the prison of our planet, all those divisions will spread out again like opening a closet packed to the brim with junk.

Just wait until we contact our first alien civilization. We will either be overwhelmed in technological ability (and feign servitude and niceties) but if we are EVER able to see an upper hand, war will be inevitable; or just flat out declare war on them through sheer hate. But then again, life is destructive, and what are humans but just another form of life.

a reply to: swanne

The only revolution that is possible is the counter revolution.

There is already a smaller communist revolution going out that is funded by the oligarchy elites like Soros.

a reply to: Peeple

Americans don't dominate anything, it's more like the big bully that continues to get it's ass whopped on the national stage.

a reply to: swanne

I didn't say largest military. I said "arguably most powerful" as can be seen in the quote you posted. China may very well have a nice sized military, but they have not been tested in the field of battle in anyway. China's modern warfare experience is extremely limited whereas the United States military has been involved in nearly every single modern warfare encounter to date.

Secondly, I gave reasons as to why the US would not use missiles and high yield weaponry on their own soil. If I feel like that would not be a threat, why would revolutionaries destroy it? There would be no purpose. Yes, there would be a lot of damage to equipment, but if you have been on any military bases or depots across the US in the past few years, you would know that when it comes to the sheer amount of vehicles and armaments that the military possesses, it probably far outnumbers even the population of the United States itself. An entire generation could not hope to destroy everything that is here.

People want heroes?

With the fickle, Hollywood mentality of people, how could anyone hope to be a hero? Everyone has their dirty laundry and their flaws and the media and the public will do everything to expose those things. Then people will eat it up for the fodder it is.

The closest thing this country had to a "hero" in the political spectrum in modern times was Ron Paul. Libertarian ideals of individual freedom in all choices and whistle blowing on the biggest problems this country faces only to have the public turn the cold shoulder or to base their judgement on a racist pamphlet written 20 years ago that may or may not have been associated with the man at all.

Because people don't want actual heroes. They want to be TOLD who heroes are. They want to be lead and guided like the sheep that THEY are. Sadly, there are actual humans scattered amongst those sheep and they don't want to be lead like animals - they want to be free and will do anything to obtain that. History shows that these people exist. These are the heroes.

Revolution may not be too popular or have a high success rate, but when the only thing you want out of life is freedom, none of that matters. You fight regardless of the odds. You become your own hero because its the only thing you can do.

originally posted by: ObjectZero
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think one of the best things we can do for our kids is remove the electoral college system and switch to a direct system. It wouldn't save them but it's harder to bribe 316 million then 538.

With networks we have the tech to support a direct election system now. I bet with a push for it it could be in place and working with in under a years time.

It's really not though. As long as you have a binary system the votes will drift towards 50/50. Throw in a bit of social conditioning as people become entrenched with their choice and you'll find that out of those 316 million only a handful (the swing voters) have any real say. You can target those voters specifically and win (of course the other side will do the same).

I'm in agreement that an armed revolution in the USA would be a very destructive destabilising event. I would think certain countries would take advantage of this event to gain political world power.

I do believe, however, that if the USA continues down is current direction; I foresee in the future an event happening orchestrated by the general public.
The wealthy are becoming more wealthy, the poor increasing in numbers especially the children. And the middle class is dwindling.


a reply to: swanne