It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com 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

A New Civil War

page: 3
31
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Riffrafter

I agree that people are more alert and better informed now. Communications is key.

I'm not viewing this through the lens of Hillary or Trump and just this election though, even though they may both be the great examples of what's wrong.


Neither am I. But I firmly believe that was the catalyst that got peoples attention. And since it was, how it plays out will also affect people's feelings, choices and actions going forward.

So we may still be divided, but we are no longer disengaged, uninformed or apathetic.

I believe events will unfold very quickly from here on out to whatever conclusion ultimately arrives vis a vis the HRC/Wikileaks/FBI mess that got the ball rolling.

What happens after that conclusion, is critical to the question posed in your OP.


edit on 11/1/2016 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

Yes it is.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 06:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: masqua
On a lighter note, there are those who are already locking and loading...

The insanity will not end if Clinton is elected.

What Trump will do if elected is one big question mark, imho.

That’s some scary scenarios.


If you peruse some of the more uber rightwing sights like storm frnt. it's very scary. Read between the line and tell me what you think they mean.

Can't link to hate sites. But to paraphrase they think Trump is going to declare open season on fill in the blank _____________

Bundy X1000


God help us...
edit on 1-11-2016 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: masqua

Sigh

It's good that these folks represent a tiny minority of us.


Who wins or looses this election has little of nothing to do with what I'm getting at here though? It's how we let ourselves get to this point, where we have no good candidates and we are constantly faced with the choice of the lesser of two evils. It is our own fault we have forgotten how much power we have. That power requires no use of force, just a force of will and a desire to take back our place in a government by the people.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555




It is our own fault we have forgotten how much power we have. That power requires no use of force, just a force of will and a desire to take back our place in a government by the people.


You have been constantly lied to. Over decades!

You have been re-educated via schools and MSM. How many times have I read about what your school system has become. It has all been training. Those kids, so well trained in the 80s and 90s are now your citizens.

A small percentage of the population are awake. Only a small percentage.

This election should prove that. Americans, by and large, are buying into this facade.

Well, there are only a few more days to see what happens next.

P



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

I totally understand the desire for a peaceful change in your country. It's the intelligent way forward.

If Hillary gets elected, a small percentage are threatening violence, though. I've read that only 3% of Americans own 50% of all the guns 'out there'. It's that 3% I'd be worrying about.

If Trump wins, there will be a lot of folks IN America who will suddenly face either deportation or increased scrutiny. In a way, that might be a good thing, but on the other hand, it will make people hide to avoid authorities. Nothing like a few million people going dark instead of trying to become citizens.

All told, that looks like a formula for trouble.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

I think more people than you realize are awake to what is going on. When given no other choice than to vote for the least objectionable person, they don't know what else to do.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: masqua

On a small scale maybe. The squeakiest wheel .................

Being that I had my sister in-law slaughtered by an illegal, who the Mexican government still insists is in a prison for 5 rapes in southern Mexico, who was arrested in a sanctuary city three times for menacing women, even once on the same day and still let loose, I'm a bit biased when it comes to the illegal situation. It did not work out well for my wife's family. On that I can't help but be with Trump even if I don't support him in general. Maybe its time that pot is stirred for our own good. Damn now I'm drifting off topic.

I honestly believe that Western Democracies in general, are beyond a time when violent revolution would ever be more than a small uprising by a very few people.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Sadly, I think we have allowed ideologies to become too divergent.

There is one group of people who honestly do think the government is best suited to do way too much for them and everyone else around them. They think nothing of the idea that the only way that happens is through increased taxation to the point of it being punitive or predatory or both so long as they don't feel they are the main targets of it and through forcing those "other folks" to participate even if they don't want to.

Obamacare is only the latest and worst iteration of that strain of ideology.

I'm not sure how you live and let live with that mindset because it will not leave you alone. It needs to compel you to participate in everything it does whether you will or no. It doesn't want or need your willing participation; it has the law to force you right along.

And the rest of us just want to live our lives in a sand box curated by people whose job it is to keep the poop raked out and keep the walls strong. Then we can all build our sand castles as we see fit and as our abilities allow.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: diggindirt

We make all the decisions good or bad by allowing to happen, what is happening. We have all the power, but we throw it all away over petty differences and a desire to control our neighbors. Which candidate does not much matter when they can be easily controlled by those in power.



I agree, mostly, with what you're saying. We who don't want to control our neighbors are less likely to fight that control it seems to me. The only political issue I've ever seen get people in my community riled up to the point of holding rallies and actually forming an organization to fight was a taxing issue. When the taxpayers in this town were told via a paid advertisement in the local newspaper that the county government had passed on first reading an ordinance that would put in place a tax on all insurance polices with no sundown date and no specified use of the tax, they sat down and figured out what a huge chunk of money it was going to cost them. In a county of less than 35,000 over 400 people showed up at the next meeting of the county legislature.
I see non-partisan governments working at the city and county level. When leadership is not party-directed, it tends to work for the people.
I firmly believe that the party system is so out of date and out of touch that it should just be banned. We might actually be able to find some leadership if the party patronage system was busted.
Like you, I believe that education is the first step in getting back to the government envisioned by the founders of this country. We've had a century of corporate directed government. It's time to take it back. Education is not a federal issue. The states must be convinced to take back the powers they've ceded to the feds. That's the revolution I'm wanting to see. We're commanded in the founding documents to alter or abolish a government that becomes oppressive.
I'm feeling oppressed by the fact that I'm "breaking the law" by refusing to pay a health insurance company ten thousand dollars a year to insure me. For that I'll be fined. For not giving away my money to the right people.
I'm feeling oppressed by the fact that in Colorado I can light up a big fat one anytime and nobody is going to hassle me. In Kentucky I face detention and possible arrest. For possession of a plant!
I could go on but I think you see my point. If these issues were handled locally, in a non-partisan legislative body, resolutions to problems could be reached, accommodations could be found when thinking more about the possible solutions than the politics happens.
My hope currently lies with the generation of children being educated privately, in private schools or home schools, children who are being taught the value of critical thinking, the history of the founding of our nation and even civics classes! Let me tell you---there nothing "common" in the core of that group of young people. As a public educator, I see the yyyyyuuuuuggggeeee difference between public school groups and private education groups.
I'm still enraptured with the dream of the founders, of a country where a concept never before attempted would be put into practice. That life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were important for all people---and worth fighting for. I pray for a peaceful revolution---not a civil war. But I've read diaries of the women who lived through the war and I know it could happen again so my pantries are stocked, my powder is dry and I continue to hope for the best and prepare for the worst.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Agreed.

And therein lies the problem.

Can it be overcome?

Yes, but it will require a seismic event to make people begin to realize it truly is about enslavement by the elite and different rules for different people. And with that in mind it is in their best interests to put aside their other differences to work together in the fight against this disastrous status quo as that is the *big* problem.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend, etc.

People aren't stupid - they've just been switched off for so long for the reasons cited by the OP, that even thinking about this has been beyond their ken.

Until now...

So much depends on what happens in the next few weeks.

Hope springs eternal...
edit on 11/1/2016 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 11:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Natas0114
a reply to: JinMI

We couldn't communicate quickly back when then country was founded. News was by rail mail, telegraph was fast but not available everywhere. We elected representatives to stay abreast of the situation so we could work our daily lives while our reps focused on doing our bidding. Now communication is worldwide and instant, we don't need representatives. We can do our own damn governing, if people would wake up, and realize it. We agree on what rights we all should have, then police ourselves with people's courts- not judges.


The communication issue is actually worse than ever. Issues are complex and experts have little ability to educate the populace. There are only a few they can inform. The voting electorate as a whole isn't capable of being educated on a subject, and will therefore always vote with ignorance on a topic. Elected representatives can instead meet one on one with experts and craft better policy.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

Any plan based on educating voters will end in failure. Facts are partisan, people will pick and choose the facts that align with their preconceived beliefs. In the end you wind up with a bunch of opinions teaching people. That's where we are now.

People are incapable of learning what doesn't interest them, and almost no one has an interest in actual governance. They have an interest in the hollywood like drama, but not in actual policy.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

That's exactly what the politicians and media think of us. Same mindset they have exactly. The same sort of nonsense they push to keep people subservient and blind to just how incompetent they themselves truly are. It makes them feel important to talk down about people.

Of course a glass half full person will never change anything and drag others down with them.

There is a reason only a few thousand groupies show up at political sideshows. Most people are smarter than that. I think you underestimate both the intelligence and capabilities of average people. The politicians don't keep the water and power on, they don't build the roads and bridges, they could not build the towers they live in and in fact they would be helpless without Jane and Joe Average. That's where the true power lies and it lies in the peoples hands and always has.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

I'm with you on the power of leaving as much as possible in the hands of local government. That's how it was intended originally I believe, before the Fed's started on their power grab.

I also agree the Party system needs to go. Each candidate should stand or fall on their own merit and if they can't, then its a good thing they loose. Far better than a few power brokers picking our puppet leaders for us.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

The communication issue is actually worse than ever. Issues are complex and experts have little ability to educate the populace. There are only a few they can inform. The voting electorate as a whole isn't capable of being educated on a subject, and will therefore always vote with ignorance on a topic. Elected representatives can instead meet one on one with experts and craft better policy.


Consider my mind blown. That's actually your opinion?
People protesting do more often than not have good reasons. Very often beyond "personal advantage".
If the populace was informed their opinion sure still would be different from all technocrats/globalists/neoliberals/socialists/whatever colored politician. But why are you so sure their opinion is "better"?
It's a global downwards spiral. Social, economical, environmental, even in things like "prolifering peace" they suck and they love that ideal. As much as they despise us. For being irritating, annoying, difficult...
What and which was the last political idea that made you go: good one sir/madam! You're spot on.
Reagan? But even there it's more for riding skills than politics.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 03:26 PM
link   


A New Civil War



I don't think people realize just how likely this is....


www.rawstory.com...



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
That's exactly what the politicians and media think of us. Same mindset they have exactly. The same sort of nonsense they push to keep people subservient and blind to just how incompetent they themselves truly are. It makes them feel important to talk down about people.


It's not that I think down of people, I have the same opinions of myself. It's that I see it as a reality. Most people have some skill base, some are better than others but at the end of the day all of us are pretty bad at most tasks. There's some stuff I understand really, really, well like why we need a new digital copyright system or why Net Neutrality is a must have, or virtually any software based question. Then there's things I have a reasonable grasp on like energy, geopolitical strategy, and how to balance short vs long term strategy. Then there's things I'm virtually clueless on beyond the basics like construction/building regulations and health care.

I have opinions on most subjects, but that doesn't mean my opinions are informed. On some subjects, I'm not sure anyone has an informed opinion. To take economics as an example, from the same 100 years of research two very well researched experts on the subject can wind up with wildly differing opinions. When the experts can't even agree, what hope does that leave for the rest of us.

Do we push further towards direct democracy and let a bunch of people vote on subjects they don't truly understand, or do we go for a more abstract system like what we have now (or even further in that direction) where we elect representatives? Perhaps we mix the two, and we elect representatives by sector and skillset of the chosen person rather than as general representation.

It's stuff to think about. I have several different ideas.


originally posted by: Peeple
Consider my mind blown. That's actually your opinion?
People protesting do more often than not have good reasons. Very often beyond "personal advantage".
If the populace was informed their opinion sure still would be different from all technocrats/globalists/neoliberals/socialists/whatever colored politician. But why are you so sure their opinion is "better"?
It's a global downwards spiral. Social, economical, environmental, even in things like "prolifering peace" they suck and they love that ideal. As much as they despise us. For being irritating, annoying, difficult...
What and which was the last political idea that made you go: good one sir/madam! You're spot on.
Reagan? But even there it's more for riding skills than politics.


See above for my opinion. I'm not a fan of direct democracy because I don't think crowds are wise enough to self govern. But single individuals suffer from the same issue. Our current system is brilliant because it provides a layer of abstraction between the governing and the governed. However, I think that with technology today we need to take it further. Go back to the constitutional 1 rep per 20,000, and then give those reps voting power over a smaller branch of congress. So that the people are two levels removed rather than one. That is the simplest fix in my mind, because the first layer would largely devolve down to making picks based on a persons character, and then people of good character would choose who gets into power.

Note that what I just described is how the Senate is supposed to be, until we amended the Constitution and screwed that part up. I just think it should apply to the House too.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Natas0114
a reply to: JinMI

We couldn't communicate quickly back when then country was founded. News was by rail mail, telegraph was fast but not available everywhere. We elected representatives to stay abreast of the situation so we could work our daily lives while our reps focused on doing our bidding. Now communication is worldwide and instant, we don't need representatives. We can do our own damn governing, if people would wake up, and realize it. We agree on what rights we all should have, then police ourselves with people's courts- not judges.


The communication issue is actually worse than ever. Issues are complex and experts have little ability to educate the populace. There are only a few they can inform.


I respectfully disagree with this. We're in the "Information Age" now, so citizens can learn any part of the political process if they choose to. Most government agencies, large and small, have official websites. Different legislatures and councils regularly list their bills and documents online and have public hearings that are usually empty because citizens simply don't care enough to attend them.

And even a simple search on Amazon.com or any other online bookstore can give you all kinds of books on political science, meaning that anyone can become well informed about our system. So we can't blame educators or bureaucrats for the public's complete lack of interest in political details.



The voting electorate as a whole isn't capable of being educated on a subject, and will therefore always vote with ignorance on a topic. Elected representatives can instead meet one on one with experts and craft better policy.

I'll counter this argument with an article I just read about California's daunting 2016 ballot. It has 17 state measures to be voted on and voters are given a 200+ page voting guide to teach them about the issues on the ballot. And the article then says that the city of San Francisco has an additional 25 local measures and a voting guide that's around 300 pages. That means that San Francisco voters would have 42 ballot measures to vote on and more than 500 pages of info provided to them to learn about the issues being voted on. And that doesn't even count the federal Congressional and Presidential elections.

In California, pizza and wine help the epic ballot go down: 'It's too darn long'

So the real question here is why aren't more States & local govts giving this many choices to their voters? I find it hard to believe that citizens can memorize years worth of sports stats and the intricate details of their favorite action heroes' exploits, but can't learn the details of the death penalty debate.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

The thing with political parties is that there's more power in numbers. No single legislator can get a bill passed by himself/herself. So even if the parties were officially abolished, they'd simply be replaced in practice by cliques, clubs, fraternities, secret societies, etc.

Or let me put it like this, let's assume that every legislator and/or official had to stand on their own. Someone like myself could simply make side deals with as many of these individuals as possible, basically saying I'd vote for their measures if they voted for mine. Once we built up a strong enough alliance, we'd simply push through our own initiatives. That's basically what "kingmakers" do anyway, regardless of the structure of the political system.

And it still wouldn't stop companies/donors/lobbyists from being able to buy off these politicians, which is a large part of the problem right now.




top topics



 
31
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join