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.


Too passive?

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 10:20 AM
Are Americans too passive? Should we not be more demanding and violent to get our point across to the government that says "Don't #### with us." I think we are a little too submissive and accept everything we are told. Bush should be tried for treason and the penalty is death. The president can't hold any power over the constitution. Bush is the reason why people want to cut off my head. United we stand! Well gotta go! Bush just read this so now I'm labeled as a "terrorist"! I hear its sunny in Gitmo. Viva la Revolucion!

posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 04:50 PM
Are we off our meds? First, why on earth would you post something like that online unless you want the FBI knocking on your door, that walks the fine line of a death threat against the President, and it also just makes ATS look bad and potentially harmful. Second they (I assume you mean Islamic extremism) wanted to cut off your head before Bush, no worries.

Third are you crazy?! Take a look around, I don't think anyone on earth would say Americans are too passive; the general world view of us is something like......the EXACT opposite.

posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 09:05 PM

Originally posted by Baphomet79

Third are you crazy?! Take a look around, I don't think anyone on earth would say Americans are too passive; the general world view of us is something like......the EXACT opposite.

Yep, pretty much, you guys seem to be quite, pro-active and loud...

What's the difference between Australians and Americans?
Americans like Australians......jk

posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 09:09 PM
Im going to have to agree with the two posters ahead of me. The world views us as alot of things.

Lazy, arrogant, fat, undeserving, but I dont think anyone would say we are passive. Rather, we are viewed as violent pig headed antagonists.

posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 05:15 PM
I have to both agree with the last 3 posters, and AMANNAMEDQUEST.

Americans are quite overbearing in their foreign affairs, sticking their noses in everyones business, not letting other nations follow their own course.

However, as AMANNAMEDQUEST was trying to say IMHO, the proactive stance taken by the nation of America is not in line with the actions of the American people. You (and most of the Western world) ARE far too passive. You forget that the governments power is derived from the people, and when their actions do not reflect the views of its people, this is a great injustice. But we dont even stand up for ourselves. In many nations without democracy, people take out gov'ts that dont properly represent them. In America, you have the simpler and less violent ability to make change through protesting, demonstrating, etc. But this is not an option for you. Yes, there are protests, but the numbers are nowhere near close to reflecting how many people disagree with the current regime. It's not violent action that is needed; The people simply have to make clear that they are willing to if the government gets out of hand. and thus far, you seem quite content in mindlessly following the government.

posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 05:34 PM
The average citizen of the U.S. is ignorant.

IMHO, not by choice, but rather by deception.

Of course the media plays a huge role, as does the "education" system.

As a result people are apathetic to change the world we live in.

I can say with little doubt, that the average citizen cares more about whatever is on T.V. or what they are wearing then what is going on.

The important thing is education.

And I ain't talkin about schools.

However, I think that right now, the people who are not apathetic (a lot of us here on ATS) need to organize.

Violence is not the answer.....

But sometimes I fear that is what it will come to.

posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 07:29 PM
exactly. Violence is not the way to get the government to listen. violence is never worth the cost. however, if they begin to feel that we are not willing to get violent/otherwise actively protest their actions, then they will feel enabled throught that passivity, and continue about their nefarious agenda.

posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 05:31 PM
As noble as a revolution against the U.S Government sounds the average Joe would probably equate this with Communism.
Also what makes you think that, if you depose Bush, you'll get a more 'lenient' leader?

From my (and History's) view of revolutions one of three things occurs:
1. Government crackdown destroys/cripples the revolution and increases security measures, further tightening control over the average citizen.
2. Revolution dissapates as infighting between religious, ethnic etc factions tears it apart or simply dissolves as people realise that a revolution is not such a good idea.
3. Revolution succeeds and (both guilty and innocent) government ministers and officials are executed/imprisoned either on orders or by extremist factions. As the different factions fight for control over the revolution a civil war develops (much like Iraq) until one leader emerges victorious.
Said leader is ,more often than not, deeply paranoid and increases security measures to maintain control over the citizens, so as to stop another revolution from deposing him (much like Zeus making sure he never has another male child, as it would depose him) and turns the nation into a dictatorship.

Lastly I think that the main reason for the average American's 'passivity' would be either media or the fact that they really cannot do anything to change the government due to bipartisan politics.

As Homer Simpson (I think) said when aliens controlled the Democrats AND Republicans: 'Why split the vote on a third party?'

top topics


log in