Why violent revolution is a TERRIBLE idea

Yes, it's true American gov't corruption is at an apparent all-time high. Yes, it's true that there are both implicit and explicit calls for violent revolution on this forum and elsewhere.

For the love of God (or reason, take your pick), please don't do it!!!

Let's go back to the early 1900s. The Russians thought they were getting rid of their tyrants, but instead they went from the frying pan into the fire, setting the stage for 70 years of ultra-oppressive communism.

Is this really what we want for our country?

That happened in Russia primarily for one reason:
Outside interests where funding and guiding the revolution from the very beginning. They were the same interests that guided the English Civil War, the American Revolution, and the French Revolution. The interests in question were the merchant class or as we call them today the business men or bankers if you want to be imprecise.

So it is little surprise that though the character of the system of government was different (Communist vs. Republic) the nature of the system was identical. Both systems were incarnations of the state, a system designed to redistribute the wealth of the conquered (the proletariat or, in America, the debtor) to the interests of their new leaders. The system in America is simply more opaque to casual appraisal but the same people benefit enormously. While the people at the top always get generous concessions from the system in the form of lower taxes and more freedom to conduct business as they wish, the citizen is legislated into a slave for the business interests or a criminal if he choses his "God given right" to do what he pleases as long as it hurts no one.

In the end, both systems sought to control land and production for the benefit of a relative small group. If you think that isn't true about America consider the scam that is Microsoft.

Here is a quote from a Motley Fool article about Microsoft in 1999:

So there you have it. $3.1 billion from a tax loophole, $1.3 billion from its employees, and $0.7 billion from put warrants combine to give Microsoft over $5 billion from its own stock in fiscal 1999. And it avoided paying $9 billion in wages [because it issued options]. All that from a company that only had $7.8 billion in net income.

Eternal Sauce

The state is an institution that robs Peter to pay Paul - because Paul's ideals are more compatible with the ideals of the state. Never does any state concern itself with freedom or the right to happiness, instead it exists only to help business generate wealth.

If you still question this view of the state, consider that every war the US has ever been in has been popularly characterized as a war to help the people of a region while simultaneously depopulating those same countries. At the same time or shortly thereafter, everyone will publicly admit that we only killed those people because "our interests were threatened" yet few take the time to ask "who's interests?" The answer is of course, that we seek only to protect the interests of business and not the interests of the people or the electorate of this country who would prefer the government work on more local concerns.

Jon

[edit on 7.30.2007 by Voxel]

for one we are not the russians and for two read the Declaration of Independence. As it seems,that may be our only resolve to gain back what we called "the land of the free",people say..."if you dont like who is in power vote them out.. ect." thats a pipe dream... lo0k at bush's poll ratings... and congress has the power to limit or even kick his ass out of office.. yet we all sit back like idiots and let these fo0kers ruin our great nation.

I am really starting to hate the fact that I can't make a short simple posts. I doubt think anyone reads my rants anyway...what a waste of a half hour. Well I hope you all learned something.

By the way, if you are bored or actually care about America, have a look at the book "Our Enemy, the State" by Albert Jay Nock. He writes at length about something that has always bothered me. Namely, why is it, regardless of structure or founding principles, all governments in recorded history sought to legislate and war for the benefit one group at the expense of all others?
Our Enemy, The State - Nock - 1935

His analysis of the history of England before the American Revolution and how their civil war lead to a shift in power from Feudal Lords to powerful merchants and corporations is quite insightful to a Yankee. His insight was that no new freedoms were created in this shift and all power vested in the lords of the feudal system was simply transferred whole-sale and without modification to a new ruling class - the businessman - as the government gave parcels of land to men of business to develop.

Jon

When you believe in revolution, you either die or succeed.
Its time for Americans to start understanding why it is there forefathers wrote the constituion they way they did.
Specifically, to keep people like GW and Richard Cheney from ever gaining too much power.
Which they are doing while you sit back and throw your arms in the air.
Washington must be turning in his grave at the cowardice of his people.

BTW, I kind of agree, the ultimate goal of our revolution should be to have nonviolent change. The government will then seek to suppress with threats and violence any motion or request to change. The revolution would end up with martyrs (vital to igniting the indignation of the masses) and a reason to proceed with violence directed towards the power keeping institutions.

I just want everyone in the US to bring a single brick (signed brick would be better) to Washington DC while the government was in session. One by one the bricks would be laid and slowly a wall will be built around DC, turning it into the biggest political prison in the world.

Just 30 million bricks would be something like a 30foot high wall that is over 15 miles long and we have 300 million people in this country.

Jon

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
When you believe in revolution, you either die or succeed.
Its time for Americans to start understanding why it is there forefathers wrote the constituion they way they did.
Specifically, to keep people like GW and Richard Cheney from ever gaining too much power.
Which they are doing while you sit back and throw your arms in the air.
Washington must be turning in his grave at the cowardice of his people.

i 2nd that!... wish more people had the ballz they claim they have.

It will be hard to convince people to stop saturating themselves in the glow of their television sets, to get up off the couch and die for their country. We as a nation have lost our edge, now when we learn that our politicians have lied to us or are trying to screw us, we just turn the channel and watch the extravagant lives of stars or numerous reality shows. The real world isn't in front of a TV telling you what the real world is, the real world is outside of the cocoon that you wrap yourself in hoping to not be affected by it. Before we can revolt we need to realize that we can never go back to the way things are now, we cannot be as comfortable as we have become with the world around us and those in power, we need to demand more from those who lead us, because they work for us. I can feel something big is on the horizon, a big change and instead of sitting around hoping it doesn't affect me I have decided to prepare myself for what is going to happen whatever it may be.

I honestly do not see anyway around it anymore.If a major "terrorist" attack does happen and they implament a police state....it's on.If i get a knock on the door you can bet your rear end I'm not going any where and they are not coming in.

They have already proven the legal proccess holds 0 significance to them,hence the executive orders for poeple not to testify,hence the new protest laws,hence no one thinks we should be in Iraq,hence the world has grown much more dangerous and fearfull and no one is happy about it but that does not matter.

Lord knows i could go to prison as a terrorist for this very post.Where are our rights going and how the hell did we let this happen?This is far beyond a conspiracy in my opinion and I'm disgusted.I refuse to write more letters and get the same response everytime,I'm sick of friends and family dying for somethign that even they don't believe in now,I'm sick of cover ups and extended troop tours,I'm sick of lies and having no voice.

So yes if it comes to it,I will stand up and do my part to rewrite history.I love this country and we at least owe it to all of our dead soldiers throughout our history.If im the only cat on my block to get my head stomped in by the police for fighting the take over of my country,well then i hope to also be an example and a source of inspiration for those around me to stand and fight for what is right and what is ours.

God Bless America

Hey if a snowball at boston can start a revolution why can't a thread on a website? We should all take a march down to washington storm into congress and demand to remove bush.. or we could do it the old fashioned way with Guns and cannons blazing heheh wouldn't that be a site. I don't think the U.S soldiers would fire on their own people unless they were really threatened by us. If we did overthrow the government we should make it like the Greeks when they were up on the hill, you vote to go to war then youre the one that goes.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Yes, it's true American gov't corruption is at an apparent all-time high. Yes, it's true that there are both implicit and explicit calls for violent revolution on this forum and elsewhere.

For the love of God (or reason, take your pick), please don't do it!!!

Let's go back to the early 1900s. The Russians thought they were getting rid of their tyrants, but instead they went from the frying pan into the fire, setting the stage for 70 years of ultra-oppressive communism.

Is this really what we want for our country?

That is very true. Another thing is (despite popular belief) revolutions are almost always failures. I just read a great article about why and how they are failures in a military magazine i get called Armchair General by Ralph Peters, I will try and scan it and post it here.

user Voxel: I really enjoyed your writing. Some really calm dissections of how this poor old planet works.

I suspect there is a large difference between the embedded power structure that founding US revolutionaries fought compared to what would have to happen to "take america back" from the state today....

Survellience technology, weaponry, total control of transport infrastructures, integrated and pervasive media complicity....power grid.

Not to mention a pretty well kitted out military, that I suspect would turn on its own, given the right emotional incentives.

A few good men, some sturdy horses and an old remington or two isn't gunna cut it.

I do not mean to demean anyone here - but....without some major military support you guys are not taking anything back soon.

The horse has bolted, it just isn't that easy to topple a super-power anymore.

Of course, this is a guess....

Apologies for the double post - all along what I was getting at was that with the states power...

i feel it almost has to be non-violet protest....just to survive, and to keep the death toll down.

I would hate to go up against your military in an urban setting. They are getting too much practice, right now.

Revolution should never be violent, as revolution stems from the people with a desire for change. Unfortunately, those at the reigns of the state rarely (if at all) give up their seats of power without a fight. Is revolution inherantly violent? No, but the power of the state is.

This is not to say that state power cannot be wrested from those in control. there are historical context inwhich the state is actually left leaning and supported downwards wealth distribution, land reforms, and social justice, vis a vie Chile under Allende.

Voxel, i read your "Rants" and found them insightful and informative. I will also pick up that book you recomended.

ChrisF231, I think the main reason that social reform and revolutions are unsuccessful is because of intervention policies (mainly from the US.) If a revolutionary country was not attacked, embargoed, sactioned, and subverted, im sure it could thrive and enjoy friendly relations with neighbouring countries, and ones far away.

Originally posted by Voxel
At the same time or shortly thereafter, everyone will publicly admit that we only killed those people because "our interests were threatened" yet few take the time to ask "who's interests?"

To reiterate this point, I'd like to to pose a question to everyone. What were some of the first "Military" infrastructure targets in Iraq?

Power Stations, Water Treatment Plants, and many other facilities that supplied the public with human neccessities. Why would we target such infrastructures if, indeed, we were invading Iraq to free the people from oppression. Of course it wasn't for freedom of oppression. It was for WMDs. And when we found non, it was for freedom from oppression. Regardless, I'll tell you why we bomb such public facilities:

Contracts. Plain and simple. After these facilites were destroyed they have to be rebuilt. The government issued some $4 billion (not sure on that amount, but it's in the neighborhood) in funding for rebuilding such structure.

This war machine that we've let take over our government is a vicious cycle that's gotten out of control. We will take it back. I don't agree with a violent revolution, but I'm prepared for one if that's the only way possible. I think a public example such as Voxel reccommended is in dire need. Even a nice brick wall around the white house and/or Senate would do nicely to let the Powers-that-be get the message. I don't think we should insinuate that we want violence, but it should be made clear that we'll make things right by any means possible.

Originally posted by Voxel

This war machine that we've let take over our government is a vicious cycle that's gotten out of control. We will take it back. I don't agree with a violent revolution, but I'm prepared for one if that's the only way possible. I think a public example such as Voxel reccommended is in dire need. Even a nice brick wall around the white house and/or Senate would do nicely to let the Powers-that-be get the message. I don't think we should insinuate that we want violence, but it should be made clear that we'll make things right by any means possible.

I'm torn. Not on how I feel about it but on how it would actually unfold. I love the idealism in JFK's quote "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." but I feel that with the conditioning and practice the soldiers have I don't see any reason why they wouldn't be used against US citizens. I also don't see any hesistancy on the soldier's part on firing on citizens. It's been done before and with so many stories of soldier's being asked to kill children, women, civilians etc. I think they're ability to act with a conscience en masse is greatly weakened if not obliterated.

You say the war machine is out of control. It is. It truly is. It's laughable when you know that you blow the hell out of a country's regulatory system only to give no bid contracts to your fatpants friends to rebuild what you just destroyed. It's like pulling a knife on someone and putting it to their throat then putting your knife back and saying "I just saved your life." It's so beyond comical that you have to either A) learn to laugh at how screwed up it is or B) turn on the television and pretend it isn't happening like %97 of the country does. Or C) go insane when you realize effecting change on this large of a scale is beyond the scope of you.

But when you say "we will take it back" I'm not so sure. What makes you think we will take it back? Now let's be clear I am a fairly level-headed guy and I truly an optimist at heart. However, I don't see it in the cards. I don't feel a surging vibration. I can't sense that palpable energy, that oneness that people speak about when they were joined together in the 1960's.


I only see a revolution of any sort (peaceful or otherwise) going forward if you can get an entire state to declare it's secession from the Union. Only then would people start paying attention and start believing in the power of change once again.

I disagree that revolutions should never be violent. Sometimes that is the only way to bring about a revolution. America won its independence from a violent revolution. There are many examples of violence succeeding. I will agree it is not the IDEAL solution, but not much is ideal in this world. I would hope there would be enough gun owners in America that will rise up if a police state becomes reality here. Discussing ideas and protesting cannot work against guns. I do not advocate the loss of life, in fact, I despise it. Every person has so much potential. But for the possibility of a better tommorrow, I think its irresponsible to take anything off the table.

Originally posted by Voxel
The state is an institution that robs Peter to pay Paul - because Paul's ideals are more compatible with the ideals of the state. Never does any state concern itself with freedom or the right to happiness, instead it exists only to help business generate wealth.

i am not a very educated man, but, i would have to disagree in part with this statement.

states exist, or are supposed to exist, to protect the people and manage the taxes. i wont comment on the protect people part. but, as taxes are concerned, someone needs to manage the money. to allocate the funds to the various programs people need.

and to get taxes, the state is supposes to get them from the companies in there districts. so, it is in the interest on the state to promote the well being of the businesses, so as to collect more taxes, so as to provide more or better services to the people, who want them. the key thing is, who want them.

same in business.
people want stuff. when the car was created, and people saw how useful it could be, everbody wanted one. so, some people got together created a company who made them for people to buy. people who bought them paid for them of there own free will. if they thought it was over priced, they didnt buy. over time the price came down to a reasonable level and people bought. and more and more people bought. and more and more taxes were paid to the state. who used that money to provide more or better services to the people.

now, you could say the system has become corrupt. i would agree. but, to say the system was designed corrupt would not be a honest statement.

and as far as revolution goes, what would we replace this system with. i always hear the "viva la revolution" cry on ats, but for the most part, its just a bunch "we hate bush" speech. honestly, what would we replace our corrupted repulic with?

things have been bad before, and we have worked our way out of it. i see no differnce with the situation we are in now. its bad, but, not that bad.

the fallacy of the argument regarding the rich paying lower taxes is widely believed and distributed amongst those of us not making millions. That's quite sad, because it shows an innate biase towards those who succeed, and an unwillingness to digest proper fact.

1. The rich pay more taxes than anyone in this country, accounting for 52% of the total tax burden, while comprising a mere 2-5% of the population.

2. For an ideology that claims you cannot legislate morality, I find it absurd that the libs and dems constantly try to legislate fairness where there is neither the need nor the place for it. (fairness is the only morality the dems and libs know, and only then when it suits them)

3. The redistribution of wealth ignores the very basis of wealth in the first place....free enterprise and capitalism. (in america at least) To hamper this is to dig into the pockets of every American, and puts countless more workers out of a job.

AND the real reason why it's not smart to start a violent revolution in American is this.....THE ARMY HAS TANKS....THE AIRFORCE HAS BIG BOMBS....THE NAVY HAS BIIIIG SHIPS

It may very wel come down to armed insurrection, but until that truly does become our very last resort, I'm hopeful that we will continue to choose ballots over bullets. Right now, your best revolutionary option is your vote and all that goes along with it.

The simple truth is that things are not yet bad enough for Americans to WANT the kind of changes they'll be called on to vote for. Yes, I do know that we risk an apathy that results in a social failure that collapses our society as we knwo, but...to actually incite revolt means turning our backs on every other peaceful option that there might be.

Until our hand is forced, we must take the high road.