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.

 

The Conspiracy for a Non-Violent passive public...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Ok. This is just a theory I have put together through observation.

It seems to me within this last century (20th century) theres has been a huge change in the way it is acceptable to protest. Non violence seems to be the only route acceptable by society. It would seem that it has been ingrained within life in the United States and other modern nations around the world that if things got rough you are supposed to sit there and take it.

Now, to set the record straight, my personal belief lies with violence being the last resort, but still within my right to make that decision to take the next step if necessary.

A vague but sad example is how parents teach their kids today. It is always walk away, correct? Now, there are always the "badasses" who think they are tough and become bullies praying on the "weak" ones who were always taught to always walk away, but my father was one who believed in fighting. He was always a scrapper who did not like to take crap from anybody. I believe in a more suddle aproach. He was more direct, but always thought he was in his right to take that step if necessary. And again, I am not saying fists first words later.

So my point here is more of one that centers on public displays of protest. I was giving the example that lies with peoples personal beliefs that get filtered into the mainstream view. Like most anti-war protests are non violent. Back in the 60s most civil rights protest were non-violent. Those people got pummeled, killed, raped, thrown in jail, received broken bones among other dispicable things.

The funny thing here is how these crowds that stay non violent sometimes get subdued with violence and this is acceptable. We use war (the ultimate form of violence) as a means to an end and this is acceptable. By that logic, I would think people would be going at it like cats and dogs, but protests stay non-violent and yet the dissatisfaction of the American public is at an all-time high.

My point here I guess, is when does it become acceptable for violence? Once Americas name is destroyed beyond all repair? Once the violence comes to us? When do the people who make the decisions have to answer to the people and be held accountable? And if the court system fails, when does the public take things into their own hands?

...Im short on time, so I will have to come back to this later. Look forward to hearing from anyone with an opinion.

edit to add:

I think there has been some agenda to cast a non-violent "net" over the public. And given the impression by the media and school systems that it is immoral and always wrong to commit acts of violence. When in fact this nation was built upon it. The government has subdued the public and uprisings since the civil war and absolutely nothing has been done about it.

I am not saying this is the time to rise up or anything as I believe it might be futile unless it was done by 100 million people. Obviously there are enough content people that would never let that happen. But in the past I believe there arose situations where the government should have been put in check. I won't go into what those situations are because that is not the point of this thread.

But it would seem the government has granted itself (whether it be its policing agency or its military) the moral authority alone to commit acts of aggression and violence with complete disregard of our (the people) right to become violent if indeed necessary.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by abelievingskeptic]




posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Here are the words of Thomas Jefferson. You will probably notice that you recognize part of the quote, but have never seen the whole thing. Ask yourself why this is.

God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 


Hi,
thanks for that quote there. That is an excellent example of what needs to be done from time to time. Unfortunately, I see this as very unlikely due to multiple reasons such as fear, the mindset that it is immoral to use force or violence in public and apathy.

People always forget history it would seem. I wonder what the Thomas Jefferson would say today?



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
My opinion is that as a government aligns itself closer with the will of the people, there will be less motivation for hostile protests and/or violent take-overs.

The US government although far from perfect was designed with the intention to reflect the will of the people.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Absolutely, just as when the government fails and should be repromanded when it succeeds it should be praised. I think the key words you said there are to align the government with the will of the people.

In some ways the will of the people is met, but in many ways the gap is widening. If that gap widens enough the non violence should take a step back and a more appropriate reaction from the people will be necessary. I hope this does not become the case as it should have in the past (even in the recent past), but I think the government needs to start reasessing the will of the people.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I actually see it as the opposite of what you do ...
I think TPTB want people to be more violent not calm and obedient (Problem Reaction Solution senerio)
They send out carrots to make us more violent ..like allowing all the very violent video games,rap songs etc etc (then they try and take them away).....they push guns on the public as the only logical way to defend ourselves .(then they try to take them away) ...they want us all on meth and crack and cigs and alcohol (but wont allow pot which would give them the most submissive society in history of the world if they put it in our water lol) ........
Then they turn around and say ...well these things are all bad for you ...we want to make it where you cant get them no more we also want yall to take these meds (which make them more violent) .....and then they do their best to pit us all against eachother (wars,racist stuff,make the poor poorer and make the rich richer which causes all sorts of wars between them )...
They incite riots,gangs etc ...........so they can just arrest you (which fills up prisons) .......................


Then they give us their solutions the very things they created,watched for our reactions for .What are they just on some power trip or what ?
I mean lets just say I didnt believe in God ..and the bible ..and I was looking at it without the thought of Antichrist ..demons etc ..I would say TPTB seem to be just plain totally insane and it really makes no sense to me whatsover and what they are doing and why they are doing it and what is the outcome they hope to accomplish .....................



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
I respect your opinion, but I'm not sure your ideas of government are clear.


They send out carrots to make us more violent ..like allowing all the very violent video games,rap songs etc etc (then they try and take them away)

"Allowing" and "sending out carrots" are two completely different things I believe. I believe in the Constitiution and free speech. So anyone that wants to listen to rap is free to do so, and it is not the governments right to take away. These are rights instilled in our Constitiution to the people.



.....they push guns on the public as the only logical way to defend ourselves

I think there are many more accounts of the government taking away our guns than "pushing" them on us. In fact i don't recall the government ever pushing guns on me.



...they want us all on meth and crack and cigs and alcohol (but wont allow pot which would give them the most submissive society in history of the world if they put it in our water lol) .......
.

I believe there is an element of truth to this. It might fall in the floride crowd. A lethargic public is one that is easier to control and less likeley to get out of line. I think the drugging (I think you are reffering to the CIA efforts) of the public has more to do with keeping people ignorant. The dumber they are the less questions asked and so on...



They incite riots,gangs etc ...........so they can just arrest you (which fills up prisons) .......................

I would have to see some sort of evidence for this. I highly doubt it.



Then they give us their solutions the very things they created,watched for our reactions for .What are they just on some power trip or what ?
I mean lets just say I didnt believe in God ..and the bible ..and I was looking at it without the thought of Antichrist ..demons etc ..I would say TPTB seem to be just plain totally insane and it really makes no sense to me whatsover and what they are doing and why they are doing it and what is the outcome they hope to accomplish .....................


Im sorry I dont understand any of this. What is your point here?



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   
ive been reading lots of reports on the DNC lately, and one thing that caught me by surprise was that many articles refer to quotes from police and other officials that seem to imply the extreme force against protesters has more to do with maintaining Denver's image, and to make trips to the shopping malls more convenient to visitors. Seriously.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Ok Sorry sometimes I am not real good at writing my thoughts out for others to understand what I am saying ..



I say the Gov allows (which is what I mean by the carrot comment)things like lots of guns to be available for the public ..Everyone carried a gun in the olden days with no Gov interventions ...now everyone carrys guns again ....and now they want to intervene (only because it leads to them using the problem reaction solution on them) ..I believe they want this violent generation we have now to kill kill kill eachother (maybe for population control ) .......
They allow the cussing,gun toteing gangsta rap now which it used to be even the word cuss was sensored lol (ok so Im exagerating) ........

I just think whats going on is exactly what they wanted to go on and that they somehow had a hand in it ..behind the scenes ...



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I believe that Scientist ....
There is so much happening that shows without a doubt at least in my opinion ...(when things dont make sense then to me that means for sure there is something fishy going on ) that people (the public) are being set up and manipulated in every way to suit their (TPTB) purposes ....to get their end game results is what I mean ...........



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Wow, that is just sad. Consumerism at its finest, eh? I know there is quite a bit of protesting at the DNC. What exactly are they protesting?

And this is my point if extreme force is being used to subdue the protest then what gives the government the moral authority to use violence? I mean if the protesters acted back violently, what would happen?

What if the protesters had brought guns? Thats a scary thought



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join