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.

 

This is what Anarchy looks like... (video)

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 06:49 AM
link   

edit on 26-12-2011 by jibeho because: (no reason given)



I got a good laugh with this this morning but the reality behind it makes perfect sense in the wake of the zany behavior of the OWS movement.


As unlikely as it is for OWS to gain power, what would it mean for our nation, and our society, if they did? Michael Bane provided a frank answer. Bane has several decades of experience in the coverage and study of riots and social cavitations worldwide as a journalist. He is also the host of “Best Defense Survival” on the Outdoor Channel.

Bane discussed Occupy’s anarchist collaboration: “If anyone succeeds in bringing down the United States government or creating a social dislocation that breaks this fragile, amazing machine the Founders created, what comes after is not pleasant. What comes is what was before the Dream of America… That was simply survival of the most vicious.”


Who can fill the power vacuum? Just look to Egypt and Libya and envision those who would achieve power in our country


Bane continues, “What the toy anarchists in the Occupy movement don’t understand is that the best organized people in the country are the criminal enterprises. They’re very good at it. MS-13? Biker gangs? Mexican cartels? These guys are good at anarchy… because they are without conscience or any sense of moderation… That is what anarchy looks like. Anarchy looks like someone’s head on a bed.”

The communist and socialist elements within the Occupy movement believe the elimination of our current system, or at least the collapse of it, will bring about a favorable revolution. What the Occupiers fail to understand is the historical, if not psychological, context behind a revolution. These movements are regularly co-opted by more insidious ideologies. Those who instigated the French Revolution ultimately found their way to the guillotines just as many of the antagonists who toppled the Russian Empire found their way into the gulags of Soviet Russia.

Regardless of what conjecture we make about an Occupy rule, what will most assuredly come to pass will be the disorder, chaos, and criminal enterprise that would arise from the ashes of social upheaval. In disrupting ports, freight, and passenger transportation, Occupy may be able to achieve a collapse of our system, but at a cost much greater than they bargained for.

biggovernment.com...-384828

We certainly live in a fragile realm... Cheers!!




edit on 26-12-2011 by jibeho because: oops




posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 07:07 AM
link   
I wish people would check the meaning of terms before they use them.

What you are talking about is Anomy NOT Anarchy.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


Ha Ha ha

Sad. But funny



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


The guy is some kind of "specialist" and he's decided that an entire group of people are "Anarchists"?

Seriously? You trust a word of this guys opinion?

Pathetic, truly pathetic.

The guy doesn't even understand the very basic concept of anarchism, while talking about the institution of a new government. He's a complete idiot.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


Are you such a "detached individual" tha you cannot see the bigger picture?

The"OWS" movement is full of complaints, demands and obstruction. And itself.

It completely lacks an agenda, an alternative, a goal.

Without at least the beginnings of a coherent poliy, "OWS" amounts, at best, to petulant whining. At worst, the result of persistent paralysis will be the empowerment of those more powerful and less scrupulous to step into the void and "legitimize" the tactics, goals and values that the mainstream haws kept in check one way or another.

Your criticisms of the message and the messenger are hollow, without an alternative.

"I don't like it;" and "that's not right," only sound like more of the petulant whining that served as the basis of the thread.

What are you "occupying?"
(Other than valuable bandwidth?)

jw



new topics

top topics
 
3

log in

join