After a revolution. Questions.

Hello fellow humans, today I have a few questions I would like to ask.

How would we know if our revolution has been won for the people?
How are we supposed to live after it? Do we try and put someone else In charge or a group, to try and make a different set of laws nationally. Or will each town make their own rules like the old days and have their own police force? Will we go to a currencies system or back to barter system.

Really there's unlimited questions and no way to answer it. But any input is good to me.

Sorry if this is in the wrong section, mods do as you must. Sorry for grammatical errors and what not too : b

reply to post by ConfusedPeasant

Just about every revolution is claimed to be "For the People." It doesn't sound very good to say it's for the corporate executives or the nomenklatura. You have to know before hand what would be for the people, and that varies from revolution to revolution.

Individual feedom? Material sufficiency? Peace? Control by Committee? Equal distribution of wealth? Any of those things, and more, could be considered as good "for the people."

Why don't you decide and offer your thoughts here?

I think that many laws need to be altered, mainly the laws that make this an undemocratic society. First of all, there must be laws governing elections that give the people a larger variety in candidates. All this corporate money and the 2 party system is not democratic at all, especially considering a politician can say anything just to get elected, and then do whatever they want once in office. Next, there needs to be much more government regulation of large businesses. The government is so entertwined with large businesses that corruption must occur. Human nature suggests it, especially when money is waived in someone's face. Mainly the corruption needs to stop, in politics, business, on Wall Street, etc.

I have long thought about what you are asking, and in doing so I have realized that there are many things that I like about this country, but I also realize that it could be so much better. Some systems are extremely efficient, but many are not. I think true democracy went out the window long ago. It would be extremely difficult to "fix" things after a revolution, to be sure. In fact, it has been said before, although who made the statement is slipping my mind, about starting over being much easier than rebuilding after a revolution. I cannot say I agree with that, but that could be the right way to go. The first Americans did it, and it could be done again. Granted it would be much more difficult now.

Plus, if a revolution overthrew the US government, at some point in the future, then there would be the HUGE problem of foreign invasion. Maybe even before the government was overthrown. The foreign government may even fund and support those who are rebelling in the name of freedom, basically telling them what they want to hear. Then, after the military no longer exists, or is beaten, foreign forces move in and take over. But there are still measures that can be taken to fix things as they are. It would take a while, and the opportunity is slipping ever further away every single year. This is because more and more laws, measures, and executive orders are being passed that give too much power to individuals who have no positional oversight. Those who come after, say the president, are not going to want to abolish powers that they themselves would get to execute. So as this continues, it will get much worse than it is now, with the killing of dissenting citizens, etc. I fully expect this to happen in the future, although I cannot say how long it will take. That is where our government is headed though.

If you are interested in mostly non-violent tactics that could be used to overthrow a dictator, and in many instances a tyrannical government, read Gene Sharp's "From Dictatorship to Democracy." This is one of the most brilliant individuals in the world when it comes to ideas like this. This book was banned in multiple countries, mostly those who have the potential for high volatility among the population.

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


These are in line with my thoughts as well. More and more regulation of the people but no equal regulation for the governmental bodies doing this regulating. Checks and balances exist - they are just getting less balanced and the checkers more corrupt. I keep coming back to popular vote rather than electoral as a start. Don't know why no one agrees but I see this as a positive beginning to change.

As far as how things would work after any revolution - have to have leadership IMO. I think this because there are always gonna be takers; control freaks who need to be kept at bay for those who can't compete for resources. Therefore, a leadership that is of a committee of people who come from all walks of life and do it for "free". No getting rich off of being a facilitator of rights and equality. Money corrupts people.

reply to post by ConfusedPeasant


You have questions....I have some as well...

I'm curious....

With all this talk of revolution....

Who exactly would be the revolution against? The military? The Cops? Government workers like the Forest Service? Congress and House? Random politicians?

Who would be the enemy? Who would lead the revolution? You?

A revolution would denote an overthrow of an established societal and governmental system by fundamentally changing it through force. I don't think that's what people necessarily want. They like the governmental structure and societal structure for the most part. And that's key, the most part. There are loopholes and ambiguities caused either by unprecedented scenarios, technology, or downright subversion that various administrations, institutions and interests have taken advantage of to undermine the foundation of this country, specifically the constitution. I think a lot has been learned over the last two centuries, and a shored up constitution that reforms but doesn't replace many aspects of government is what a lot of people desire. I would say a civil war is more likely.

How would you know if the new system is for the people after the normalization period? Basically if the new constitution or set of laws or whatever formal documentation that sets the standard of governance written by the victors strips those very same victors who wrote it of all power and immediately and in no uncertain terms gives it to the people in the form of unlimited franchise (the right to vote). That formal declaration by the winners must also ensure that the power remains with the people in that capacity for the foreseeable future under the threat of force. There are only a mere handful of revolutions in human history where the winners have done just that, the American War of Independence being one of them. Anything short of that would mean that it was all for nothing in my opinion.


Edit: Personally I would like to see the bill of rights clarified with definitions to remove any interpretation whatsoever. I also think synthetic individuals (corporations) and their ability to petition government ought to be addressed. Perhaps an article on commerce requiring the treasury to never operate on a deficit. Stuff like that. While we're at it, remove legal jargon, legalese, and make common law in plain English a requirement for legislation, business contracts, and so on.

Originally posted by olaru12
reply to post by ConfusedPeasant

 

You have questions....I have some as well...

I'm curious....

With all this talk of revolution....

Who exactly would be the revolution against? The military? The Cops? Government workers like the Forest Service? Congress and House? Random politicians?

Who would be the enemy? Who would lead the revolution? You?

edit on 3-6-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

It would be a mess. Maybe a litmus test to show friend from enemy.

Friend = Believes in the Republic, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights 100%.
Enemy = Does not.

There are several who come to mind as leaders but I will not speak their names here. Don't want anymore "helicopter" accidents.

reply to post by ConfusedPeasant


I think that we gotta take the corrupted officials out of the government and build a new form of education where every citizen grows up to be well informed about their rights and about the government, how it should be and how it works. So in the future generations of citizens will recognize a corrupted government and have the right to take them out of office immediately!

reply to post by ConfusedPeasant


If you need to know who won, check and see who supplied the cash and weapons.
You also want to see how much they poured into the opposition as well.
There are very few if any "grass roots" movements nowadays.

That's a good question, and the dangerous part about a revolution - who rules next? Was that person pulling the strings? Pretty common occurrence.

Originally posted by Tlexlapoca
reply to post by ConfusedPeasant

 

I think that we gotta take the corrupted officials out of the government and build a new form of education where every citizen grows up to be well informed about their rights and about the government, how it should be and how it works. So in the future generations of citizens will recognize a corrupted government and have the right to take them out of office immediately!

edit on 3-6-2013 by Tlexlapoca because: (no reason given)

Who decides who's corrupt? Will there be trials or just mob rule?

What if someone accuses YOU of corruption?

reply to post by olaru12


Well it wouldnt be just someone it would have to be a whole group of people who KNOW your corrupt. People know who is causing corruption its not that hard to point out the bad guys its just that they dont have the power to throw them out, only those in power have the power to throw out those im power...sometimes.

Its worse today, a cop can just accuse you of stealing or murder and youll be in prison in no time

Originally posted by olaru12

Who decides who's corrupt? Will there be trials or just mob rule?

What if someone accuses YOU of corruption?

I say again:

Friend = Believes in the Republic, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights 100%.
Enemy = Does not.