Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger
My opinion of the situation in this country is obviously grim if one looks at the themes I tend to write on. As I see it we are either fast becoming a Corporate Feudal Police State, or already have achieved that dubious distinction. I am in favor of a movement towards reversing this situation. There are some issues that can resonate with most Americans and any movement seeking to reverse the anti-Constitutional trends afoot in the U.S. today must find the means to go beyond the falseness of the Left/Right, Liberal/Conservative ideological inanity. We have a corporate two party system, run by an oligarchic elite, whose base disagreement is how to treat those 99% of us, who in their view are the American Peasantry. The Republican Corporatists in effect believe that the majority of Americans should be left to their own devices, while the Democratic Corporatists mildly look for palliatives that won’t disturb their benefactors who are really in charge. Some may say my viewpoint is a radical one and this is possibly so, though the definitions of “radical” have blurred through the years. In my life I’ve spent a number of years as a political activist in one form or another and as I approach the age of 70, I think that my experiences have taught me much about political activism and the potential dangers it brings to the people at large. Right now I find two issues that frighten me for the sake of the future and how my progeny will experience it. The first is the notion of a coming police state and the second is the prospect of a violent, revolutionary upheaval in reaction to it. In other words I see we the People of the United States being between the proverbial “rock and a hard place”.
A study/survey done at Farleigh Dickinson University came out this week done by: Dan Cassino who is a professor of political science it was titled:”BELIEFS ABOUT SANDY HOOK COVER-UP, COMING REVOLUTION UNDERLIE DIVIDE ON GUN CONTROL”. http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2013/guncontrol/
“Partisan divisions on gun control go deeper than the legislation being fought over in Congress. Supporters and opponents of gun control have very different fundamental beliefs about the role of guns in American society. Overall, the poll finds that 29 percent of Americans think that an armed revolution in order to protect liberties might be necessary in the next few years, with another five percent unsure. However, these beliefs are conditional on party. Just 18 percent of Democrats think an armed revolution may be necessary, as opposed to 44 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of independents.
Only 38 percent of Americans who believe a revolution might be necessary support additional gun control legislation, compared with 62 percent of those who don’t think an armed revolt will be needed. “The differences in views of gun legislation are really a function of differences in what people believe guns are for,” said Cassino. “If you truly believe an armed revolution is possible in the near future, you need weapons and you’re going to be wary about government efforts to take them away.”
While Professor Cassino did this survey from the perspective of the gun control issue, that is not my focus in this piece. What concerns me is the amount of people who believe that an armed revolution in this country is necessary and what group in our population these people represent. You see I too believe that the changes needed to bring our country in line with the aspirations of our Founding Fathers would be revolutionary; however, I also believe that “armed” revolution never works towards positive changes.
The “American Revolution” and the subsequent Constitutional Republic derived was the first modern example of a revolution against tyranny that worked. Prior to that “revolutions” were in fact coups, where one “King” was replaced by another “King” and tyranny still reigned, whether or not in a more benign form. However, the “American Revolution” was not a classic revolution; it was an example of an uprising against a foreign imperialist power. History is replete with examples of this type of revolt against a foreign power, from the Egyptians throwing off 200 years of Hittite rule 1,300 years ago to the numerous examples of the Afghan rejecting foreign hegemonic rule of their country. To my mind the first major modern revolution was the French Revolution and in the end that revolution replaced a decadent monarchy with a power hungry Emperor. We have seen many modern armed revolutions all over this world since the French Revolution. How many have ended with tyranny replaced by a better form of government? Those since 1900 certainly haven’t produced salutary results.
The Russian Revolution replaced the despicable Romanov Dynasty, with two arguable sociopaths in Lenin and Stalin. They instituted as system that represented a slight improvement in living standard for the serfs, but that was every bit as much a feudal economy as under the Tzars. The nobility was replaced by “The Party” and things devolved to such a point that the USSR became the world’s largest prison camp. Under the Tzars at last my ancestors were able, if not encouraged to leave their accommodations “beyond the pale” and come to a place offering greater freedom and opportunity. Since the end of the “Cold War” Russia has moved away from Communism and towards Fascism, now under a new sociopath, Vladimir Putin.
The Chinese Revolution deposed a crumbling empire, ruled by regional satraps into a Communist State, led by another sociopath, “Chairman Mao” and his henchmen/women. Mao died and he was replaced by a faceless group of Communist Party functionaries who embraced “Capitalism”, which in fact seems to have also gone in the Fascist direction. Having known actual American Stalinists and Maoists in the 60’s, these developments since then have given me a kind of bitter amusement at the correctness of my judgment of those I knew and whose blandishments I rejected. They were a humorless lot, who had difficulty relating to people on any genuine level. Perhaps they too were sociopathic in nature, but I really think it was that they were the type of people who needed some authority to follow in their lives and in those instances chose Marx.
Many people, perhaps the majority of the populations anyplace are afraid to stand on their own judgment and seek the authority of some political/economic system, or most especially a religion. I wrote about that awhile ago: http://jonathanturley.org/2012/01/21/the-authoritarians-a-book-review-and-book/ . That guest blog was about the “authoritarian mindset” as detailed by the book “The Authoritarians” which was written by Bob Altemeyer, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. The book is free incidentally and a link to get it is included in the blog. To quote Professor Altemeyer from his book:
“[A] right-wing authoritarian follower doesn’t necessarily have conservative political views. Instead he’s someone who readily submits to the established authorities in society, attacks others in their name, and is highly conventional. It’s an aspect of his personality, not a description of his politics. Right-wing authoritarianism is a personality trait, like being characteristically bashful or happy or grumpy or dopey.
You could have left-wing authoritarian followers as well, who support a revolutionary leader who wants to overthrow the establishment. I knew a few in the 1970s, Marxist university students who constantly spouted their chosen authorities, Lenin or Trotsky or Chairman Mao. Happily they spent most of their time fighting with each other”
I can immediately see an objection raised in the minds of some readers regarding Authoritarians supporting established authorities including government officials. They might well think well the ultra-Conservative Movement is anti-government, so how could they be Authoritarian in personality? The answer is I think easy. ”Authoritarian followers usually support the established authorities in their society, such as government officials and traditional religious leaders.” To many “authoritarians” true authority might come from FOX News, Ayn Rand, Karl Marx, Pat Robertson, or even Adolph Hitler. The innate need that they have driving them is the fact that life itself is and always has been a very scary proposition. To deal with the anxiety that fear produces many people need to reach out for something that will give them a feeling of certainty, whether it is a God, an “Ism”, or even a Glock.
In Salon.com this week the columnist David Sirota wrote about the FDU survey linked above in an article titled Rise of the conservative revolutionaries” he begins:
“There’s plenty of proof of an authoritarian streak and animus toward democratic ideals in today’s conservative movement. There was the movement’s use of its judicial power to halt a vote recount and instead install a president who had lost the popular vote. There is the ongoing GOP effort to make it more difficult for people to cast a vote in an election. There is the GOP’s record use of the Senate filibuster to kill legislation that the vast majority of the country supports. There is a GOP leader’s declaration that what the American people want from their government simply “doesn’t matter.”
Up until today, you might have been able to write all that anti-democratic pathology off as one infecting only the Republican Party’s politicians and institutional leadership, but not its rank-and-file voters. But then this morning Fairleigh Dickinson University released this gun control-related poll showing that authoritarianism runs throughout the entire party.
Take a look at the cross-tabs on page 3 of the national survey. That’s right, you are reading it correctly: Almost half (44 percent) of all self-described Republican voters say they believe “an armed revolution might be necessary to protect our liberties.” Just as bad, more Republicans believe an armed revolution might be necessary than believe one isn’t necessary.” http://www.salon.com/2013/05/01/rise_of_the_conservative_revolutionaries/
In the 2012 election obviously more Americans voted for Barack Obama than for Mitt Romney. In the total vote for the congressional election the majority by far voted for Democratic Congresspeople over Republicans, but gerrymandering skewed the outcome. My point is that currently the population clearly favors the Democrats and in a democratic system one would suppose that the populace would abide by the results of the election. Yet we now see proof, as if it hadn’t been obvious before, that 44% of Republicans believe an armed revolution to support their views might be necessary. Following that the survey also found that including the beliefs of self-described Democrats and Independents a total of 38% of the American populace believes that an armed revolution might we be necessary.
Another way of putting that is that much more than one third of all Americans believe that our system of government and our Constitution has failed, or has been failing. Now truthfully I am among that thirty eight percent, yet I am strongly opposed to the concept of change via armed revolution. This is no dichotomy in my thinking; rather it is my judgment of what I see as the reality of the situation. My background in the social sciences and mental health, combined with my lifelong interest in history and mythology, has led me to the conclusion that most of humanity’s problems are not religious, political and/or economic in causation. Those “Ism’s” are merely the manifestation of the ills of the world, or to put it another way the symptoms. The real cause is rooted in psychological and possibly genetic pathology and is called Sociopathic Behavior. Those who are said to be sociopaths suffer from what is defined in the DSM IV as Anti-Social Personality Disorder. What follows is an overview in the DSM IV “Antisocial Personality Disorder Overview (Written by Derek Wood, RN, BSN, PhD Candidate)”
“Antisocial Personality Disorder results in what is commonly known as a Sociopath. The criteria for this disorder require an ongoing disregard for the rights of others, since the age of 15 years. Some examples of this disregard are reckless disregard for the safety of themselves or others, failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors, deceitfulness such as repeated lying or deceit for personal profit or pleasure, and lack of remorse for actions that hurt other people in any way.”
“People with this disorder appear to be charming at times, and make relationships, but to them, these are relationships in name only. They are ended whenever necessary or when it suits them, and the relationships are without depth or meaning, including marriages. They seem to have an innate ability to find the weakness in people, and are ready to use these weaknesses to their own ends through deceit, manipulation, or intimidation, and gain pleasure from doing so.
They appear to be incapable of any true emotions, from love to shame to guilt. They are quick to anger, but just as quick to let it go, without holding grudges. No matter what emotion they state they have, it has no bearing on their future actions or attitudes.” http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
Read the overview above and think about how closely that description may well apply to our political leaders, corporate leaders and religious leaders. When we someone like Sarah Palin that description should come to mind. One of the points made in the book “The Authoritarians” which I quoted above is that those who lead those with authoritarian personalities are rarely, if ever true believers in the cause. My take on it is that most of those who lead us humans in the cultural, political or religious sense are sociopaths using a particular doctrine to merely satisfy their own ends. In revolutionary terms they are willing to sacrifice anyone on the altar of their own needs. These leaders then are willing to commit any deed to achieve their ends. Was this not true of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mao?
To paraphrase John Lennon “you say you want a revolution well you can count me out”. So we come to my own personal conundrum which is that I see how bad things are, yet I don’t have any real solution to change them. An American Revolution in this current climate will only lead to a Fascist Dictatorship of those who would make the “Tea Party” seem moderate. When one defines the problems in this world in religious, political and/or economic terms one can propose solutions, but I believe that ideological solutions lead to the same dead end, because the problems are the result of sociopathic behavior, with some genetics thrown in. The issue is how do we deal with that successful, yet anti-social behavior and change the country and or the world for the better? I really don’t know, nor have I any long term solutions. I cope with that by trying to report the world around me as I see it and hope that someone much wiser than me, who is not a sociopath, nor a barker of a some palliative nostrum, will come along to help provide ideas that can save us all. Perhaps that someone is you the reader. If so please share your ideas with us and any comfort they may bring.
Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger
The red is republican if you didnt know.
mike spindell:
interesting article.
here is the 2012 election results by county, I dont think this is a result of gerrymandering:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d8/2012_US_Presidential_Election_Results_by_Counties.png&imgrefurl=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2012_US_Presidential_Election_Results_by_Counties.png&h=691&w=1024&sz=272&tbnid=zP_k_lwRkavkuM:&tbnh=82&tbnw=121&prev=/search%3Fq%3D2012%2Belection%2Bresults%2Bby%2Bcounty%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=2012+election+results+by+county&usg=__gmaVArqi5plVWjfH3qPkFaEtWqM=&docid=qC433hvZhgsDIM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iPuEUYeKKM7q0QH-84HgDw&sqi=2&ved=0CEkQ9QEwBA&dur=3562
The best revolution of the last century in America was the Hippie Revolution. America learned a lot of things and has put these things on the shelf. The pot smokers are on oxycotton and living in nursing homes and their kids and grandkids are like the Ike boys and girls of the early fifties. The Occupy Movement showed some promise. Right now we could not do better than Barak Obama for President but we could do with a new Congress and retire some of the old farts off of the Supreme Court. The wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and next Syria and Iran show that the Military Industrial Complex was the only notion that Ike had that was in fact real. Had he stayed with Kay and foresaken Mamie perhaps he would not have won and we would all be better off today. The Military Industrial Complex flourished under Ike and that is why I dont like Ike. Those of you who send your kids or grandkids off to the Army “to make a man out of him” are the biggest fools. Those who send your schmuck politician off to Washington to vote for war are the biggest schmucks since the electorate that elected Adolph Hitler. So my advice is look back on Vietnam and pull out now like your father should have. Tell sonnyboy that learning to be a sniper wont get him a job at Woolworths or any other place and to learn to be a man back here in America and to forget the weenie uniforms.
It is afternoon here in Europe and I have to take my half blind guy to the cathouse in Amsterdam. He needs guidance. I need a better iPhone to hook up with the Dogalogue Machine back home in America. Over and out.
The major revolutions mentioned, and those commented on, are typical of the nationalism harbored in us all.
By “us” I mean humanity around the world.
It is more complicated than mere national solutions now.
Here are a couple of articles that illustrate the point:
Europe Bans Bee-Harming Pesticides; US Keeps Spraying
You Are a Guinea Pig
The source of our collective lives, and our bodies along with it, are under attack.
The attack is from the industrial grade addiction to fossil fuels and chemicals that our civilization itself suffers from.
Unfortunately, we face more than the people of past revolutions faced.
Yet, the old saying “we gotta start somewhere” comes to mind.
The ultimate peaceful solution is “Civics Education” for high school students where they are mandated to understand the concepts of American government so they support the entire Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land. Generally speaking today Republicans only support the 2nd and 10th Amendments while most Democrats support any amendments except those two. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are a package deal, it’s all of it or none of it. (Sandra Day O’Connor has started a new website http://www.iCivics.com to help educate young children on American government).
For example: If not educated properly many adult voters don’t understand that the 2nd Amendment can’t be cherry-picked out of context when interpreting the Bill of Rights. Most 2nd Amendment supporters were totally silent when the Patriot Act was violating the other amendments in the Bill of Rights – sacrificing liberty for security – but are ready to revolt and secede when the the same standard is used on the 2nd Amendment. Properly educated and led by real leaders these voters wouldn’t be radicalized and probably would have opposed unAmerican laws like the Patriot Act. It is the fault of our American leaders of both parties.
Another problem is our leaders divide us instead of uniting us. If one demonizes the other party, their supporters flood them with money due to the threat of the evil other side gaining power. While they are distracting and dividing us they are not serving the voters.
“Perhaps that someone is you the reader. If so please share your ideas with us and any comfort they may bring.”
LOL.
Intellectually, politically, and culturally challenging post Mike.
Which, under the auspices of today’s world, axiomatically makes the issues you discuss disturbing.
We are all in it together, meaning every human that has ever lived, and still here we are.
lexmanifesta,
Is ‘Bob Kausten’ a historical figure that we should know?
Hello,
I was doing some online research and happened to go through your http://jonathanturley.org/ as well. I was really amazed by the rich and informative contents that your site provides.
I am a content writer and I can write a fully customized and well-researched post for your blog. My articles are mostly of 600 – 700 words related to Health.
– You won’t have to pay anything for the content.
– You will own the copyright for the content.
– I promote my guest posts on social media and on other websites, which will also help boost your site’s search engine rankings.
It would be really great if I could get 1 of my website’s (do-follow link) in the author bio.
Please do let me know if you’re still accepting guest posts at this moment. I’m really excited about the opportunity and I hope to hear from you soon. 🙂
Best Regards,
S. James
contactsarahjames@gmail.com
When I watched Obama run Bush’s third term I realized that the same people are still running America. The 180,000+ war contractors that are robbing the treasury right under our noses, Big Banks, Big Oil, Wall St, & a corrupt group of people in key positions.
So with the big money pushing candidates, no matter which candidate wins, WE STILL LOSE! The argument of the “lesser of two evils” doesn’t work anymore, they both work for the same people, it just ain’t us!
The biggest change I see that needs to be made is that even ‘survivalists’ think they can just hole up somewhere and ride the storm out….I think they are fooling themselves.
Like Ben said we all need to hang together…or we’ll all hang together…
good post Mike. i agree with you on most points but i tend to see a large religious component to it also.
Mike and Gene,
You guys definitely nailed it. I dare say that a certain Sheriff in Palm Beach County Florida is probably going to be getting calls about you on his new hotline. I don’t think for a minute that the sheriff will appreciate the nuance that you aren’t actually advocating a revolution. From his mindset, it is enough that you are talking about it.
I am in slight disagreement on one thing. I think economics is the key. The wealth/income gap between the 1%er’s and the rest of us continues to diverge. Upward mobility and the ability to elevate to a higher class is extraordinarily limited. Eventually resentment turns into rebellion. There is nothing on the horizon to suggest that the “corporate feudal police state” will be inclined to cede any of their consolidated wealth or political power to the unwashed 99%. It is possible that a charismatic leader could surface and lead the country in a progressive direction. Think Theodore Roosevelt and his “New Nationalism” speech of 1910, but I doubt it. After all, Theodore had plenty of charisma, but still lost the election. More likely we will come to understand and eventually act upon Frederic Douglass’ observation that, “power never concedes anything without a demand. It never has and never will”. At some point revolution becomes inevitable.
I am going to re-read Jack London’s, Iron Heel, and thank my lucky stars I don’t live in Palm Beach County as I’m sure I have said enough to warrant some dutiful right wing authoritarian calling me in. I hope everybody that reads this comment reads Altemeyer’s book. It explains much about what is going on in America. I could be mistaken, but I think Bob Altemeyer had a chapter in the Authoritarians dedicated to Bob Kausten.
Very thoughtful piece, Mike. I believe that the poll figures do not indicate actual support for armed revolution, however, but reflect instead a high level of fear grounded in authoritarianism and fed by Second Amendment remedy fantasies.
The Democratic Party is hampered by a lack of effective leadership at all levels, beginning with the President. William Jennings Bryan taught us that great orators are not necessarily great leaders. Pres. Obama confirms that truth. We are constantly reminded that the President has had to choose his battles carefully. That may well be true, but the careful choice of a battle is a pointless exercise when it is not combined with the political will to fight it.
The Republican Party is a different matter. All of its post-election analysis has focused exclusively on labels and packaging. Ford Motors understood that sales would not improve by changing the name of the Edsel. But Republicans refuse to recognize what has primarily driven their politics since the 2008 election. That one thing is racism. I am convinced that the election of a black president shredded the thin veneer of superficial tolerance in the Republican base. From that moment we have seen racist opposition buried in euphemisms: “socialist,” “Muslim,” “foreign-born,” “dictator,” “un-American.” It has been vicious and ugly. Racism is the room in the middle of the elephant.
Here’s the type of revolution (or March on Washington & Wall Street) that we need:
http://college.cengage.com/history/ayers_primary_sources/malcolm_x_washington_1964.htm
I think your fundamental theme is flawed…….specifically the notion that the problem is ‘sociopaths in charge’…..I’m sure its a viscerally appealing theory, but it really is just a clever way of demonizing those who disagree with a given set of beliefs.
The bottom line is that what seperates us ideologically is a lot more involved than.just ‘Sarah Palin is a sociopath’……the themes of history are driven by something far more fundamental. The fact that all humans are born with finite lives and limited resources. Those with skill and ability seek to advance their position using those skills and abilities…….those without skills and abilities have learned to use collective influence to gain access to resources…….all human beings seek what they perceive is their own interests.
Excellent, Mike!
This is a representative republic, and if the government is bad, it’s because we voted it in. We are the government. We have to fix it, no matter how hard and tedious the task. I don’t like it. It doesn’t matter whether I like it.
Those who entertain ideas of violent revolution are traitors to this country (us) and the Constitution. The Constitution doesn’t include permission to violently overthrow the government of the U.S.A., because some fool didn’t like the way the vote went. The words “treason” and “sedition” are, however, used in the Constitution.
If “oathkeepers” tell me they’re going to “uphold the Constitution” by promoting violence against elected officials, then they are attempting to blow smoke up my butt. It won’t go up there. I’ve tried.
There will be no armed revolution, anywhere but in someone’s twisted delusion.
Last time there was a successful revolution, the resisted government was thousands of miles, and several weeks, away. That’s no longer the case. The government is run by us, and it’s just down the street. If the government’s a tyrant, then we are the tyrant.
Back in the days of relatively primitive weaponry and transportation, a significant number of states talked themselves into believing they could revolt. How’s that working for them? Will they ever recover from it, after 150 years? I doubt it. A lot of their descendants are the ones itching for revolution. I guess they love being professional victims, and having the hell beaten out of them.
Out of fear of numerous boogie-men, “we” chose to create the most powerful military force in the world. Now that it’s here, I can just pick up my pathetic “2nd amendment remedy,” and stop the government?
Talking violent revolution persuades the weak-minded and insane among us to do violence to law enforcement officers. You know, the ones that might be living in your neighborhood, just doing their jobs.
The weak-minded and insane will pour out of the woodwork, in response to your article.
Excellent job as always, Mike. However . . .
“What concerns me is the amount of people who believe that an armed revolution in this country is necessary and what group in our population these people represent.”
A valid concern but you don’t address another segment of the population – the segment that thinks revolution is inevitable, but that the outcome of that action is uncertain.
“You see I too believe that the changes needed to bring our country in line with the aspirations of our Founding Fathers would be revolutionary; however, I also believe that ‘armed’ revolution never works towards positive changes. [. . . ] An American Revolution in this current climate will only lead to a Fascist Dictatorship of those who would make the “Tea Party” seem moderate. When one defines the problems in this world in religious, political and/or economic terms one can propose solutions, but I believe that ideological solutions lead to the same dead end, because the problems are the result of sociopathic behavior, with some genetics thrown in. The issue is how do we deal with that successful, yet anti-social behavior and change the country and or the world for the better? I really don’t know, nor have I any long term solutions.”
Agreed. And I think Gandhi’s approach with the Salt Marches is a good place to start. Short of massive numbers taking non-violent action though, nothing will be accomplished without some degree of violence. Even Gandhi’s tactics resulted in deaths albeit minimal when compared to traditional warfare or insurgency tactics. The one factor that I think throws such an upheaval into the vagaries of uncertainty instead of a guaranteed Fascist Dictatorship is a lack of a unifying figure or cause for the far right. Although gun ownership has the potential to be such a cause, even among the 2nd proponents on the right, there is (at this point anyway) too much fractionation among the various parties to present a unified front based on a cause alone. Should such a leader emerge or the situation change? Fascism is the outcome without question. However, this does discount the very real threat of fascism from the far left as well. The Democrats have squandered the mandate to bring accountability and justice back into politics after the manifestly criminal Bush Administration on kissing Wall Street’s ass and further aiding and abetting the war crimes and policies destructive to civil liberties started by the previous administration. In some cases, such as the kill list, going beyond those previous crimes against the Constitution. We have a double threat of a fascist outcome from both the far right and the far left as both are corporatists now with a demonstrated track record of treating the Constitution like a urinal puck if it profits them personally. Yet again, on the left there is a lot of fractionation and no unifying leader in a true sense as distinguished from the faux leadership of progressive causes by Obama.
The first conflict is likely to be brutal and end in fascism no matter what after a period of anarchy. That does not discount that fascism is creeping up on We the People with or without conflict. Greed and selfishness and deference to corporations infest our body politic like a cancer. Short term? It is inevitable unless by some miracle Congress grows a spine and throws the money changers out of the “temple of government”. And you know me well enough to know that I think that is highly unlikely.
But that is not the end of it.
Fascism always ends badly is the lesson of history.
The second uprising is where the potential for real change rests. When people have been subjected to the unrestrained avarice and sociopathic tendencies of those put in power by the corporations and suffered under that yoke, there will come a day when having Sen. or Rep. in front of your name or CEO or Chairman or Director of a large corporation will be like putting a bullseye on your back and again we’ll see anarchy, but a different kind. One where people are unified in vision of the democratic (note the small d) ideals and a desire for justice if not by leaders and specific narrow issue defined causes.
And that is when the 1% should flee for their venal corrupt lives because now as always 99>1.
I know this because history tells me so, but it does not give me a certainty of outcome. Non-violent resistance is the best tactic from an ethical standpoint, but no tactic guarantees success. Neither “theirs” nor “ours”. You plays the game, you takes your chances but I think one thing is certain at this point.
There will be blood.
Whose, how much and for how long are the questions.
You are right to be concerned.
Only the delusional, the ignorant, and/or the naive wouldn’t be at this point.
The average non violent person almost always loses in a violent revolution and considering the views of those now championing such action I believe that would be a certainty.
The frustration people feel is real but part of the blame for the problem we are now facing falls squarely on the shoulders of the voters who would rather worry about how other people comport themselves in the most intimate and personal areas of their lives rather than considering the rise of corporate power and the diminution of the rights And power of humans. We have allowed big business to get us fighting over scraps while they steal the entire pie.
Thanks for the thought provoking post.
Excellent treatise Mike. I am with you that I don’t think a revolution will solve our problems, but I also do not think a revolution will happen in our lifetimes. I would be curious if the FDU study had been done during the Bush years if the results would be the same? If not, why not? Could the underlying reason why many are expecting an armed revolution is related the color of the skin of the current President? Like you I do not know the answer to that question.
As I see it the “Corporate Feudal Police State” has adopted a strategy of divide and conquer regarding the left/right-conservative/liberal populace. How we can unite against it is a major question in my mind.