Rebellion - How do we do it? (Political)

[Lee Chambers]

So with the country quickly spiraling out of control and people demanding much, much more of our money than usual, I can't help but wonder if we're reaching a point where someone is going to say "Fuck it, let's burn it down and start over." I'm talking, of course, about rebelling against the established federal government of the United States.

The first response to my question would be "It can't be done." We've seen our military in action, we know what we're capable of. So let's get past that part.

How would it start? How could we get people to join the cause? Where could we get the things we need? How big do we want to go? Are we looking to overthrow and reform or are we simply wanting to carve out our own little niche? Which would be better in the long run?

A friend of mine and I have gone back and forth on this matter for the last year. He insists that if the people want change they can simply tell the government "We're no longer following you and we're not going to do what you say anymore."

But I believe that the American public has became so apathetic to things that go on in the world that only a very violent and upfront revolt would shock them awake. Not to mention that doing something like not paying your taxes or refusing to leave your property for imminent domain is a simple fix for the government...they call the police, who have guns. You are one person or maybe only a handful of people and they are many more with training and weapons. This is another reason why only force would make a true change in our government, because they government is always using force to enforce its laws.

So, let's start with the first question. How do we get the ball rolling?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

That's simple. Get a bunch of heavily armed citizens (and there are tons of us in this country, that's the great thing about the 2nd Amendment) and seize all of the major government buildings by force. There's not much that they can do to stop us, with such vast numbers and firepower at our disposal.

That, of course, is if we actually do such a thing. Which at this point is still an academic question.

 

[starrkers]

You need the major media outlets as well.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

You need the major media outlets as well.

Or at least seize Fox News. LOL.

 

[starrkers]

Or at least seize Fox News. LOL.

I'm not kidding. If you seriously want to wrest power, you must have control of the media. you can sit on Capitol Hill forever and no one will notice if the old guard can talk to the people and prevent them knowing of your existence.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I'm not kidding. If you seriously want to wrest power, you must have control of the media. you can sit on Capitol Hill forever and no one will notice if the old guard can talk to the people and prevent them knowing of your existence.

Actually, I'd send the old guard to Alaskan penal colonies, but that's just me.

But, yes, it's important to get the right message. So the establishment media (and the right-wing media, for that matter) don't brand it a "violent, hostile takeover of the Republic by unrealistic reactionary fanatics" or some such nonsense.

But I was mainly poking fun at how much more powerful Fox is than its "maverick" image.

 

[DeeZire]

Keeping in mind that this thread is hypothetical, right? I don't think we're allowed to actually discuss the overthrow of the government. I'm certainly not discussing the overthrow of the government. Hey, don't look at me!

Information is the key to waking people up. Unfortunately, with the specialization of information available these days, people can insulate themselves from the truth. I've always thought that publicizing the Fox News talking points for the day would be a good start, but I don't know how you get access to them. If people realized that the mainstream media news is driven by whatever the right wing spin machine coordinates with Fox News, they might realize that they're being victimized by propaganda. People don't like being victimized.

Back in the day, people like Ghandi and MLK got a lot done with non-violence. These days, they'd need a security force to keep the anarchists out of the demonstrations. I've seen transit strikes and such in other countries, but I would never advocate such a thing here in the US. I've seen the inside of jail, and I don't like that color of green.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Since the fatcats control Washington, the fatcats are the force that changes Washington. To get the attention of the fatcats you have to affect the money they make. And thats easy and simple to do; dont patronize them for awhile. This includes the national charities, too.

Ruin a megacorporation's day with no sales. And let them know that they need to get on the team.

 

[emap]

To get a rebellion force going you first have to have an outspoken leader that people can look at and go hey he/she is right this sucks and we should have better.

Think Martin Luther King here, someone on that caliber of speaker. Barring that, you need a leader of the government that most everyone hates, Bush qualifies but he would have to be a permament type leader. After that you gotta find a ready source of weapons.

In the US that wouldn't be much of a problem, national guard bases are not that well defended and are well stocked. Course there is one other thing, you gotta find something the majority can beleive in. Think V is for vengeance here, would take something everyone can rally behind and go hey that is wrong, killing a little girl because she is unhappy with the government type things. Biggest problem you face in doing a rebellion in the US, nobody is there for life, there are limits to how long a person can stay in office, either legal or based on election results. Which is the biggest problem with the government, people relax, sionce this person can't do this forever, most tend to assume the next person will fix it. Not going to happen.

When was the last time you heard Obama or McCain talk about removing the patriot nonsense?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

EMAP

The South tried it years ago. The government simply allowed more Irish in and drafted them into the army.

Americans are too stupid and docile to storm the White House.

 

[Liar]

The key is strength in numbers, coordination, and everyone's willingness to take one for the team. If you are, say a third of the county's adults, you don't need to go as far as armed revolution. Just refuse to pay taxes. Everyone, at the same time. There is no way for the system to enforce penalties for more than a handful of you, and the rest can hold the government financially hostage.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Actually, I'd send the old guard to Alaskan penal colonies, but that's just me.[...]

They actually have colonies of penises in Alaska? (I am SO stifling a LOT of wise ass Palin comments here...)

 

[rgraham666]

And, if I may ask, what are you going to do after you've won your revolution?

That's the important thing.

 

[Safe_Bet]

And, if I may ask, what are you going to do after you've won your revolution?

That's the important thing.

Oh. You want "details"? You actually want to know what is the ultimate purpose of a national upheaval - beyond the platitudes?

What kind of lemming are you Rob? Geeze...

 

[rgraham666]

Well, as a card carrying and fully paid up heretic, I'm concerned.

Revolutions usually celebrate their victory by killing a lot of people. And heretics are always high on the 'must cleanse from our new perfection' list.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

This is hillarious. I hate to be rude, but you don't have a clue.

How to generate a revolution: First off, you need sustained unemployment well north of 20 percent. Then you need ruinous inflation - not 3 percent, but nore like 50 percent, or 500 percent. You need falling living standards, and a destroyed middle class.

Obviously the unemployment and inflation aren't there. As for living standards and the middle class, here is the most you can say: The evidence is mixed; by some measures there has been a very small decline in real household median income over the past 10 years (2 percent according to the American Home Survey earlier this week), but there are lots of cross-currents in the data that confuse this. The bottom line is, there has been no "falling out of bed" in living standards and middle-class well being in recent years. The reality is somewhere in the range of steady, slightly better, marginally worse. Hardly fertile ground for revolt.

Oh, and a really bloody war that was drafting millions would be useful. Sorry, but one fought by an all-volunteer military that kills fewer Americans than are murdered in some major cities in a year won't cut it.

If I was the evil dictator targeted by this "rebellion" here is how I would respond: I'd send the ringleaders and as many followers as possible on a world tour. Of course all the third world hell-holes would be on the itinerary, plus South American cities where cynical populism and corruption really have beggared large segments of the population, and held back the growth of a middle class. Then the Moslem world (don't forget to bring veils, girls), where living in ignorance and squalor is considered "the good life."

Finally China and India - first, to the urban areas bursting with energy and growth, where literally hundreds of millions are on the threshold of middle class living standards - are are busting their butts in ways Americans can't even imagine anymore to get there, for themselves and their children. Then to the poor rural areas, to see the poverty that motivates those aspiring urban proto-bourgeoisies.

When they got off the plane at the end of all that my "revolutionaries" would fall on their knees and kiss the ground when they landed back in the good 'ol U.S. of A. They would tear up their Revolutionary Party cards, crush their decoder rings, proclaim, "Thank God I live in the most free, prosperous and stable country in the world," and then roll up their sleeves and start working to make it even better.

http://research.soe.purdue.edu/ackerman36/webquest1/FreedomofSpeechPoster.jpg

http://research.soe.purdue.edu/ackerman36/webquest1/FreedomFromFearPoster.jpg

http://research.soe.purdue.edu/ackerman36/webquest1/FreedomFromWantPoster.jpg

http://research.soe.purdue.edu/ackerman36/webquest1/FreedomofWorshipPoster.jpg

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

ROXANNE

Hate to burst your bubble, but things are not good out here. You obviously havent bought gas or groceries lately or been to the E/R without insurance.

Recall that the South waged the bloodiest insurrection imaginable when times were great.

Average Americans are pissed and frightened. The government makes it possible for mega-corporations to devour the economy, send jobs and factories to India, and pay no taxes.

Americans are tired of it.

 

[Lee Chambers]

That's simple. Get a bunch of heavily armed citizens (and there are tons of us in this country, that's the great thing about the 2nd Amendment) and seize all of the major government buildings by force. There's not much that they can do to stop us, with such vast numbers and firepower at our disposal.

That, of course, is if we actually do such a thing. Which at this point is still an academic question.

I want to put aside the question of if, just for the moment. What about the local police, national guard and the military? I've asked this question several times over the years: would the military fight it's own citizens? Yes, we can easily get access to guns and rifles, even assault rifles. But what about vehicles, explosives, gases, armored vehicles, helicopters, etc. We would be seriously outmatched if we were to take our own military head on.

Seizing the government buildings was also my first idea, as far as seizing things went. The question is how do you hold them from an outside force?

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

ROXANNE

Hate to burst your bubble, but things are not good out here. You obviously havent bought gas or groceries lately or been to the E/R without insurance.

Recall that the South waged the bloodiest insurrection imaginable when times were great.

Average Americans are pissed and frightened. The government makes it possible for mega-corporations to devour the economy, send jobs and factories to India, and pay no taxes.

Americans are tired of it.

The problem with your analyis, JBJ, is that it's completely lacking in any appreciation or recognition of historical context, magnitude and scale of the problems. "Average Americans are pissed and frightened." Sure they are, but let's try to put that in context, shall we? Well, how do you think Americans felt in the 1930s, with 20-30 percent unemployment for an entire decade? How do you think they felt in the late 1970s, with double digit inflation and unemployment, periods of no gas (never mind expensive gas), and 21 percent interest rates?

But let's not limit our survey to the US. How do you think they feel in Venezuela now, with double digit inflation and increasing difficulty in acquiring basic staples at any price? Or Pakistan and Syria, where squalor and ignorance are a way of life for millions?

Let's not limit our survey to present moment. How do you think they felt in the Warsaw Ghetto in in 1938, sensing the doom that lay over the horizon and hoping against hope that they had it wrong? How do you think the inhabitants of a Khwarezmian city of central Asia felt in 1200s, with a Mongol army camped outside their walls, knowing that every man, woman, child, dog, cat and parakeet was just days from brutal and painful death? All these comparisons and countless more are what I meant in my first post here, "you don't have a clue."

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

LEE CHAMBERS

That shit is too melodramatic for most Americans. The idea is to change the government NOT burn the house down.

Look at our own Revolution for guidance. Back then the East India Tea Company was Darth Vader. It bought a concession from GEORGE III to control North American commerce. Americans then started smuggling lower priced goods from Spain, France, and the Dutch. And the rest is history.

 

[Lee Chambers]

I'm not kidding. If you seriously want to wrest power, you must have control of the media. you can sit on Capitol Hill forever and no one will notice if the old guard can talk to the people and prevent them knowing of your existence.

That's a very good point and an internet presence also cannot be ignored. This is the age of information and as much information as there is, you would have to be able to stand out without being drowned out by the propaganda of the opposing force. At the end of the day, we would have to have the hearts and minds of the people behind us in a rebellion. Otherwise we would just have someone overthrowing us at a later date.

And this brings up the point of needing to have a clearly and decisive statement to deliver to the people as to why you're rebelling. Rob asked the question and he certainly wouldn't be the only one to do it.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

ROXANNE

The Southern Rebellion is the precedent. Times were terrific when it got rolling.

Latin Americans and ragheads are used to being beneath boots.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Given that even abroad things aren't thought to be as bad as the keyboard twiddlers here seem to think, why even daydream? http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,580342,00.html

 

[Lee Chambers]

Keeping in mind that this thread is hypothetical, right? I don't think we're allowed to actually discuss the overthrow of the government. I'm certainly not discussing the overthrow of the government. Hey, don't look at me!

It's all hypothetical fun and games until someone blows something up.

Information is the key to waking people up. Unfortunately, with the specialization of information available these days, people can insulate themselves from the truth. I've always thought that publicizing the Fox News talking points for the day would be a good start, but I don't know how you get access to them. If people realized that the mainstream media news is driven by whatever the right wing spin machine coordinates with Fox News, they might realize that they're being victimized by propaganda. People don't like being victimized.

You're right about insulation. People have so many options about what they can read/watch and not read/watch that they can surround themselves with sources that speak to what they believe in and block out things they don't want to hear. Obviously this highlights the need for media control and an ability to get out your own message in spite of all their efforts to block it out.

Back in the day, people like Ghandi and MLK got a lot done with non-violence. These days, they'd need a security force to keep the anarchists out of the demonstrations. I've seen transit strikes and such in other countries, but I would never advocate such a thing here in the US. I've seen the inside of jail, and I don't like that color of green.

Unfortunately, their tactics aren't as effective these days. Ghandi's non-violence helped him because the British would beat the shit out of him while he did nothing and this made them look like evil sonsabitches to the rest of the world when the pictures were published. These days no one beats you if you don't get violent, they simply arrest you and take you to jail for a few days then let you go. You become something more of an annoyance than someone trying to get a message across.

As for MLK, he had LEGIONS of people that could not be ignored by the politicians and like Ghandi he had images of unjustified, horrific violence to show the world just what it was like to be black during those times.

We don't have those types of shocking examples. Instead we have failing economies, corrupted politicians, and people losing homes and jobs. These things are much easier to ignore or shrug off as not important enough to do something about...as long as it isn't you having to deal with it.

 

[rgraham666]

I want to put aside the question of if, just for the moment. What about the local police, national guard and the military? I've asked this question several times over the years: would the military fight it's own citizens? Yes, we can easily get access to guns and rifles, even assault rifles. But what about vehicles, explosives, gases, armored vehicles, helicopters, etc. We would be seriously outmatched if we were to take our own military head on.

Seizing the government buildings was also my first idea, as far as seizing things went. The question is how do you hold them from an outside force?

Good luck with that.

Have you the weapons to stop the Abrams from rolling up and pounding the shit out of you? While a couple of Bradleys walk 20mm back and forth?

Hell, if they get really serious they'll just drop a JADARM on the building and collapse the whole thing, followed up with some napalm to make sure there's no survivors.

And will 'making sure your message stands out' require silencing people who dissent? You're off to a great start if the first thing you have to do is get rid of free speech.

This sounds more and more like 'We had to destroy democracy in order to save it'.

And again, why is this necessary? There's lots of ways to change things. And none require the violence of a revolution.