American Revolution II Now?

well if u think its time and u think u want it to happen, maybe u can help it along. i constantly talk about it here. some people are even siding with me and getting the word out. i do believe that there is unrest across the country. here in new england (and maybe outside of it) we had what were called tea parties on april 15. if thats not a sign of things to come i dont know what is. thousands of people gathered to show their unhappiness. i dont think it changed anything. one protest cant do anything. it takes much more.

 

Cash for Clunkers could only be a government idea. Who else would take a valuable product of human effort, a vehicle that might make a useful starter car for a new driver, and that is going to die a natural death fairly soon, anyway, and destroy it?

I checked out your article 10 of the New Hampshire Constitution, Shadow 2145. I especially like the last sentence:

Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
June 2, 1784

 

its a nice right and is worded very greatly. i say we start a revolution in new hampshire and just say its okay because of the tenth amendment. we could test just how well the government upholds our bill of rights in hew hampshire. after all if we have the right to revolt the government shouldnt try to stop us right? most people dont know that most states at one time had a similar amendment. most states have since abolished their rights to revolution. new hampshire has retained it.

 

That's a great idea. The government runs little social test experiments on us all the time, why not return the favor?

I have a couple problems with the CARS program. I just don't believe in the the government messing with private enterprise like they do.

And how do they get the money for these rebates? Do they borrow or do they print out? If they borrow it how do they pay back with interest since they never have surplus ( I guess surplus spending is nothing new). If they print then they're devaluing your money unless you buy into their incentive, which is almost likely a devlish tactic of subtle coercion.

Trust me man, any large movement towards change and you will definately see me there. I constantly make changes on a personal level but I don't know how to make changes on the macro-social level. That's what our politicians are supposed to be for!!!

The only problem with the tea party is that it didn't change a damn thing. They KNOW what they're doin to the people and they keep on doing it. The only way to change it is to create real life pressure.

Change the politicians? Change the system? Guns and fire?

 

most politicians are the same. they seek money and power. think about it. where better to find power then the government. those of us who dont want power have no need to run for office. hence why we dont. there are select few who are different. i consider ron paul to be one of those few. i think he is not there for the power but truly for the people. unfortunately there arent too many ron pauls around. this makes changing the politicians useless.

changing the system is nearly impossible. amendments dont occur too often. hence why congress just ignores the constitution and does what they please. its not actually supposed to be easy to change the constitution.

guns and fire? a viable option so long as it happens before those of us who own guns and weapons aren't forced to give them up. if we are forced to give them up well... to quote Hitler "who remembers the Armenians" when referring to the Armenians attempt to fight back against the Turks. the Turks were smart and already took away the Armenians' weapons. Hitler did the same with the Jews and took away their weapons. see a trend? when weapons are taken away, the government has free range to hurt its people.
the other question that goes along with this is... what side will the military be on? if the military is on the side of the people the war would be quite easy. if not... there will be a lot of bloodshed.

 

Well in my mind a peaceful revolution is always the first order. Blocking transportation routes, camping outside politician's homes, etc. But to effectively do that you have to get a HUGE portion of the population to go along so you don't have decension within the general public. You don't want some poor corporate sap to starve because he's cut off from the network.

Guns and fire is a last resort. There would be tons of arrests, guaranteed rights taken away, and maybe a visit from our buddies at the UN. I think the U.S. military would be less likely to intervene unless they carefully carry out an "orders from above" type setup which gives the military total inflexibility in orders.

In either system we would have to truly unite. If long term, food and proper water distribution would have to be a top priority, especially under conditions of primitive transportation. Black mobs? We would also HAVE to have some sort of idealogical system to replace the current to avoid a power vacuum that leads to more corruption.

Pray that no malicious country invades.

Oh, and Ron Paul, the only politician I'd vote for. My dad voted for Obama because it was a racially historic event.

I referred to the oldtime philosophy "IF you have nothing good to say, don't say anything at all".

 

as far as inflexibility of military orders is concerned... arent all orders inflexible? isnt that the point of them being orders. otherwise they would be called requests right? im not trying to insult u im just making a point. either the military would ignore their orders and be insubordinate or they would carry them out.

as far as ur dad voting for obama. that is a terrible reason to vote for a president. vote for who u think is better now because he is black white yellow male or female. the whole idea of racial equality is not to get a black or hispanic or asian to be president. i think its about viewing someone by their qualifications and their actions. not by color.

 

I know that the military heirarchy is meant to be a strict chain of command, but what I meant is the way that they manipulate circumstances so that the people in the military do not understand the cause of the people.

Kind of like "brainwashing" them into thinking that Americans simply went lawless and rebel. Because Americans can readily identify with their kind, if the government did use the American military I would imagine that the assignments would be planned in a way which minimalizes the chance of them sympathizing with the enemy. People don't join the military to kill Americans. So that's why I say that either the U.N. would help or social engineers would use cunning tactics on an unprecedented scale.

Yah I talked to my dad about politics recently and I've pretty much given up. He's a pretty smart man when it comes to health, political corruption, and people but blind in others. He believes that we fucked up everything in "The Garden of Eden" so discussing any political ideology ends up with him saying that "we'll never get it right". He voted for Obama because "everyone wants to see their race come from the bottom and go to the top", but he doesn't realize that he's dragging the top nation of the world to the bottom.

The only problem I see with having a revolution is lack of unity. You would have to have some BIG pushers leading the movement. Would people be willing to give up filet mignon and cars for a short season when our power systems short-circuit? Will they be willing to unite in a way that provides reasonable food, water, health, and security? Will they input proper checks and balances for the new system?

 

He voted for Obama because "everyone wants to see their race come from the bottom and go to the top"

Tell Charlie I said... "hi."

x

 

i still think its a bad reason to vote for someone based solely on their skin color.

uhh... ok ill tell charlie... i guess i missed something

 

I'm not saying that people WON'T unite, but that a big problem stopping a revolution from being successful would be lack of unification. More than lack of resources, giant impending malicious entities, or any other reason Unity would be the making or breaking point.

We could reestablish our own functioning society in a week, or we could go through months of chaos acting like chickens with our heads cut off. A revolution as I CURRENTLY see it is more of a fight against the negative (the government) instead of a push for a positive (new system). Of course movements can evolve but its important that we understand this as a basic premise for the cause.

 

well yes and no. personally i would have a positive and negative as a cause. the negative is the current government but the positive would be freedoms and liberties. i would be fighting for my freedoms.

 

The thing that everybody must understand about any form of successful revolution, is that it will NOT solely come from the people. If it is to happen, and happen successfully it MUST be initiated and carried by several State governments.

This will likely happen initially through States becoming non-compliant, and completely undermining the Federal Government to a point where a change is forced.

We may not get everything we want, but it is the only way we will retain any semblance of the things that are great about this country, and actually likely improve it.

Any revolutionary party that would take power another way, is one that will become inherently worse, and much faster than what the current government is doing now, and the last 30 years.

Let us not forget what types of governments revolutions usually seat in power.