Revolution !!!

There as never been a truly successful revolution. People have overthrown governments and attempted to replace them with better systems, but no matter how good that system is, eventually all governments are over run by corrupt people at the top.



You will never achieve a classless society where everyone is equal. You might be able to create that impression - but some members of your new society will always be more equal than others. It goes back to the old truism of Lord Acton's, 'Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.'



I am not saying that things don't have to change, but the old idea of storming the barricades - however romantic it might seem - just isn't feasible. And if even did manage it somehow - and also managed to set up some kind of effect leadership it would one day - maybe in a few weeks - maybe in 90 years become just as corrupt as any government. That is down to human nature.



A lot of Marx et al doesn't really carry over to the 21st Century. As someone rightly pointed out - the vast majority of people are not treated badly enough to cause them to wish to revolt. They might not be happy, but they are satisfied enough to not want a revolution. Someone posted to say that once enough comforts had been removed, then there would be action. The trouble is people don’t want their comforts removed. I agree, but people do not want to go back to a largely agricultural, pre industrial world, people do not want revolution, and you cannot force it upon them.



I don't believe revolution is the answer. And to the person who suggested destroying computers and other things so the government could no longer control people, do you realise, you are planning to destroy the tool which allows people all around the world to communicate and actually discuss issues like this? From the sounds of it a lot would have loved to be running around in 1917 Russia. Destroying the modern world would not help your revolution, or help you change the world.



I don't believe legalising drugs will bring this about. I don't believe everyone dropping acid, or smoking pot will bring this about. People will be awakened by rising sea levels, and rising oil prices. The industrialised world relies on oil so heavily, that in the coming decades the world will have to change, because the system will bring itself to its knees, and the comforts will remove themselves, not by revolution – but by ecology.



Within the next couple of decades society will be forced to change due to the effects of climate change - and purely because there won't sufficient resources left to continue the way we are living now, and that will force people to consider the way we live - and perhaps we might improve it a little, not by revolution – but by evolution, we will adapt or die.

 

someone had been talking about rabbits, foxes, and roadkill earlier in this thread. Sure a rabbit in a cage who is fed every day, and doesn't have to worry about foxes chasing it or about winding up as road kill might be more comfortable than a wild rabbit, but which is within its own element. It's possible that the natural state of human beings is to fight. Possibly when you stop a human being from fighting he turns into something like the rabbit in the cage, comfortable but not really himself. I prefer the notion that to be truly human is to overcome your own nature.

Life goes on within us and without us - John Lenon

 

This has nothing to do with the subject, but..first of all, you spelled John Lennon's name wrong..and that quote was from written by George Harrison, not Lennon. It was "Within And Without You" and it was on Sgt. Peppers.

 

in respecting nature , balance can be achieved . it's quite enough to keep us busily and peacefully engaged . this does not mean the end of life-death realities , of which humans have made senselessly institutionalized metaphors such as 'the war machine' .


once i got me some tame rabbits - and old pregnant mother and then two young females and a young buck . i let the young ones live free outside , and old ma had her babies in a little shed . she'd been caged all her life , so even this was quite a change of scene for her . everything went along ok . the outdoor rabbits were learning the birdcalls that warned of hawks . they chose a pile of rocks nearby my house to live in . ol' ma raised her babies . then one day a madcow busted down her door and stomped a hole in the floor . ma never went out through the hole , but her babies did , and the other rabbits started teaching and taking care of them . i fixed the door .

eventually , tho , i left that shed door open wide , and ma walked out into the green grass and daisies of the meadow . she couldn't run , never had , and never would . she just wandered away .
.

this revolution is for all life .
allow all life to participate .

.
.

 

I stand corrected about the accuracy of Lennon's lyrics and the spelling of John's last name.

 

this revolution is for all life .
allow all life to participate .

I'm not putting the above quote down, but as far as I know revolutions are violent. I've never heard of any other kind. If there is another idea about revolution that doesn't invlove violence I would like to explore it. If it wasn't for the violent aspect of revolution I think I'd be in one right now, but how can you allow all life to particiape (which is what I would truly like) when in a revolution it is necessary to overthrow the forces in power.

There are those who live to observe life and there are those who live to participate in it. The ones who live to observe life are alive but not living, the ones who participate in life are alive and living.

 

Someone here mentioned the recent Ukraine (Orange) Revolution which to my knowledge was not at all violent.

 

Aren't you forgetting about Mahatma Gahndi? He led peacful protests in India to end British occupation.


Nelson Mandela did too; he led peacful protests to end Apartheid in South Africa.

And, I'm pretty sure that all of the recent protests in Nepal that made the king step down were peacful until the Police started beating the protesters.

 

Nelson Mandella did not lead peaceful protests... they used guns...


and in nepal, that was an attempted revolution, a violent one at that.

 

I dont believe you could say that the Russian revolution sought to destroy the modern world - quite the opposite - the revolutionaries merely wanted to end the feudal system so that Russia could join the industrial age. Until the revolution the Russian people were living in a system not seen in the rest of Europe since about 1680

 

Your right if your reffering to the februaruy revolution, but the october revolution, the one more commonly talked about, was the bolsheviks leading a revolt against the parliament, trotsky's permenant revolution and all that

 

The whole episode was a war for history - not against modernisation but for improvement of the people
just that "improvement" is a subjective word - it means different things to different people

 

Ah. re-reading what I posted I can see how I didn't make myself clear. I should have started a new paragraph perhaps, but I ended up merging two points.

I wasn't trying to suggest that the Russian's wanted to destroy the modern world in 1917...

The destroying the modern world comment was aimed at the person who wanted to destroy computers.

The 1917 comment - I was trying to say that idea of starting a revolution might sound exciting in a 'Boys Own' kind of way - but the actual logistics...and the very fact the majority of the population do not want one, not to even mention the deaths etc.

well. I just don't think it is very a very realistic prospect. What would you replace the current system with? How would ensure every service the Govenment provides would be continued. Post? Prisons? Policing, communications, etc?

 

I can't say that I would encourage anyone in the direction of revolution, but I don't know, wouldn't the current system be asking just this: what would we replace the current system with.

Asking questions like that will "insure" that there never is a revolution.

Be that as it may, I don't know whether the French had any plans for what they would replace the existing system with but I do know that the French revolution was one big blood bath. By the time one faction got done guillotining (I know I didn't spell that one right) another faction, another faction yet was guillotining the ones who had just done the guillotining.

I don't think you can really focus on too much of anything during a revolution. There must be a lot of very deep emotional stuff going on. My guess is that the most important thing is to be on the side of your friends no matter what direction things start going; and at all costs, do not lose sight of who your friends are.

Has anyone ever heard this one:

From each according to their ability, to each according to their need.

I learned that when I was very young and I still like it!

 

He wasnt peaceful? Wow....

 

DAMN RIGHT REVOLUTION!!! LETS BRING THE 60'S BACK ALL OVER AGAIN! Even though I wasnt alive cuz Im only 13...

 

Nelson Mandela was in prison for leading an armed revolt against the South African government. His movement, the African National Congress, a Marxist organization, had been bombing oil refineries and engaging in other violent acts. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, just a fact. The South African government had repeatedly offered to release him if he would renounce violence as a means of social change, which he refused to do. They then finally released him unconditionally.

 

Yes. Well. Having a revolution just because you are pissed off at the current system and offering no real answer of how to rebuild things betrays everyones angst.

Go smash a window or something.

It will have the same effect.

and I would suggest everyone budding - cigar smoking - che gavara style revolutionary read 'Animal Farm' by George Orwell.

 

Bare in mind george orwell was a communist, he wrote both 1984 and Animal Farm to hilight what was done wrong in the USSR

 

its just played down by the mainstream media that he was parted of an armed group, it wouldnt suit them for people to know that such a great guy used violence as a means of ending suffering