General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMake the Rich Panic - By Chris Hedges
Revolutions take time. They are often begun by one generation and completed by the next. Those who give the first check to a state are the first overwhelmed in its ruin, Michel de Montaigne wrote in 1580. The fruits of public commotion are seldom enjoyed by him who was the first mover; he only beats the water for anothers net. Revolutions can be crushed by force, as amply demonstrated by history. Or they may be hijacked by individuals such as Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky and Josef Stalin or movements that betray the populace. There are no guarantees that we will move toward a workers paradise or socialist utopiawe might move toward the most efficient form of totalitarianism in human history...............................
But no matter what happens, the chain reaction that leads to revolt has begun. Most people realize that our expectations for a better future have been obliterated, not only those for ourselves but also for our children. This realization has lit the fuse. There is a widespread loss of faith in established systems of power. The will to rule is weakening among the elites, who are entranced by hedonism and decadence. Internal corruption is rampant and transparent. Government is despised.
The nation, like many prerevolutionary societies, is headed into crisis. Lenin identified the components that come together to foster a successful revolt:
The fundamental law of revolution, which has been confirmed by all revolutions, and particularly by all three Russian revolutions in the twentieth century, is as follows: it is not enough for revolution that the exploited and oppressed masses should understand the impossibility of living in the old way and demand changes, what is required for revolution is that the exploiters should not be able to live and rule in the old way. Only when the lower classes do not want the old way, and when the upper classes cannot carry on in the old wayonly then can revolution win.
When I was a foreign correspondent I covered revolts, insurgencies and revolutions, including the guerrilla conflicts in the 1980s in Central America; the civil wars in Algeria, Sudan and Yemen; and the two Palestinian uprisings or intifadas, along with the revolutions in East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Romania and the war in the former Yugoslavia. I have seen that despotic regimes collapse internally. Once the foot soldiers of the elitethe police, the courts, the civil servants, the press, the intellectual class and finally the armyno longer have the will to defend the regime, the regime is finished. When these state organs are ordered to carry out acts of repressionsuch as clearing people from parks and arresting or even shooting demonstratorsand refuse their orders, the old regime crumbles. The veneer of power appears untouched before a revolution, but the internal rot, unseen by the outside world, steadily hollows out the state edifice. And when dying regimes collapse, they do so with dizzying speed. Upheaval is coming. The people must be prepared. If we are, we will have a chance.
...........
the rest (scary good):
http://www.truthdig.com/report/page3/make_the_rich_panic_20150503
greytdemocrat
(3,299 posts)I'm moving to Russia!!!
daleanime
(17,796 posts)Russia move to you.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)Last edited Mon May 4, 2015, 01:52 PM - Edit history (1)
servants, press, intellectual class and army ready to stop supporting the corruption that we call a government?
Two: Are the upper class at the point that they cannot continue as they have - hoarding all the money and thinking they can control the populous by buying politicians?
I would like to discuss that as this is the answer to these two questions tells us if we can win this revolution. At this point it is still a political revolution.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)totally encouraged by the Corp-State-Media. There is a revolution starting. Just look around. There are protests across this country at least weekly and many around the world. In Brussels 100,000 clashed with police recently about austerity. The people in Peru are protesting in the streets over the potential lose of their water to private interests.
It's time for change. Sen Sanders offers that change from the status quo.
The revolution has started. It's time to choose a side, The 99% or the 1% (Goldman-Sachs).
Romeo.lima333
(1,127 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Sen Sanders opposes fracking. He wants to save our water sources. How do you feel about that?
Sen Sanders opposes sending American jobs oversea via the TPP. How do you feel about that?
On what issues do you disagree with Sen Sanders.
Sen Sanders represents the 99% not Goldman-Sachs. Which side are you on?
Romeo.lima333
(1,127 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)The Movement will push out Republicons and those Democrats that vote with the Republicons.
We need a president committed to helping the people and not Wall Street.
Sen Sanders represents the 99% not Goldman-Sachs. Which side are you on?
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)with the possible exception of the gawdawful TPP, which is supported primarily by Repukes and the billionaire class?
Romeo.lima333
(1,127 posts)LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)Romeo.lima333
(1,127 posts)all other considerations are secondary
lostnfound
(16,192 posts)Talk about loading the wagon. The second page of this has a long light of "we musts..." that is very unclear about the who and the how of that paragraph. The article warns about overreaching and the need for timing, yet goes on to present a long list of dramatic projects that "must" be accomplished and criticizes Bernie Sanders for collaborating with the system, when I personally think he has a reasonable (if long) shot at winning.
It would be a very good thing to have a President Bernie. Not a road to perfect, but an antidote to fourty years of propaganda being pumped down the Amerocan public throats by corporately-funded Ayn Randians.
appalachiablue
(41,179 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)I keep thinking of Havel's Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia.
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)Beauty
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)that it has to fall. And it is ripe to begin happening very soon.
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)The Interlocking complex of systems contains the algorithm of its own destruction. The slow and chaotiic cascade has begun. It will spread and spill and gain momentum. We cannot contain it, we cannot control it, but we can embrace it, become it, and maybe occupy the vacuum that will form in its wake. Revolution has to be more than what we stand for,...in these fluid times it must be what moves us.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)struggle4progress
(118,378 posts)of being a war correspondent, and the corresponding excitement of being in mortal danger, produced an addiction and a psychological damage
During that period, his writing was insightful and interesting
Unfortunately, he has since been unable to escape from his own character defects and apparently lacks the self-critical skill to recognize how he has reverted to his own need for excitement, sublimating his addiction to mortal danger into calls for "revolution"
Although I happen to share his opinions about many problems facing us, I'm rather unimpressed with the shallowness of his response to them
It is easy enough to cry denunciations in the public square, after the manner of an old testament prophet, and it soothes the egos of the self-righteous to do so -- but this is also very often a lazy and shallow response to the problems facing us
"Revolution" is a somewhat uncertain affair, requiring much more than simply convincing people that change is needed and pouring them into the streets to demand such change. Much more than mere motivating outrage, a concrete agenda is needed, together with the political skill and organization to move that agenda forward. Otherwise one simply resorts to some inchoate mob actions before looking around randomly for the next "leader" and then becoming "bitterly disappointed" -- or discovers unhappily that one's enemies are, in fact, capable of organizing themselves effectively and hitting back harder than one expected. The reality, like it or not, is that successful "revolution" has a large political dimension: those who can't win psychological territory won't ever hold much physical territory either
The title of the article is disappointing, also. The tactic of effective long-term "revolution" is not simple terror: it is to offer one's enemies always a choice: the hand of friendship or ... something less desireable. Such a dilemma is crucial, because the result depends continuously on the path to the result