what would it take to send you over the edge, to civil unrest?

what's america's breaking point?

do we even have one?

Great question. Another funny election going to Bush would do it for me. Although at 55, I'm not sure what I'd do as far as civil unrest. I don't own a gun, and I'm not a violent person, anyway. My knees might not even be up for a long march.

(2) If Bush wins and the sheep Democrats still have not impeached.

You just need a general feeling that no one's in charge for folks to start rioting. I would discourage any action that would endanger or deprive anyone not directly involved with supporting or enabling this administration their well-being, however, a bit of agitation never hurt, usually helps.

"Taxation WITHOUT representation." Sounds back wards, huh? However, that is what we have had the last four years.

I am so ready for the barricades. Talk to me about "bring it on." August is going to be one ugly month.

Why August? Something happening that I haven't heard about?

:tinfoilhat:

-MR

I smell Chicago '68

eom

more casualties and an increasing awareness of foreign policy mistakes. Americans like their wars short, sweet, sanitized from view, with no apparent lingering questions. It will be up to how much the media will expose. I guess for myself, I'll send letters and complain for awhile hoping.

The SS and OHS are watching...

If you know my flashpoint, you have the advantage.

all it would take for me is a little mmore time..

if Isreal/US drops a nuclear bomb in the ME somewhere.

I think it will be something so big that a revolution would simply rise up out of the population's en masse eruption into outrage. For me personally? I simply can't answer that question. I can imagine certain theoretical circumstances that would cause me to erupt. But then, there is no guarantee that we would ever reach such a place for that specific scenario to transpire. So... I guess I'll do what I can to attend rallies and protests, and make contributions to candidates and causes, and volunteer for democratic causes, and yes, wait... because I think we'll know it when it happens.

Don't even get me started thinking about who'd be on the Supreme Court if that happened.

keep playing it over and over...

breaking point? an engineered bu$h re-occupation of 1600 penna ave. in november...

I really believe that if we were to suffer an economic collapse of another major terrorist attack, the majority of Americans would endorse a dictatorship or martial law to keep order and enable them to "keep theirs".

America has become, by and large, a nation of fat, lazy people who are more concerned about material possessions and comfort above all else. The word "freedom" has come only to mean freedom to shop, buy and consume without conscience. The real meaning of such words is lost on most.

You hit the nail squarely on the head.
Which is why I am seriously looking into
getting the hell out of here.
I do not want to live among such people,
and here at DU, I think we fall under the delusion that
there are many like us in Amerikkka- it simply is not
true. We are a VERY small minority- the majority
of our fellow citizens are ignorant, selfish, greedy,
arrogant, violent, basely natured and total hypocrites.
Sad, what being a US citizen has come to mean
to the rest of the world.
I'm not proud of what we have become.
Not proud at all.
BHN

Lets not get hung up in semantics--whether you agree with the choice of the word 'soul' or not--the question is, do we have within us a deep, human desire for truth and freedom? If we do, if it is alive in us at all--however repressed or passed over it may be by the cares and distractions of daily life--then at some point something can still CALL to it, awaken it, bring it up from the shadow into the light of day. We can once again regain hope, have something to live for, even to fight for.

If we do not, if we are dead to our own inner possibilities, then there is no hope for us. The sooner this vain narcissistic world self-destructs from its own inner contradictions, the better.

Rather, I think it's for meaning, and for meaningful interaction with other human beings. While truth and freedom may be necessary for pursuing these goals, I think that they're more peripheral than the main purpose.

Our society increasingly provides neither. In fact, it is set up to actually DISCOURAGE us from realizing these aspirations. Your entire sense of meaning is to be derived from your job and material possessions. Your human interaction is limited due to longer working and commuting hours, reducing the time you can spend with family, friends and others in your community.

The end result of this denial of our most basic desires results in the cultivation of other, more selfish and narcissistic desires to replace them. If we can't find meaning, then we end up seeking meaning in stuff. If we can't have meaningful relationships with others, then we become angry at the rest of the world.

The key lies in breaking the self-destructive cycle that compels us to turn away from our real instincts and instead focus on self-destructive, conditioned behaviors.

For me, at lest, this is all very difficult to get clear on in myself. I understand that "truth" and "freedom"--and "meaning"--have metaphysical implications. But everything has become so fragmented and distorted. What can SPEAK to me--that is, those most fundamental aspects of myself--and draw them back into this life? How can I begin to FEEL my way to a new understanding of what is needed and what is possible?

These are my questions--and I hesitate to even spell them out because, if truth be known, I see that most of the time I do not live from anything in myself that is particularly "honorable." I mean, I'm just "ordinary," and my concerns are mostly very myopically centered around myself.

But that is not always the case. Sometimes something calls me and something comes up that, although it was there all along, it wasn't really moving my life. Is this making any sense? How can nonviolent political action SPEAK to me amidst the INCREASINGLY violent tendencies of our society. (And, as I'm sure you know, they are likely to become more 'violent'--in every sense of the word--as time goes on.)

I think you're onto somethimg there. And how much of this syndrome is deliberately cultivated, because people who're basically happy in their human interactions and a meaningful life don't BUY so many things they don't need?

I'm a socialist. The 2nd amendament is great. I'm angry. I'm One person. However there are mroe of us out there, just needing a catylyst.

I doubt that Christ would have endorsed such tactics. In fact, I'm quite certain he would have not.

Furthermore, what aims do you hope to achieve by using violence against a state that already has far more practice and skill in using it than your motley crew of discontents does? Do you honestly think you would win? And by achieving your aims through the use of force (which, of course, requires centralized control in order to ultimately bring defeat) would you not be concerned that you would simply end up substituting one form of tyranny for another (like in the USSR and China)?

I am not perfect nor do i aspire too. But having ancestors that were slaves and having people fight and die for them to be free kind of plays with my conscious. So by your logic, let the slaves be slaves because violence is wrong.
Btw America became the ideal of freedom by war, and revolution. And don't forget most movements if not all have been rag tag. I.e. the soviets being driven froma fghanistan, castro with 22 men, iraq now. It takes progress, you can't have it overnight, You think the 60's would have been such a time for civil rights without vietnam?

When talking of things like confronting power structures, it is best to analyze approaches in depth.

You speak as if slavery was ended by the Civil War (if you're referring to another event, please let me know). While it may be true that Lincoln ended slavery during the Civil War, that was a side effect of it. The Civil War was more about preserving the Union than about ending slavery.

Furthermore, in taking the end of slavery as an example, you are discounting the efforts of the abolitionists who had been agitating for a full 80-100 years prior to the Civil War in order to help mobilize public opinion against slavery. Many of these abolitionists also did not endorse violence as a means to achieve their aims.

Would you accuse them as well of endorsing slavery -- even those who paid for their stance with their livelihoods or very lives?

Going forward to the period of segregation and Jim Crow, it is important to note that those systems were overturned by the application of NONVIOLENT NONCOOPERATION, rather than violent action. Do you believe also that since MLK thought violence was wrong, he was implicitly endorsing the continuance of segregation and overt racism?

Now, moving along, I would ask you what you think the result of an armed insurrection against the United States government would be. Do you honestly think it would be successful? Do you think that any insurrection would be able to defeat the combined efforts of law enforcement, counterintelligence services, armed forces, etc. that would be brought to bear against it?

If you answers to these questions are "absolutely not", as mine are, do you not think that it would then be wise to consider alternative courses of action? I do, and that was what I was trying to point out. I am sorry that my initial point was miscommunicated.

If you're interested in discussing these "alternative concepts" in more detail, I'm certainly game for that. But I could direct you to a very important book on the matter, Social Power and Political Freedom by Gene Sharp, if it's something for which you would rather "go to the source".

I'm afraid that may not be possible--that the powers that be already have such an event on their story board for total global domenation and the manufacture of MYTHIC history.

Who do you think your "enemy" is, gun toting Christian?

if by civil unrest you mean violent demonstrations, then NEVER. Violence is never the answer, and will not solve ANY of our problems. It can only lead to further polarization of our country, which would create even more instablitlity. I think its important to remember that no matter what happens in the next election, we can defeat any challenge to our democracy through non-violent means.

the usual, just amp it up. if we stopped buying gasoline for a month, it'd crush them. a sci fi concept, yet so simple. the stock market would crash if we did it. stock up, don't buy gas from june 1st till june 8th. it's so crazy, but so are we now.

In some ways, in some areas of the country it has already started. There are portions of LA, or NY for instance, and many of the other large cities, where there is much lawlessness.

We are moving in the direction that would eventually spur greater violence. Incomes of the majority of us have been dropping for the last thirty years, after being built up for the previous thirty before that. Now we have more to keep people in line, the media, and we use the criminal justice system and the drug war, to herd society's outcasts into prisons, which keeps dissent to a minimum. That is a sad fact itself, since they spend around $20,000 a year to keep them in prison, but so many are unwilling to spend money for economic help, housing, and jobs for these folks.

Most of all, like the saying goes, the Revolution won't be televised. Like the recent misbehavior of the police in Miami, at the last World-Bank meeting, we won't see it unless the violence happens to stumble into a live-studeo where news is being broadcast.

I suspect it has to do with the dependency we have developed on the Corporate State. We can find no way to strike back at the system without endangering our own livelihood. The Corporations like the Feudal Lords of before have created a situation where the people believe all their prosperity and even their very lives flow from them.

I myself would be protesting in DC right now if I thought I could pick my life back up again after we got George out of there. Things are so desperate these days that we cannot step away from the machine our lives have become part of for fear of being replaced or discarded all together.

seriously. it's the best equalizer our socitey has, when you think about it.

In some place called Alexandria. Sure would have liked to have been able to visit it.

A population of 285 Million "allows" itself to be governed. If we don't want people to govern us, we will be able to stop it. I'd venture to say if we all stopped watching television for a few months, and took a break from the brainwashing, we'd get a lot more upset about things. It would, of course require increased reading from books like Perfectly Legal and other books that expose what has transpired in this country for decades now. Another good one, Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States.

Certainly a lot of devices, particularly the whole of the media, and the pretense of a real choice between Democrats and Republicans, serve to keep people from being violent. As long as it seems we have some control, we let them rule. But if you look at the number who don't vote (67%) then one might take that number as a sign of an increasing problem itself.

Its not the government running the TV or the adverstisments or the marketting or the programming.

www.zombo.com

Your last paragraph reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend from college who recently travelled to China on business. I never really considered my friend to be overly political, but his observation on China and the US was quite accurate, IMHO. He said:
"Over in China, there's no illusion of freedom. Here in the US, at least we believe we have some kind of say in things, even if we really don't have any more than the people in China."

Your reference to television also reminds me of the following observation (I think it's from Chomsky):
"Propaganda is to a democracy what force is to a dictatorship."

I'm pretty sure that I remember seeing a stat that 53% of eligible voting age population, votes. Still a sorry excuse for democracy.

Be careful,

"Watch what you say........"

the petitioning of our government for the redress of grievances ...

A right guaranteed us by our constitution !

Clinton. Then the selection of Bush. Then after doing investigation on 911 myself. Then when he stated we were going to war with Iraq.

Big question, I think, how do you get something like this started???

Whilst I'm here. I found a great activist site along with a lot of other interesting stuff. One of my favorites is the criminals that Karzai has working under him in Afghanistan. The women are still living in horror.

http://www.why-war.com/features/

There are so many articles, studies, activism sites, history, information, etc. This is one of the best sites for information I have seen.

That type of thing. If Bush ever decided to round people up for detainment (US citizens) my guess is that muslims would be first, gays second and feminists third.

I have signs in my yard and on my car
in support of our troops , the Constitution and
Kerry , With yellow ribbons and flag adornments .

Just 2 days ago a woman told me to my face
I should be "tried and shot for treason".

and Yesterday a car dropping off a neighbor's child
from school had someone in the car yell out
"Liberals suck , Support the troops keep them there"
and then did a "nanananananaaaaaaanaaaaaaa" thing .

it sounded like an adolescent child ..All I could
do was stand there in disgust of the hate being
spewed at me , by a child who didn't even know me.
the car war 4 houses away , and I wasn't about to
yell down the street .

I'll see if I can find a link to my thread in the lounge
on my experience .

here's that link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=1043035