What kind of "revolution" ??

In your heart, you know we need some type of revolution to stop the fascism that has our country by the throat and is threatening the lives of most Americans. But what type of "revolution"? Our country with our military establishments and national guards would never allow any type of violent revolution in this country, in my opinion. If people attempted to resort to violence, the government would crack down on them in a New York second. It is doubtful they would permit peaceful marches if they felt it threatened certain establishments.

So, what kind of revolution? It would need to be one of education and enlightenment, in my opinion. We need to change people's minds first. So long as people are ignorant, the doors for change will remain closed. I think the Internet and sites such as DU are part of the new "revolution" and we need to look at it in that perspective. Your efforts are not in vain if you only reach one person at a time. Education and knowledge is what the fascists most fear. Those are our weapons.

that stops all corporate industries in their tracks...I am thinking Nationwide strike...nothing moves, nothing is sold, nothing is purchased....

No revenues....no taxes.....no profit...

also if you watched V for Vendetta the clue is there. The Army was out en force, but when they made contact with the enemy, it was the whole population of London... if we have marches of millions in the streets, custer comes to mind and most military will NOT fire in those circumstances. It has been done before, Romania, the old USSR, but the problem is that most people are still too comfy to even think of a massive march.

if they are living in ignorance. What would they be striking for? They must be enlightened. They won't strike just to be striking.

but the problem is that we are not yet to the point where most folks will be open to readying and ACTING on leaphlets left on car windshilelds. Though the political micro climate is changing... so they will be more and more willing as time passes. The trick will be to judge when the time is right.

Back in the 60's, we only had three major networks for TV, a lot of independently owned radio stations (instead of Clear Channel) without the likes of Limbaugh on them, more indy newspapers instead of clongomerates, and nothing like video games or computers to compete for people's time. People got books, newspapers, and magazines to stay informed and be entertained. An indy newspaper is what many people who might not be that political might pick up out of curiosity. Magazines like Crawdaddy would get kids curious (like me) to pick them up for casual reading. It's a lot harder for those sort of pubilcations to get just "picked up" by average kids today, when they are spending a lot of time playing on their Nintendo, etc. or watching one of the many entertainment shows on cable or satellite now.

It's really not an issue of media availabilty, it's about who are the gatekeepers that most people will trust to use to sift through this massive amount of info, and who controls those gatekeepers now. In some areas of media it is virtually impossible to compete with the entrenched corporate presence there. What we need to do is be at the forefront of some newer medium, that has the potential for a lot of consumption and get in the ground floor in terms of content on it that will get everybody to consume it.

Perhaps it would be some service for cell phones just on the horizon (though there again you have a set of corporate giants controlling what gets onto their more proprietary cell phones and that might not work.

Another idea I had is do something like help put together a plan to populate Starbucks and perhaps other coffee shops with internet kiosks built into tables there which could have user friendly search engines which could be built to put a lot more alternative news sources of info in an easily digested format that would be a lot more variety than people traditionally watching TV in those places. That would be a big time slice for many young people of today that you could be a part of and help them get exposed to info there without as much corporate competition there just yet.

It would allow them to justify a total police state and suspension of whatever shreds of the Constitution still exist.

start flying what will come at the end of the day... in fact that is the last thing they want and exactly what they may get. In fact I fear that the moment bullets start flying it will not only be a revolution but a civil war... and why do you think people like Gates are buying property around the world? The writing is on the wall... and he is hedging bets.

But make no mistake about it, we ARE living in pre-revolutionary times... but that revolution may take many forms, and I will NOT discount the violent kind... in fact the more they press down, to quote JFK, those who make peaceful revolution impossible ensure the violent kind.

I don't think I'm completely wrong, though, and I certainly see your point as possible if not accurate. This is an exciting, if horrible, time to be alive.

as each day goes by....and more draconian laws are passed....the environment is ripe for something to go wrong....and some innocent American getting killed!!

.....the one way to wake EVERYONE UP is to bring back the draft. Right now our military is all volunteer but with a return of the draft more people would be affected by whether we go to war and how long that was lasts. Talk about quickly waking people up.:headbang: Think about it everyone, that's what woke people up in the 60's and it would work again too.:bounce:

edited for emotion

and exactly why they will not bring it back... never mind the volunteer military is falling to pieces.

destruction of the military as we know it....No strong military....weaker borders...more terrorism on US soil....That will be the wake up call!!

The party that brings back the draft will be hated for a generation. Yes, it would wake people up, but they would wake up and make you the minority party for years.

Before people will take to the streets, boycott businesses or even get off their coaches to vote they need to be convinced that there actually is something that is "threatening the existence of most Americans". I fail to see how you will do that given that it's not even true. Are you actually claiming that if there is no revolution, most Americans will cease to exist in the near future?

and changed the wording. Although, I do feel it threatens the lives of all of us, no matter if it is war, the environment, workplace, whatever, they do threaten our existence.

geo-libertarianism/anarchy/cooperatives/communalism/less consumerism/personal responsibility for one and one's own community/rejecting mass media/local sphere of influence/rejection of national brand names/federalism, etc.

What ever the cause, I know one result will be a financial reordering. The current budget and priorities are unsustainable, especially considering that the budget is significantly borrowed.

We could accomplish all our social goals if the military did not swallow up $400 billion plus per year. It's obscene and the source of much of our difficulty.

If the "revolution" is based in any part on revelations that the military-intelligence complex was involved in 9/11, it would make sense to defund them because in fact, it would show that the chief threat to our security is our own military industrial intelligence complex.

We would not be successful in a violent revolution. The problem of not having communication rules out most forms of nonviolent revolution. Within the existing framework - not revolution but a renewal of the Constitution - we could begin to address all of our problems by freeing our representation from its corporate and special interest bonds. As soon as congress was responsible to voters again, I think we would see real reform and actual investigations.