"I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half." - Jay Gould financier & tycoon

Isn't it exactly what the Kochs and Dick Armey have been doing with the Teabaggers?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Gould

Jason "Jay" Gould (May 27, 1836 – December 2, 1892) was a leading American railroad developer and speculator. He has long been vilified as an archetypal robber baron, whose successes made him the ninth richest American in history.<1> Condé Nast Portfolio ranked Gould as the 8th worst American CEO of all time.<2> Some modern historians working from primary sources have discounted various myths about him.<3><4>

the Tea Party Express, doesn't it?

After failing to convince or force Canadian authorities to hand over Gordon-Gordon, Gould and his associates, which included two future Governors of Minnesota and three future Members of Congress, attempted to kidnap him. The group was successful, but were stopped and arrested by the North-West Mounted Police before they could return to the United States. The kidnappers were put in prison and refused bail.<14><15> This led to an international incident between the United States and Canada. Upon learning that the kidnappers were not given bail, Governor Horace Austin of Minnesota demanded their return and put the local militia on a state of full readiness. Thousands of Minnesotans volunteered for a full military invasion of Canada. However, after negotiations, the Canadian authorities released the kidnappers on bail.<14><15> The incident resulted in Gould losing any possibility of taking control of Erie Railroad.

when he's president.

video that he posted about on Thursday:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=439&topic_id=835328

;-)

A lot of people assume Oilwellian is a he, but I'm really a she. :D

This is why revolution cannot succeed. Americans are motivated by money. Most are capitalist inside and are brainwashed to fear words like socialism.

Lets face it, How many could be bought off just to sit out any conflict?

have always had 2 enemies. Most revolutions, at their inception, encompass a small percentage of the total population. In our own American Revolution, only about 20% of Americans (the rich, white, male, land-owning ones) in Colonial times wanted to break away from England. The enemy was the British and those colonists who advocated for the status quo. The social changes of the 60's came about with only about 10% of the Boomers and WWII generation participating. Our enemies then were a well-entrenched "establishment" if you will AND the rest of the Boomers and WWII generation screaming all about how we were long-haired, dope-smoking hippies. We were of course, but we also found time to dedicate to social change. And we succeeded.

Sit back if you choose, but please don't get in the way of those of us who intend to show up for the fight. And no bad vibes! :hippie:

And remember you don't have to be at the barricades to help. A revolution needs support services too. The Ian's Pizzas and People's Infirmaries.

the tactic mentioned in the OP's headline has been used by plutocrats for millennia. It is being employed against us once more. If society were to break down entirely, some in the working class would become mercenaries employed by rich fucks to suppress the rest of us.

:). The only thing I'd quibble with is the ratios. In most revolutions it's not a majority that are active participants. What you DO have to have though is approval from the majority of people, either active OR tacit.

The plutocrats can hire maybe 20%. Usually, the active part of a revolutionary movement is 33%. The rest of the country is what makes or breaks the revolution. If they sit it out or help where they can without otherwise actively being involved, it can succeed. IF they actively oppose, even if it's not violently, a revolution won't succeed.

Apparently his rich lifestyle was not very good for his health somehow. That's not a very long life.

"quote" from Gould?

During the Great Southwest Railroad Strike of 1886 he (Gould) hired strikebreakers; according to labor unionists, he said at the time, "I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half."<16>

Philip Sheldon Foner - History of the Labor Movement in the United States Vol. 2: From the Founding of the A. F. of L. to the Emergence of American Imperialism 2nd ed.. International Publishers, Co., Inc.. p. 51. ISBN 978-0717803880.

but I was hoping for a more unbiased source than that.

Is the source totally unnamed?

These days you could get one half of the working class to *pay* to kill the other half..