# Is revolution coming?



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

An important part of your survival strategy needs to be "knowing when to jump". 

This article I found through browsing the JPFO website today ...

http://www.alternet.org/democracy/77498/


----------



## TonyE (Aug 1, 2007)

Ernie-

Iâm sure the big Government is totally aware of this and has been planning for one for quite some time.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Without a doubt.

It's important that we do the same.


----------



## Cyngbaeld (May 20, 2004)

I can't see it happening any time soon. People are good at talking and complaining, but how many are willing to step out in harms way for an ideal? You here a lot on the forums, but when I talk to people who don't hang out on forums, they don't sound like they are thinking of revolutions.

I think we may see some civil unrest and probably some riots in the cities, but I sincerely doubt it will result in any widespread revolution.


----------



## charles burns (Mar 21, 2006)

Don't you need revolutionaries to have a revolution?

The young are too busy playing computer games and the middle aged are far too busy managing their portfolios.

The article is written to attract attention, ultimately to the ads on the web page. It's almost like a new genre of romantic escapism, not movies, not a novel but a quasi political article.

Revolution is for those with nothing to lose who are more than willing to die for their cause - I don't even think the communists would back anyone who picked up a flag and ran, guns blazing to the scream of freedom. It'll be you and the Moslem's.

If you must quench a thirst for greatness - fight drugs and crime. We are under attack from an army of drug dealers and occupied by a seemingly insurmountable criminal force.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

I think there are a lot of revolutionary eggs out there waiting to be hatched.

Charles, what are the values you hold that are non-negotiable? Values that you will not give ground on. Values that you will fight for. Values for which you will resist the majority effort, even in a democracy, to uphold.

We've all got some line in the sand. For me it's my children and their future. Anything that touches on that pushes my revolutionary hot button.


----------



## charles burns (Mar 21, 2006)

I don't think you can preconceive your _action_ point. But I think you will know it when it comes.

Personally I don't think I'm even close - life is good. It could do with tweaking here and there but generally speaking I believe the balance in this country between personal freedom and civic obligation to be pretty enviable.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

As it is I would rather be a poor American than a rich Ethiopian. sure the system has flaws but for now I am content. Nothing that happens on the news has a direct impact on my lifestyle above inconvenience.

The line I draw in the sand is simple and one I would defend viciously. Unless it is in my obvious best interest I will not be vacated from my home.I will NEVER have my family separated or be parted with basic means of survival. (ie; I will offer much of my farm goods for hungry in a pinch but don't even try to take my last breeders, seed or stocked food)

I am willing to sacrifice a great deal for the common good but I reserve the right to keep and fight to the death over family, home and survival I am already entitled to. Those I will never let go of.

I am trying to prep for family but still have a sense of community preservation too.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Ah, cool. Hintonlady is always good for playing these games ...

So your line in the sand has been drawn. Will you pick up a gun and start shooting sheriff deputies or soldiers should they show up at your house and try to confiscate your livestock? What if they show up and tell you they are taking the children to one internment camp to be "vaccinated" and you adults are not allowed to go? Will you start shooting then? 

What if you hear from a trusted source that they are doing this in the county next to you and are just about to start next on your county? Will you band together with others to wait in the woods and ambush their convoy? 

Does everyone see, through this example, how quickly such a revolution can be hatched from satisfied and content people who believe "life is good and America is a great place to be"?


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

I'm sorry, I got 'lost' when they mentioned 1000 disenfranchised students having to walk ten miles, oops, 7.2 miles, to absentee ballot. PLeeeeasssseee... we only have one local early voting place... the courthouse.

I do not get any of my info from communist websites...

I did like the first poster's response about 'revolution'.... Good god, we do not want a revolution. Who will win the revolution? The south and its military bases; the tens of millions of largely conservative people who own guns and will organize militias for the "patriotic" defense of our country. Our cities cannot revolt against the large and largely conservative (fascist?) base of Americans from other non-urban areas.

We are wedded to reformism. We will suffer under revolution. Rarely do social progressives realize they'd lose in anything more than a panty raid... One of the reasons progressives insists we become de-armed... Only a nation of peasants can be manipulated. If only all the progressives would realize the futility of their dreams, we'd all be better off. Marxism works (barely even then) only in Utopia.... where few 21st century humans live.


----------



## hacon1 (Feb 4, 2008)

Everyone's line in the sand will be different. We can all agree on family. How about your guns? I can honestly say that I won't be a good little slave and just hand them over! How about your preps? As touched on by hintonlady, there is no way I will give them up and hand them over! How about travel? Will it be ok if your travel is restricted? How about being chipped? How about being rationed like you live in the U.S.S.R.? Where is your line and what is not acceptable to you? Everyone needs to remember one thing.......a lot of good men and women have died to protect our rights. Will you just give them up so that you can just go along to get along? What is your line in the sand?!?!?!?


----------



## OkieDavid (Jan 15, 2007)

That line in the sand is a very fleeting space..... MY family and I'm good to go, your family, and I'm not so quick to oil up the squirell gun.
How many of us stood glued to the TV during WACO, Ruby Ridge, Freemen standoff or any other of the more recent false starts? How many of us grabbed our rifles and attempted to flank the agents and get them in a crossfire? How many of us actually even drove out to the site and waved protest banners? I predict that we will have many more of these isolated minor skirmishes that rate barely a mention in the papers a week after they are successfully put down. We're a LONG way from revolution as we all have full bellies and roofs over our heads and we're only thinking of "me and mine". Until we begin thinking of "us and ours" TPTB are safe from harm.


----------



## TonyE (Aug 1, 2007)

_âIn Germany the Nazis first came for the communist, and I didnât speak up because I wasnât a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didnât speak up because I wasnât a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didnât speak up because I wasnât a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didnât speak up because I was a Protestant. Finally they came for me, but there was no one left to speak up to.â _

-Martin Niemoeller, a Lutheran Pastor who was sent to the Dachau Concentration Camp in 1938.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

Oh Ernie, you silly boy:banana02:




Ernie said:


> Ah, cool. Hintonlady is always good for playing these games ...
> 
> So your line in the sand has been drawn. Will you pick up a gun and start shooting sheriff deputies or soldiers should they show up at your house and try to confiscate your livestock?
> 
> ...



You and I have a lot more in common than I would ever admit. I just have a different strategy. Bullets are a last resort, nothing ever ends well that starts in violence. I want to survive not be a hero.


----------



## Callieslamb (Feb 27, 2007)

or revolting? There is a difference. I imagine myself more as having to defend me and mine too much to have time to go out and run a revolution. 

Revolution will not solve any problems. Look at other countries. Usually, after a revolution, something worse takes its place. 

Did anyone else catch the news that the USA signed an agreement with Canada that in the case of civil unrest, their troops can come here to help put it down and ours can go there? I can't find where I read that. If we are not planning for civil uprising, sounds like someone else is.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Hintonlady, you're far more subtle than I am. I hope it serves you well when the time comes. It probably will. 

Callieslamb, you're referring to the following:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57228

The pieces of the puzzle are now all in place. Internment camps, executive orders authorizing the president to declare martial law and suspend elections, and now foreign-born troops to round up the dissidents.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

I used to be a hot head and it always got in the way. It turned people off and clouded my judgment. I used to be ploitically and socially oriented. Now I just turn off the news, only way for me to stay sane.

I used to be a heck of a fighter and "stand up for". Then I realized it took a lot of energy and filled me with frustration. I hate to admit it but I have become much more passive in my dealings. I sort of let the junk happen as it will, been ripped off, treated badly etc. Thing is though, if I were to become consumed with making it right it would just add to my own drama.

People like I am now, take it easy types used to drive me crazy. I hate to see folks taken advantage of. Then I realized it may not be due to weakness it may just be a choice.

We all step into unsavory situations from time to time, not a lot of ways to avoid or deal with that. 

That also means I will be much more meditative and "under control" visually at least, should I ever have some heavy situations to manage. Usually the upset ones, the yellers etc. get dealt with quickly and are not listened to.

It's that drawing flies with honey thing..........

I used to be somewhat like you and very animated/enthusiastic at that. You often speak my mind, just the more hidden one. Not sure why I changed but I sure enjoy my ignorance is bliss smile. Besides, all well laid plans should be silent. (or something like that) There could be much more here than meets the eye. 

Have you ever read Sun Tzu, The art of war? I highly suggest that. Fun read when you try to visualize todays situations to ancient tactics. Lots of major mistakes being made by a military who insists on handing this book out to all officers in training???????

I also semi suggest the "48 laws of power". The guy who wrote it is a total scumbag who hustles people. However, if you can disect his evil nature from the knowledge he has there is a lot to be learned.

It will give you some new ideas to ponder if nothing else.


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

.................I can forsee a "revolt" of sorts due too the large , nationwide drop in realestate values . If the taxing entities across the nation fail too reduce the taxable value of realestate and then they try and forclose on large numbers of homes there will be confrontations twixt the sheriffs dept'(s) sent to evict homeowners off their property . 
..................Taxing entities are extremely slow too take any action that reduces their cash flow ! , fordy


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

I have two firearms. I will gladly give them up. I am a good citizen. I'd talk to the confiscators.... "You boys finding your work hard? Have enough to eat? They got plenty of heat over at that camp ya'll are in? Oh, you're not there? Oh, over """there""" "...

I've got some broken firearms, that will 'fire' and I'll give those up. If they find the rest, they'd best have good guards, and head shields.

Fighting an armed force at your home is a losing proposition. Best to appear to get along... and if measure are needed, take measures on their ground, and at your time of choosing. Less chance of retribution.


----------



## hillsidedigger (Sep 19, 2006)

A revolution seems to imply a thought-out process of confrontational change

I expect we are more likely in store for unleashed mayhem.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

I suspect you're probably right, hillside.


----------



## Madame (Jan 1, 2003)

So am I the only wuss who would consider moving elsewhere?


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

Madame said:


> So am I the only wuss who would consider moving elsewhere?



Where would you go in a disaster without the value of your property to sustain and restart?

(assuming that were the situation)


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

I'm not really inclined to put a whole lot of stock in the political forecasts of someone who thinks we live in a democracy. If he doesn't even understand what our form of government is and has been for the past couple of centuries, he probably doesn't understand what the political future is either.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

deaconjim said:


> I'm not really inclined to put a whole lot of stock in the political forecasts of someone who thinks we live in a democracy. If he doesn't even understand what our form of government is and has been for the past couple of centuries, he probably doesn't understand what the political future is either.


Play nice deacon.


Are you speaking of oligarchy? 

Speak up, but lets all remain friends.:goodjob:


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

hintonlady said:


> Play nice deacon.
> 
> 
> Are you speaking of oligarchy?
> ...


I am being nice, but I'm also being truthful. We have a republic, not a democracy.



> A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.
> Thomas Jefferson


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

deaconjim said:


> I am being nice, but I'm also being truthful. We have a republic, not a democracy.



Okay, point made.

Now what do you forsee in the future, so far it is not revolution..........


I'm not a historian but from my best guess Republics have a "shelf life" so to speak. (as have democracies from my observations too)


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

I see more of the same, ups and downs for each party. A not so slow drift towards socialism, and hopefully a full retreat from it as soon as people realize the danger...if they ever do.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

deaconjim said:


> I see more of the same, ups and downs for each party. A not so slow drift towards socialism, and hopefully a full retreat from it as soon as people realize the danger...if they ever do.




Just a guess,

but isn't a revolution possible regardless of wether republic or democracy?

Not that I am printing up "viva la revolucion" shirts or anything. I mean more in theory..........


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

deaconjim said:


> I'm not really inclined to put a whole lot of stock in the political forecasts of someone who thinks we live in a democracy. If he doesn't even understand what our form of government is and has been for the past couple of centuries, he probably doesn't understand what the political future is either.


We tend to use "democracy" as a broad term. True, we are in a republic, but the common usage of the word democracy is accepted. 

Methinks you are splitting hairs about word usage because you don't have anything useful to contribute to the argument, not because you really believe that one usage of the word "democracy" undermines the entire credibility of the topic. Such tricks undermine political discourse as a whole, and if the traditional rules of rhetoric applied to internet forums, then a whole lot of people would be shown the door.


----------



## charles burns (Mar 21, 2006)

It's absolutely a democracy. 

Britain has a monarchy and that's a democracy too. On account of the monarchy are bound by the same laws of the 'common' people. In theory. It's a brave traffic cop who would stop the Queen of England for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign though.

Lots of political systems operate under the cloak of democracy. It has some negative aspects such as failure to address the needs of minorities and then proportional representation can be tricky but generally speaking if it isn't democratic it isn't good.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

charles burns said:


> It's absolutely a democracy.
> 
> Britain has a monarchy and that's a democracy too. On account of the monarchy are bound by the same laws of the 'common' people. In theory. It's a brave traffic cop who would stop the Queen of England for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign though.
> 
> Lots of political systems operate under the cloak of democracy. It has some negative aspects such as failure to address the needs of minorities and then proportional representation can be tricky but generally speaking if it isn't democratic it isn't good.


Funny, the guy that wrote the Constitution thought otherwise. Too bad you weren't around to set him straight.



Ernie said:


> We tend to use "democracy" as a broad term. True, we are in a republic, but the common usage of the word democracy is accepted.
> 
> Methinks you are splitting hairs about word usage because you don't have anything useful to contribute to the argument, not because you really believe that one usage of the word "democracy" undermines the entire credibility of the topic. Such tricks undermine political discourse as a whole, and if the traditional rules of rhetoric applied to internet forums, then a whole lot of people would be shown the door.


I'm not undermining the argument by insisting that those taking part in the discussion know something about it. There are real differences between a democracy and a republic, so it is important to know which you are talking about.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

hintonlady said:


> Just a guess,
> 
> but isn't a revolution possible regardless of wether republic or democracy?
> 
> Not that I am printing up "viva la revolucion" shirts or anything. I mean more in theory..........


Revolution is always possible, and the US is no exception. The fact that we have a small 'revolution' every 4 years tends to relieve the pressure that would result in such an event.

The only way I can see events leading to a revolution would be for our government to ignore the constitution. As long as the Supreme Court keeps that in check, folks will have faith that our system will protect them from those who consider the Constitution to be a "living, breathing document" subject to public opinion and societal fads. When that breaks down, discontent will build until revolution is inevitable. 

Of course, the means to do that is built into our constitution, so that would not be so much a revolution as it would be an uprising in support of what our founding fathers originally established.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

deaconjim said:


> I'm not undermining the argument by insisting that those taking part in the discussion know something about it. There are real differences between a democracy and a republic, so it is important to know which you are talking about.


We do know the difference, most of us anyway. Don't be so arrogant as to believe you're the only one who does. The term "democracy" is in common usage and thus most of us are willing to let it pass. 

Have any of you ever read Arthur Schopenhauer's _The Art of Controversy_? Here's a link to it.

http://www.teach12.com/ttc/figs/38waystowin.asp

What Deaconjim is trying to pull is a classic example of #25. He is attempting to distract and undermine the entire argument by arguing some little point of order that is meaningless in the grand scheme of the argument.

Ok, so what now, Deaconjim? We said "democracy" instead of "republic". You've added nothing to this conversation but distractions and nitpicking over word usage in one of the comments. So let me ask you this ... do you NOT believe that a second American revolution may ever come and therefore you are trying to undermine the credibility of the argument so that those undecided may come to believe as you do? Or are you simply one of those people who like to jump into the middle of every discussion and start flailing away madly at all participants? 

What do you truly believe? What are your true motives for nitpicking apart the true nature of our government? After all, I could just as easily argue that we're no longer a republic and that we've moved into fascism or plutocracy. It has no bearing on the argument.


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

Ernie's quoting Schopenhauer!

I always knew you had a deep side


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

NoClue said:


> Schopenhauer!



*Gesundheit*


:banana02::rotfl:


----------



## Madame (Jan 1, 2003)

hintonlady said:


> Where would you go in a disaster without the value of your property to sustain and restart?
> 
> (assuming that were the situation)


If a repressive government endangered my children, I'd consider moving to another country - and yes, I'd have to start from scratch and would be working til I was 90. 

The reality is, things would have to be very, very bad before I'd think in terms of revolution. I'm neither brave or heroic.


----------



## seedspreader (Oct 18, 2004)

Is revolution coming?


Nope.


As I've said before... too many content, fed, entertained people.


_But it was only "x%" during the American Revolution... you say._

But there wasn't a big media machine and the entitlement/entertainment mentality.

A "revolution" by a few would be a media event... and then when those people were all dead, captured, on the run indefinitely... we would watch American Idol.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Ernie said:


> We do know the difference, most of us anyway. Don't be so arrogant as to believe you're the only one who does. The term "democracy" is in common usage and thus most of us are willing to let it pass.
> 
> Have any of you ever read Arthur Schopenhauer's _The Art of Controversy_? Here's a link to it.
> 
> ...


My true motive is to point out that the author of the article cited is inaccurate in his description of our form of government. This is a clear example of telling a lie often enough to make people believe it. I make every effort to counter that lie every time I hear someone using it, and this thread is no different.

If you had read my last post you would know what I truly believe. I won't bother repeating it for you.


----------



## Landshark (Jan 25, 2008)

I would have to agree with deacon on this one. When discussing poilitics in general, and especially in context of revolutions, changes in form, etc, it is very important to get the exact term for the type of government.

We were set up as a Republic. The American Revolution was fought to change from one form of government to another. We have a "revolution" every other year when we have a chance to throw out certain Representatives - modifying the current structure of the same Republic. We do not have Revolution to change the form of government though.

Although our Representatives are not listening, it is still a Republic. Now if enough are thrown out on their butt for not listening some people could see that as a Revolution.


----------



## Freeholder (Jun 19, 2004)

Ernie said:


> We tend to use "democracy" as a broad term. True, we are in a republic, but the common usage of the word democracy is accepted.
> 
> Methinks you are splitting hairs about word usage because you don't have anything useful to contribute to the argument, not because you really believe that one usage of the word "democracy" undermines the entire credibility of the topic. Such tricks undermine political discourse as a whole, and if the traditional rules of rhetoric applied to internet forums, then a whole lot of people would be shown the door.


I don't think it's splitting hairs to insist on accurate usage of words. Words can be very powerful, but only if we all know what we are discussing. We really shouldn't be sloppy with our language, any more than we are with our numbers. Republics and democracies are very different sorts of animals. Unfortunately, I don't think we have truly had either one for some time now. 

Kathleen


----------



## hfwarner3 (Feb 19, 2008)

YES! Revolution is definitely coming! Every 2 years in America, we have a revolution. It does not require guns or blood - just for good people to run for office and for everyone of age to vote for the one they think, after careful research and consideration, is best for the job. 

So there will be a revolution this November. Unfortunately, the people that are seeking office are no better than those we are throwing out, few who are eligible to vote actually do vote, and most of those that vote see it as a popularity contest instead of an election.


----------



## michiganfarmer (Oct 15, 2005)

Ernie said:


> Charles, what are the values you hold that are non-negotiable? Values that you will not give ground on. Values that you will fight for. Values for which you will resist the majority effort, even in a democracy, to uphold.


mine are guns. 

I will fight anyone, or any cop who comes to take mine


----------



## Jack T. (Feb 11, 2008)

michiganfarmer said:


> mine are guns.
> 
> I will fight anyone, or any cop who comes to take mine


Interesting thing for somebody who lives in Michigan to say. . .

I spent a year in Michigan. . .and was sure glad to get back to a free state. No "safety checks" (also known as de facto registration) here. :rock:


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

So we throw the SOBs out. They just move somewhere else and draw their pensions for life. There is never going to be any real change until they feel the pain also or mother nature steps in.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

deaconjim said:


> This is a clear example of telling a lie often enough to make people believe it. I make every effort to counter that lie every time I hear someone using it




Calling someone a liar is pretty harsh.

This is supposed to be a civil discussion. We all have opinions. Mine do not happen to coincide with yours. I have put my foot in my mouth a hundred times on this website.

However, I would never call you a liar.

A strong argument does not come from picking apart ones "opponent" but from well thought out counter points, which you have held back pretty well so far.

Potato or Potato(e) , arguing semantics doesn't solve a thing.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

I don't know that we have a revolution at the polls, as hfwarner3 indicates. I think we have the potential for that ... but I think a real revolution there at the polls would be someone like Ron Paul or Ralph Nader coming in. Not just a complete unknown like Obama who seems to be a puppet, or Clinton who is more of the same, or McCain who will turn out to be far worse than Bush on many fronts. 

As to the original article, I found it interesting and enlightening, though Deacon found the word use to stick in his craw. I'm not sure how accurate it is, but I've read other similar revolutionary texts and I personally think we're on the cusp. Che Guevera, Mao Tse-Tung, Castro, Marx, Bastiat, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin ... all these guys wrote quite a bit about the topic of revolution and it's not hard at all to draw parallels between their thoughts and modern society. Doesn't matter if you agree with their ideologies or not ... they were certainly experts at knowing when it was time to make their move. 

I don't agree with Seedspreader though (sorry, bud). I think a huge majority of Americans are discontent, we just can't all agree on a common cause or solution. And some are just not yet discontent enough.

Most days I don't think it'll be me and my generation fighting this coming revolution. I think we and the baby boomers are too much of a part of the problem. I think this burden will pass to my sons to be dealt with, and to our everlasting shame.


----------



## charles burns (Mar 21, 2006)

Well, if you don't define the word 'republic' you have the same political system as China.

The President is elected by a democratic process making the USA a republic and a democracy no matter how much you don't want it to be.

Funny.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

We will be herded into One World Government before the masses even knew what hit them.

At that point we are totally marginalized.

We WILL have revolution,only it wont be BY the people,it will be against the people.Which is what is occurring right now.See Euro zone if you dont get it.

Simply a matter of herding up the sheep.


----------



## Andy Nonymous (Aug 20, 2005)

Sorry for the GC type diversion, but I feel another point of view may be in order.

:soap: 
Divide and conquer has always been a solid strategy, whether militarily, or socially. That the masses still think there is any substantial difference in the candidates offered (pre-purchased, pre-selected, and groomed for public consumption), and buy into the arguing points of either party while not seeing that heading to Detroit by route "A", or heading to Detroit by route "B", you are still going to Detroit (says the guy with the pistol: "sorry we missed you" - it's a local joke). Divided? You bet! only essentially over such things as make for a mediocre game of Trivial Pursuit.

Democracy? Republic? Ha! What difference does it make if every major candidate offered for election is playing for the same owner, even if by the jersey they wear, a 'different' team? Practically every government in the world is the absolute best money can buy, and all the important ones are bought and owned and playing for the same goal. Which goal? Other than playing to distract while the sheeple are being herded, lets look at the symptoms first. Reproduced here, for your amusement and edification, are the 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto. While it's possible to nit-pick the finest of details, when the shoe fits, especially when one substitutes the word "bankers" (the truly powerful ones who pull the strings) for "state" (who merely dance)... (my comments are in red).


Karl Marx said:


> *1* Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. (Eminent domain, zoning, warranty deeds and property taxes - you rent, by the pleasure of...)
> *2* A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. (duh!)
> *3* Abolition of all right of inheritance. (ok, not quite, yet, but just wait till the 'recession' really hits and the State needs all the money it can grab.)
> *4* Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. (Seen the confiscation statutes lately? Know anyone threateningly powerful on the 'wrong side' of an opinion?)
> ...


 Perhaps that last should be "dun, dun, dun... (muhahahahaha!)"

The revolution has come, comrade, and most were sleeping. Resistance is now futile - you will be assimilated (or made an example of to your comrades and family).
~~~~~~~~
Then again...


Thoreau said:


> This American government--what is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed upon, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient, by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it.


 (Read on)

[/GC mode] Thank you for your patience. We now return you to your regular programing.


----------



## hillsidedigger (Sep 19, 2006)

Revolution can simply mean a marked change and that can be guaranteed.

With energy costs continuing to escalate, many will 

- wonder why new construction of anything is no longer happening
- no longer commute so far either for employment, shopping or recreational activities
- no longer have employment
- no longer eat a protein based diet
- no longer live one or 2 in a large house but rather group together
- no longer be moving into the middle of nowhere and the middle of nowhere will remain more in a natural state
- start gardening and farming on even the tiniest pieces of land
- find alternative methods to produce a little electricty for their homes
- be healthier from the need for much more walking


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

A revolution will come. Who benefits in the end? Well, that depends on how many people will wake up before it's too late. Right now, as it has already been stated, people are too distracted. T.V. is good for this. Whether it's American Idol or the media diverting your attention. The Constitution is constantly being trampled on by those in power, but hey, as long as we still have at least seventy two channels to choose from who cares. Right?

"In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot." Mark Twain


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

hillsidedigger said:


> Revolution can simply mean a marked change and that can be guaranteed.
> 
> *With energy costs continuing to escalate*, many will
> 
> ...


Analysts are predicting $4.00 per/gal. of gas by the end of spring.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

Dangit Andy Nonymous.....

I come on here, especially at the crack of dawn with the intent of being amused.

I'm not happy with you making me have to warm up my thinker and actually *oh my goodness* use it.

Great post, next time wait until I wake up, lol


As far as sheep, mine pretty much lay around content and behave when handled. I just have to make sure they are well fed. They only complain when they think it's time for some treats. 

I like sheep, it's those mischevious goats I can live without. Just smart enough to cause trouble. It's a real hassle having smart animals who like to be curious and assert themselves.


----------



## Andy Nonymous (Aug 20, 2005)

Ah, Hinton, then it is with some justice that I've been called an old goat.  

Next time, I'll take it under advisement that even if I stay up most of the night feeding the stove as the temps hover just above 0 and crafting a post, when it requires thought, 'tis better to wait until afternoon to post it. One would hate to have people thinking ALL DAY!  The consequences could be catastrophic! 

Wait.. come to think of it, the catastrophe at hand is due to an abundance of not thinking. On the count of three, lets place our heads back in the sand and leave our butts in the air...

1

2

...

(there's your laugh)


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Thats exactly right Andy. NO difference in any candidates except Ron Paul and the sheep just dont get it.

So they argue endlessly about Reps and Dems and there is no difference,just different trains on the same track.CFR bought and paid for members.

And Joe Public thinks he is getting a choice and will argue that 'choice' of the SAME ruling elite to the grave.

Its hopeless,line up for your chips now.You gave away your country Mr and Mrs America,now reap what your ignorance has sown.And lets have a good endless fight in GC about how ,somehow,there is a difference between the 2 parties.

There isnt.Game over.You were totally bamboozled while thinking you were so smart.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!

And you think you will lie to the trooper about your weapons or your stash,sure you will.Right up until he sticks that voice stress analyzer in your face (Flashlight) and it says LIAR.While your property and all around you is mapped with ground radar,along with your house.And off you go to the concentration camp for the crime of lying to a government official.On the spot! 

Folks,you aint seen nothing yet,and your failure to protect the constitution is why.You even had a chance this election to vote OUT the CFR,and vote in a true constitutionalist and passed it right on by in droves.Smart move America.Suck up that propaganda,dumb yourselves right on down.

Im glad I'm old and hopefully wont be the slave that is coming to a future near you soon.


----------



## NEOhioSmiths (Sep 28, 2007)

Regarding the candidates, I think that Roger Daltry said it best, "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Sorry Ernie, not trying to dilute the thread or not answer the question. Just saw the commentary on Rep vs. Dem and felt that this lyric best sums it up. I'm not sure it will be a revolution - I guess it depends on what that means. I do think that the path our country is on is not sustainable and probably within our lifetime, certainly within our children's lifetime, there will be huge changes. This scares me (prospect of my kids facing it - if it were just me, wouldn't care as much)


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

These changes...
since many of the younger generation has been wrapped in cotton batting growing up, and not even allowed to play tag and dodge ball. Not allowed to fail...don't you think it will make the changes more easily implemented by the 'powers'?

Angie


----------



## NEOhioSmiths (Sep 28, 2007)

Regarding changes - you're probably right. It seems that kids nowadays have no interest in history, in the ideals our country was founded on, in where their food comes from, in how to plant some seeds or get some firewood, etc. From what I've seen of my co-worker's kids, the biggest concerns are (1) video game systems, (2) clothes, (3) cell phone plans, (4) general materialism. Such pre-occupations will certainly make changes easier to force, or if they are not forced, harder to accept.


----------



## Andy Nonymous (Aug 20, 2005)

Angie, you (and others) might appreciate this, about 'the price of a free lunch'. Not many are free from the slop trough of the Feds (or state), and when it comes down to withholding the corn, most will stand and squeal until fed, rather than root on their own.

Easy? a walk in the park, with the Pied Piper in the lead.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Yep! Andy.
Angie


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

MMmmmmm corn, I like corn! : )

I use that trick on my sheep. Got a couple that are flighty, different breed, weren't selected to be docile. Those dang things can sense when we have shots to give or...? They just run like the dickens and give me a real hassle.

They're also the first ones to lunge at the dog if it gets out of line. The rest get chased by the goose, sheep scared of a goose, imagine that?


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

hintonlady said:


> MMmmmmm corn, I like corn! : )
> 
> I use that trick on my sheep. Got a couple that are flighty, different breed, weren't selected to be docile. Those dang things can sense when we have shots to give or...? They just run like the dickens and give me a real hassle.
> 
> They're also the first ones to lunge at the dog if it gets out of line. The rest get chased by the goose, sheep scared of a goose, imagine that?



I would imagine over time that if the same sheep or goat for that matter continued to give his owner's so much trouble that he would soon find himself in freezer camp...but I so admire their spirit...I guess others understand that by getting and training the young sheep at the earliest of ages allows you to have better control.. I wonder if baby goats would like video games or watch TV?


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

I'm in the goat category. Except I went over the fence a long time ago and started living wild.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

Aintlifegrand said:


> I would imagine over time that if the same sheep or goat for that matter continued to give his owner's so much trouble that he would soon find himself in freezer camp...but I so admire their spirit...I guess others understand that by getting and training the young sheep at the earliest of ages allows you to have better control.. I wonder if baby goats would like video games or watch TV?



Freezer camp, nah, not in my case. Happen to be the hardiest, best conformed, best quality stock I own, just have some quirks. If I ever need my flock gathered they seem to have the best instincts. Hate to lose such potential in my genetics. Got to have something to "show" and infuse worthwile qualities in the others.

Never know when the dumb ones will walk into a coyote slaughter.

Bottle babies would walk up to us, butchering knife in hand. Gotta love 'em.

Baby goats.......

My DS loves video games, good thing I strictly monitor them. He also LOVES to read. Would rather go outside and work than sit inside and do school. Kid listens to everything I say, a mini me of sorts. Thank goodness I yanked him from the "flock" and teach him at home. 

I think baby goats pick up habits from their own herd. You got some mountain goats and you got petting zoo goats.


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

hintonlady said:


> Freezer camp, nah, not in my case. Happen to be the hardiest, best conformed, best quality stock I own, just have some quirks. If I ever need my flock gathered they seem to have the best instincts. Hate to lose such potential in my genetics. Got to have something to "show" and infuse worthwile qualities in the others.
> 
> Never know when the dumb ones will walk into a coyote slaughter.
> 
> ...



Thank goodness.. I am pushing my DD to do the same for my grandchildren... but wouldn't you know.. all that independent thought I taught her to have is backfiring on me now...lol


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

(I've tried to post this twice and keep getting errors when I submit - here goes attempt #3)

It took me a couple days to come up with a response to the parent question. My knee-jerk answer was that no, we're not headed for revolution - except in the geological sense that we're headed towards anything and everything if you wait around long enough. My well thought-out answer is however: Probably not in the immediate to near-term future (1-3 years) although there is definitely the potential for it.

Looking at history, there are two basic triggers that move revolution out of the coffee houses (or internet forums) and onto the streets: Widespread and sustained hunger and dramatic and symbolic oppression of the mainstream (to define that fully would take another post). While there is significant potential for either or both of these triggers in the US right now, I don't see sufficient cause yet to think that the GENERAL population is on verge. (Frequent readers of this board don't strike me as indicative of the general populace)

Still though, I believe that the US has significant potential for recovery. Most of you will probably disagree with my definitions of 'recovery' and 'potential', but I'm cool with that. Part of what has made America great is that we can passionately disagree with each other and still peacefully (more or less) co-exist. In practice this means none of us get exactly what we want and the byproduct of this is a certain amount of discontent. I am emphatically committed to this ideal. 

I think it's naive at best to say that anyone supporting a candidate other than Ron Paul is a sheeple. I voted for him the last time he ran, but this time I just can't in good conscience do so. I respect Dr. Paul more than any other politician I can think of, and what I wouldn't give to sit down with the man over a pizza and debate politics and economics - but I just don't think he's right.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

As far as revolution being possible, I think it would be under the right circumstances. Is it necessary for evil powers to push that far and win in order to serve their motives? Not really.

There are the types who ride the fringes, always will be. Chances are rounding up dissidents would not be especially practical. Whether the general public truly has complete freedom or not is not as important as what they perceive. If they stay content yet are outsmarted out of hard earned funds through taxes, creative corporate gouging etc. they will remain quiet.

Look back at the fifties, average people could afford the American dream. John doe had a job, owned a car and a home, had a wife and kids. John Doe lived well, had moderate ability to keep up with Joneses, didnât use much credit. ALSO Mrs. Doe had the distinct honor and privilege of not working outside the home and not going broke at the same time.

Today most folks need a two income family to just survive. The housing market is a disaster. Payday loan places with 400% interest are crowded, kids are raised by institutions....etc.

As far as I see it the working class has grown, quality of life has gone down, extra funds have vanished and although they have âgoodiesâ those goodies are disposable and replaced often. (washers, tvâs etc.) The nest egg is shrinking but people get by with the shiny trinkets, no harm no foul.

We lost the financial revolution, most didnât even see it happening. In the end the evil powers just want more workers and more profit. That will only change in the most desperate of times. If the sheeple lose any goodies they will grow restless. At that point turning into a mob will be natural and done as a part of popular culture. It will spread on pirate webcasts, radio broadcasts and text messages. Hardy homesteaders would be better served to avoid that nonsense, let it blow over and go back to what we do best.......

The social revolution is fought by folks like us who simply opt out of the system. Our lifestyles are programmed out of 99% of the populace so our trying to revive an almost extinct lifestyle is very little threat. We are probably not even a glitch on the radar because no self respecting starbucks drinker would want to milk a cow. As long as we donât get overly vocal defending mindless sheep, I think we are safe as can be.


----------



## Spinner (Jul 19, 2003)

mightybooboo said:


> Thats exactly right Andy. NO difference in any candidates except Ron Paul and the sheep just dont get it.
> 
> So they argue endlessly about Reps and Dems and there is no difference,just different trains on the same track...


I agree that Ron Paul is the only candidate who offers change, very good change that is desperately needed.

There are 535 people who control this country. How do you suppose such a small number of people could gain and keep control? Do the words "divide and conquer" sound familiar? They divided the people into political parties and keep the people arguing amongst themselves while they retain quiet control, watching the fray from the sidelines. 

With this election the media is keeping Clinton/Obama on screen daily, almost hourly. They have almost totally ignored the only candidate who is really for the people instead of for "business as usual". 

United we stand, divided we fall
The few have been keeping the majority divided for generations. 
The fall will come if the masses don't unite soon.


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

hintonlady said:


> As far as revolution being possible, I think it would be under the right circumstances. Is it necessary for evil powers to push that far and win in order to serve their motives? Not really.
> 
> There are the types who ride the fringes, always will be. Chances are rounding up dissidents would not be especially practical. Whether the general public truly has complete freedom or not is not as important as what they perceive. If they stay content yet are outsmarted out of hard earned funds through taxes, creative corporate gouging etc. they will remain quiet.
> 
> ...


I don't think that one can honestly compare the American Dream of the 50's with the American dream of 2008. A family needs 2 incomes now because it wants far more stuff and perks than the family of the fifties. At least in my family, we've learned that if we live by modest standards, avoid debt and plan our expenditures we can easily live on a single paycheck and still save money. We currently aren't doing this because we plan to move to the country and want to pay cash for our house and land - we're both working still, and saving every extra cent. We could do it now if we were willing to go into debt, but it'll be easier still without a mortgage.

It's been my observation that no one ever grows up until they have to. Right now, our country's population - rich and poor alike is made up of people who've never had to. You don't call a kid stupid because they do stupid kid things until its obvious that they don't learn from the consequences, and especially if no one has ever shown them an alternative. The responsible, moral thing to do is to give the 'Sheeple' the same consideration and the same good example.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Well we also controlled most of the worlds wealth after WWII.

The goose that laid the golden eggs is gone,and the eggs long ago spent.

A lot of the need for 2 incomes is related to the loss of that wealth,not just more toys.Though the toy argument is very valid too.We all see that with the ridiculous McMansions vrs. having a good home life in that home.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

No argument here, maybe toys was a bad example.

Just think people had a deeper sense of safety and comfort financially back then. People owned stuff at the end of the "game" and kids inherited it. A lifetime of work could end in a pension and seeing the mortgage paid off.

Now we are plagued by folks who need a reverse mortgage, no inheritance, no lifes work to help the next generation. (assuming they spend wisely) Yes, it happens but not as often IMHO.

We have an awful lot of people who die with nothing, leaving behind another generation of "renters" not owners. The "land" is slowly slipping into the hands of large corps. Tract housing falls apart decades before older homes look worn. Often in shambles by the time it is paid for.

In the end what tokens we accumulate, in general, amount to less. More getting by and surviving. Less "making it".


----------



## charles burns (Mar 21, 2006)

Don't slip too far into that dreamy world, the problems are in the real one.

There was apartheid in the southern states of this country in the fifties. 

A lot of woman fought hard to get away from the role of housewife and pursue a different life.

Not everyone wants to go back to a time when you couldn't get a heart bypass operation.

The government never put the 'blacks only' signs up at the drinking fountain in the park, nor did the imaginary scapegoat you call sheeple - we did. We the people.

The government had women firmly where they wanted them in the fifties, not because they were a controlling evil force but because they were men. Men put women in chains - not the government, not sheeple, we the people and women broke them, not the government, not homesteaders, not some imaginary revolutionary force, women and we the people slowly dragged ourselves out of the fifties.

Now we see waste, selfishness, materialism, crime, drugs, an overbearing political system and blaming your favourite sheeple scapegoat is going to get you nowhere. Blaming the government is going to get you nowhere, we the people must bring about change, and homesteaders are not the glorified, elite race some people like to think they are - they are part of we the people, part of the problem, part of the solution.

Have a revolution now - have a personal revolution. Stop blaming other people for every problem you see, stop waiting for the day you see people die in their thousands because they were too consumer oriented and help them.

Or else put your bullets where your mouth is and go kill anyone with a debt problem.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

charles burns said:


> Or else put your bullets where your mouth is and go kill anyone with a debt problem.


Huh?????


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

hintonlady said:


> Calling someone a liar is pretty harsh.
> 
> This is supposed to be a civil discussion. We all have opinions. Mine do not happen to coincide with yours. I have put my foot in my mouth a hundred times on this website.
> 
> ...


I've been trying to make what I believe is a valid point about the _author of the article that this thread was posted about,_ but I feel like I'm banging my head against a stone wall. My part in the discussion is over, you folks can come to your own conclusions without my help. 

I would like to say that I did not call anyone on this forum a liar. I was paraphrasing Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propoganda. The exact quote is:



> "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."


----------



## hfwarner3 (Feb 19, 2008)

I think Huckabee could bring SOME important change (like the FairTax), but I am not sure he is up to the job. Of course, I can say that about ALL the choices left.

Give me a President who is all about reducing Federal spending, reducing the size of government, pushing things back down to the states, and passing the FairTax and you have I President I would fight for.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

charles burns said:


> Don't slip too far into that dreamy world, the problems are in the real one.
> 
> There was apartheid in the southern states of this country in the fifties.
> 
> ...


Okay, well thought out.

Here's the thing. As it is I see no immediate threat from .gov or otherwise. Sure the times are a' changin' but my ducks are in a comfortable row regardless of what happens in the news. If things got difficult I am reasonably able to cope, at least better than 90% of the population. I personally would not curl up and die if we lost a lot of the things we are used to.

I exercise free will and lead a free life. Aside from a sense of honor and maybe an occasional inconvenience no one impacts my situation. The mcmansion set does not even exist in my world, they are a planet and countryside away.

If that changed I may get a bit uppity.

If the sheeple or anyone else got disenchanted and started a revolution why would I , why should I feel compelled to chip in? If due to their poor planning and choices things get ugly what business is it of mine? Why should I nobly step in and do whats right if they couldn't all along?

It's goes back to the story about the ants and the grasshoppers , or something like that.

No, don't think homesteaders are above it all in choices, just ahead of the game by living their dream and being able to sustain selves; for the joy of it and "just in case". 

It isn't right to pick a scapegoat. I just figure I'll "target" the first person or entity that direstly threatens and impacts my way of life. If I am left alone I could care less. Apparently I have a sheeple attitude too. Didn't realize it until now. *shrug*

"Don't tread on me" and no one gets bit, plain and simple. I am way too invested in my own lifestyle to go and play revolutionary for someone elses cause. I have a family and am quite happy. Could care less who is wearing the crown or even if they have an accent.

How unpatriotic of me.


----------



## pickapeppa (Jan 1, 2005)

texican said:


> I'm sorry, I got 'lost' when they mentioned 1000 disenfranchised students having to walk ten miles, oops, 7.2 miles, to absentee ballot. PLeeeeasssseee... we only have one local early voting place... the courthouse.
> 
> I do not get any of my info from communist websites...
> 
> ...


It may just be my perception, but in this situation I see political sides as a false division. The progressives see the same thing in conservatives as the conservatives see in the progressives. Both think the other is out to control personal liberties. Don't you see it? It's a false division.

The real division is between those who want to control the masses and the masses who have drawn their lines in the sand as to how far they're going to allow someone that control.

When it gets down to you and me, neighbors, working in the land in the sun for our own survival, it's not going to matter what political side you're on, or what your religious background is. Those things are small in comparison to a common goal that's fundamental to all of us.


----------



## charles burns (Mar 21, 2006)

Actually, _hintonlady_ my post wasn't too well thought out at all. I was kinda sorry I posted it after I did.

Most people here are active in the promotion of a simpler lifestyle, you only have to visit their blogs and their web pages to appreciate that fact - the promotion of a better way to live via a blog or even participation on a forum is a personal revolution of sorts.

I had a knee jerk reaction to the _sheeple_ thing - it drives me nuts, I don't know who they are, I don't know what qualifies you to be one or what disqualifies you from being one.

Apologies for the underestimation of the people here, consider me slapped.


----------



## hintonlady (Apr 22, 2007)

charles burns said:


> Actually, _hintonlady_ my post wasn't too well thought out at all. I was kinda sorry I posted it after I did.
> 
> Most people here are active in the promotion of a simpler lifestyle, you only have to visit their blogs and their web pages to appreciate that fact - the promotion of a better way to live via a blog or even participation on a forum is a personal revolution of sorts.
> 
> ...



Actually gave me an opportunity for self reflection. I learned something, I have changed as I have matured. 

I meant what I said about being a sheeple. I would die for my convictions, thing is though, the list of things worthy of defending seems to be much leaner these days.

I used to be a rebel, a dissenter, questioned authority, got no energy for that junk anymore. Just want to be left alone. Not much different than the mcmansion set, I just buy less toys.

I wonder how far I could be pushed before I stood for a cause other than my own.

I am shamed and appreciate the teaching moment, even if by accident.


----------

