Poll: Will there be another American Revolution?
- Thread starter RamirezDoEverything
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Make it "like all non-peaceful revolutions". This tends to happen a lot. Hell, many peaceful revolutions have the same effect in the end.Madara XIII said:
Also, "people die and nothing changes. That's why they're called revolutions." (quoting from memory, don't lynch me if I'm wrong)
Few things can push people so far as to revolt. Fear of starvation is usually the strongest stimulus. And with the grotesque agricultural overproduction that the US has, that ain't happening. What else? Unemployment? All Western countries have some form of social security for that. People might gather for a few rallies, but that's it. Epidemics? Not with the present healthcare quality. And frankly, we're way past the point where religion would incite any sort of revolution.
There is just no "hook" for any ideology to catch on at this moment. Nor will there be any soon. Of course, unexpected disasters might happen, but barring that, the answer is no.
Do you know what an assault rifle does to an M1 Abrams tank? Absolutely nothing. Trying to revolt against the American military would be hilariously futile.
That notwithstanding, the answer remains no, because the United States is a reasonably-functional republic with universal suffrage (hooray for Civ IV terminology). If class tension gets particularly bad, political change will happen long before the conflict reaches the point of revolution. The only way any significant revolt could occur would be if the democratic system somehow caved in on itself, and the lower class lost their right to vote - a scenario I consider absurdly unlikely.
Well, a revolt could also occur if the majority of people in a small region felt oppressed by the majority opinions of the nation. In other words, South Carolina and Texas could still try to secede. Please note that both of those hypothetical secessions would be hilariously short-lived, for the "strongest military on the planet" reason.
That notwithstanding, the answer remains no, because the United States is a reasonably-functional republic with universal suffrage (hooray for Civ IV terminology). If class tension gets particularly bad, political change will happen long before the conflict reaches the point of revolution. The only way any significant revolt could occur would be if the democratic system somehow caved in on itself, and the lower class lost their right to vote - a scenario I consider absurdly unlikely.
Well, a revolt could also occur if the majority of people in a small region felt oppressed by the majority opinions of the nation. In other words, South Carolina and Texas could still try to secede. Please note that both of those hypothetical secessions would be hilariously short-lived, for the "strongest military on the planet" reason.
I think it is likely. Government corruption is reaching an all-time high. If Obama wasn't black I'd say we'd already be up in arms (seriously, the people were on the edge of revolt when W. Bush was screwing us over but now everyone seems fine with being screwed over).
I'm all for taking an M14 to the pricks in power. I don't care about the puppets like the senators and what not, the men behind the curtain need eradicated otherwise we will end up in the same boat as before.
And note that most soldiers wouldn't be supporting the government. They would support the people, for they aren't mindless drones.
I'm all for taking an M14 to the pricks in power. I don't care about the puppets like the senators and what not, the men behind the curtain need eradicated otherwise we will end up in the same boat as before.
And note that most soldiers wouldn't be supporting the government. They would support the people, for they aren't mindless drones.
I don't think there will be a revolution in the next 50 years. American patriotism is a powerful thing. No, there won't be a revolution in America but I do foresee the possibility of a civil war. American politics have always been incredibly, er, bombastic and all it might take is a series of assassinations on both sides of the polarized political scene.
Also this. If you guys are going to be killing each other, please don't bring that here.Tiger Sora said:
The little fact that he was a ruthless killer who advocated stomping down heavily on anyone who opposed his views tends to get in the way of sympathizing with him.Ilikemilkshake said:
He believed in his cause, but ended up being no better than the ones he'd opposed.
Hahaa
No. For several reasons. First off, it wouldn't be a revolution it would be a civil war.
Secondly, you seem to have highlighted economics as the reason for this war, in which case, hells no. America's attitude towards its poor people seems at least to an outside perspective to be, clearly these people were not good or motivated enough to make themselves rich. The American dream is still that of the self made man and almost every facet of American society reflects this. You don't give relatively as much to charity as every other nation on earth, you don't think that poor people should be given health care or housing or in fact any aid at all, and any policy which comes the slightest bit close to 'help people with less money than you' gets immediately shot down as being socialist, I have never seen a country as diammetrically opposed to the concept of helping people who need help as America. If the poor ever did start a revolution all the rich would join in the peasant murdering, fuck it'd be like Medieval Europe all over again. (This paragraph intended mostly facetiously but seriously, America hates poor people more than anyone else I know)
Which brings me to my next, less ridiculous, point. The American Military. I know the Second Amendment is supposed to be this great equaliser and it means that 'the people' can stand up to 'the man.' But come on, be serious. They have assault rifles, you have handguns, they have a minimum six months training, you have accumulated drunken evenings shooting bottles off your fence, they have tactics, strategy, huge military computers, the combined efforts of the police, the secret services, the navy, the military, the air force, you have can-do spirit and a little grass roots thing going on. They'd steamroller everyone. This isn't the 1860s where every is as well armed and trained as the army themselves, the gulf between trained personnel and the layman is so great in America that you'd be lucky to even kill one soldier before the revolution was over. The Second Amendment's supposed original purpose has about as much relevance nowadays as the Seventh. Unless the military joined you but come on, why would they ever join a socialist grass roots revolution?
So there's two extremely good reasons. I do have more.
No. For several reasons. First off, it wouldn't be a revolution it would be a civil war.
Secondly, you seem to have highlighted economics as the reason for this war, in which case, hells no. America's attitude towards its poor people seems at least to an outside perspective to be, clearly these people were not good or motivated enough to make themselves rich. The American dream is still that of the self made man and almost every facet of American society reflects this. You don't give relatively as much to charity as every other nation on earth, you don't think that poor people should be given health care or housing or in fact any aid at all, and any policy which comes the slightest bit close to 'help people with less money than you' gets immediately shot down as being socialist, I have never seen a country as diammetrically opposed to the concept of helping people who need help as America. If the poor ever did start a revolution all the rich would join in the peasant murdering, fuck it'd be like Medieval Europe all over again. (This paragraph intended mostly facetiously but seriously, America hates poor people more than anyone else I know)
Which brings me to my next, less ridiculous, point. The American Military. I know the Second Amendment is supposed to be this great equaliser and it means that 'the people' can stand up to 'the man.' But come on, be serious. They have assault rifles, you have handguns, they have a minimum six months training, you have accumulated drunken evenings shooting bottles off your fence, they have tactics, strategy, huge military computers, the combined efforts of the police, the secret services, the navy, the military, the air force, you have can-do spirit and a little grass roots thing going on. They'd steamroller everyone. This isn't the 1860s where every is as well armed and trained as the army themselves, the gulf between trained personnel and the layman is so great in America that you'd be lucky to even kill one soldier before the revolution was over. The Second Amendment's supposed original purpose has about as much relevance nowadays as the Seventh. Unless the military joined you but come on, why would they ever join a socialist grass roots revolution?
So there's two extremely good reasons. I do have more.
I kinda hope so. Seems to me that all the freedoms we got during the American Revolution are slowly being nickel and dimed away. This oligarchy we have now needs to disappear. As for the armed forces, the bulk of the military is made up of people from those middle and lower classes that would revolt. Also, if the revolution was to restore the Constitution to its full power, would have many miltary personnel on the revolting side. Swear first to support and defend the Constitution, then to obey orders from superior officers.
Actually it wouldn't, because it would quickly be detected by the secret service, everyone would be evacuated, and it would achieve nothing but swing public opinion dramatically towards the people you were about to bomb. Even if you get a few, everyone else will rally around them, because people trip over themselves trying to respect the dead.Agayek said:
Anyway, it both won't and shouldn't happen. The closest we may get is one or two militias killing some cops and pretending they struck a blow for freedom, and then getting destroyed by the National Guard or FBI.
In the next 50 years? Honestly, I have no idea. We don't know what the political climate will be like a decade from now, much less five. At the present state, no, there won't be a revolution. In order to call for that, there would need to be a breach in civil rights, security, or human rights that congress is unwilling to change, but the people are unwilling to stand for. That or the dollar suddenly reducing its value to nearly nothing. In that case, I think American citizens would overthrow the government and create a new currency.
On the topic of whether or not *I* want a revolution... well... no. Not just no, but hell no. There is a system, and we can put a shock to the system by electing the right people to change it. That's definitely preferable to use picking up the rifles in our closet and killing each other. Even if I stood for its ideals, I would not fight in a new revolution unless it was in self defense.
Also, don't even mention the military argument, it's just about irrelevant. First of all, no army in the world exists that can defeat a heavily armed population as large and widespread as one in the US. It just can't happen. Even keeping order in a country this large if we WEREN'T so heavily armed would be a major undertaking. Second of all, the military couldn't even use tactics we're using in Iraq or Afghanistan to fight a civil war. Once the war is over, everyone goes back to being citizens, so if you kill anyone needlessly, cut off certain supplies, or use any scorched Earth tactics, you'll only fan the flames. You'd also have to factor in that the military would literally split in two when it came to fighting their own people. The heavy hardware would not be exclusive to one side. Basically, if a significant portion of the US went into revolt (more than 1 percent), the US government would need to yield to their demands.
On the topic of whether or not *I* want a revolution... well... no. Not just no, but hell no. There is a system, and we can put a shock to the system by electing the right people to change it. That's definitely preferable to use picking up the rifles in our closet and killing each other. Even if I stood for its ideals, I would not fight in a new revolution unless it was in self defense.
Also, don't even mention the military argument, it's just about irrelevant. First of all, no army in the world exists that can defeat a heavily armed population as large and widespread as one in the US. It just can't happen. Even keeping order in a country this large if we WEREN'T so heavily armed would be a major undertaking. Second of all, the military couldn't even use tactics we're using in Iraq or Afghanistan to fight a civil war. Once the war is over, everyone goes back to being citizens, so if you kill anyone needlessly, cut off certain supplies, or use any scorched Earth tactics, you'll only fan the flames. You'd also have to factor in that the military would literally split in two when it came to fighting their own people. The heavy hardware would not be exclusive to one side. Basically, if a significant portion of the US went into revolt (more than 1 percent), the US government would need to yield to their demands.
Full scale revolution? Doubtful. Major changes and reforms? Probably. If not reforms in the next 50, then we will likely have full scale revolution within the next 50 after that.
If you bring the pot and hookers then I'm OK with that.Sojoez said: