The Revolution

[eyerlives]

You know what's so friggin' enjoyably delightful?

Progressives are factually so wholesale relativist and chronic with their inherent generalizations that the first thing they "feel" when they read...

Get right with God...

...or die.

...is threatened with violence. Then, because they absolutely need to blame someone else for how they themselves "feel", they demand that those who post such words be punished.

Oh please, dear progressive, two-faced GB moderator: pull your "threats of violence are not tolerated" justification crap again and ban me once more for violating your "rules".

God - this "Free Speech" shit is soooooo much fun!

 

[coati]

All humans only face two options:

Get right with God...

...or die.

Choose wisely, grasshoppers.

Duly noted...

 

[eyerlives]

Can timing be any more perfect.

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif

 

[Hypoxia]

And in the 60s it was the radical left suggesting revolution. How did that turn out? In fact there may have been a backlash against the radical left. I suspect there could be a similar backlash against a radical right if they start to get violent.

Having survived the 60's (if you can remember them you weren't really there) and seen the backlash, I'm paranoid enough to nastily suspect Tromp as an agent provocateur fomenting that backlash, like the police infiltrator urging a disgruntled but peaceful protest group to build bombs.

Whether that's his goal or not, reaction and repression could certainly be the effect of his rebellious rants. The Right could be more discredited than after Goldwater.

 

[coati]

Having survived the 60's (if you can remember them you weren't really there) and seen the backlash, I'm paranoid enough to nastily suspect Tromp as an agent provocateur fomenting that backlash, like the police infiltrator urging a disgruntled but peaceful protest group to build bombs.

Whether that's his goal or not, reaction and repression could certainly be the effect of his rebellious rants. The Right could be more discredited than after Goldwater.

Trump is too self-centered, from way back in time, to an agent. I agree that this will be bad for the Republicans. They will need to rebuild. I hope they rebuild the way they did just as Lincoln was being nominated.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

With almost 50 million innocents already intentionally and tortuously killed by progressives...

..."first" quick actually applying a long, long time ago.



BTW, a revolutionary heads-up to all you PPsoSS:

One of your most collectively egregious, fatal faults is your native inability to see anything and anyone in any other way but through your practical blindness of wholesale relativism and chronic generalization.

Keep fantasizing Timothy McVeighs and Clive Bundys et al represent anything or anyone else but who and what they actually are: just simple malcontent lemmings, veritable branches of the same collective tree you hang from, the same wannabe tree where offensive action is "justified" according to whatever man-made interpretation of what's "tolerant" and "open-minded" and "equal" happen to be the flavors of whatever progressive day it might be.

All humans only face two options:

Get right with God...

...or die.

Choose wisely, grasshoppers.

huh???

 

[underguy1]

Trump is too self-centered, from way back in time, to an agent. I agree that this will be bad for the Republicans. They will need to rebuild. I hope they rebuild the way they did just as Lincoln was being nominated.

There's nowhere for them to go. The Democrats have occupied the rightwing neoliberal ground in domestic policies and the neoconservative right in foreign imperialist policy.

The Clinton/Rubin wing of the Ds is way to the right of the Reagan Rs. Hillary was a proud Goldwater girl after all.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

And in the 60s it was the radical left suggesting revolution. How did that turn out? In fact there may have been a backlash against the radical left. I suspect there could be a similar backlash against a radical right if they start to get violent.

http://www.history.com/topics/1970s

I can't compare radical hippies and black activists to Open Carry, Oath Keepers, Bundy army or the KKK. There are also Chiefs of Police and possibly entire local police forces who feel the need for revolution.

 

[Hard_Rom]

huh???

The 'Keep fantasizing' paragraph is relevant. The rest is just eyer and his own personal axe to grind. He has a major personality disorder.

 

[BotanyBoy]

All humans only face two options:

Get right with God...

...or die.

Choose wisely, grasshoppers.

LOL what a fuckin' load of shit.

I'm choosing to jerk off, dance naked in the rain and eat shellfish (give 'God' the finger) and I bet I live to sleep in on Sunday.

Because not being a narrow minded idiot I have more than 2 options.

 

[Hard_Rom]

I can't compare radical hippies and black activists to Open Carry, Oath Keepers, Bundy army or the KKK. There are also Chiefs of Police and possibly entire local police forces who feel the need for revolution.

The Weathermen, the SDS, the Black Panther Party, the Youth International Party all called for violent protest culminating in rioting at the Democratic convention. Their aims may have been different but their tactics were the same.

Radical change is not necessarily revolution. Most folk would agree that politicians for the most part are self serving feeders at the public trough pushing purely personal agendas. They may not start out like that but power corrupts and concessions have to be made.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

The 'Keep fantasizing' paragraph is relevant. The rest is just eyer and his own personal axe to grind. He has a major personality disorder.

I've noticed.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

The Weathermen, the SDS, the Black Panther Party, the Youth International Party all called for violent protest culminating in rioting at the Democratic convention. Their aims may have been different but their tactics were the same.

Radical change is not necessarily revolution. Most folk would agree that politicians for the most part are self serving feeders at the public trough pushing purely personal agendas. They may not start out like that but power corrupts and concessions have to be made.

The Panthers and the Black Liberation Army were the only rel threats. The Weathermen was the very small radical element of the SDS.

Still, no comparison to the right wing extremists.

 

[ryan8558]

The US was started by revolutionaries. Won't another revolution be by counter-revolutionaries? Soviets always had lots to say about counter-revolutionaries. Many tyrants who emerged fro, revolutionary groups in Africa after the demise of colonialism like to jail political opponents.

How about adding how you would kill them. Usually up against the wall or strung up from lampposts as an example to others.

Would it be a revolution, counter revolution or another civil war?

Newt Gingrich would be my first choice to string up from a lamppost.

Bloody Yanks. Revolted in 1776 and have been revolting ever since.

Some of us are more revolting than others.

 

[Hypoxia]

Some of us are more revolting than others.

Was it Lenin or Trotsky who called for "permanent revolution"? I forget. (Wasn't around then.) Are USAnians permanently revolting?

I think it was Regis Debray who called for a "revolution within the revolution". Does that mean to aspire to be even more revolting? How far can we/you go?

Abbie Hoffman called for "revolution for the hell of it". Like a hobby. A revolting hobby. How revolting are USAnian's hobbies? YOUR hobbies?

But I digress. The usual results of revolutions are 1) lots of dead bodies, 2) lots of people who wish they were dead, and 3) new faces to make-em dead. "Meet the new boss / Same as the old boss". Get the bulldozers, boys; we'll need a lot of landfills.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ho...trated-the-ku-klux-klan/ar-AAiZN1j?li=BBnb7Kz

https://thinkprogress.org/3-men-arrested-bomb-plot-muslims-3569b3aa3467#.i2bh2ktlj

 

[coati]

After seeing the results of destabilizing Iraq 15 years ago, it seems unthinkable that people would now be talking in such a cavalier manner about destabilizing our own country and this continent with a similar form of politically-motivated violence. However, none of this is logical.

Just as armed groups in the middle East gradually built their sense of entitlement to use violence at a large scale, a similar sense of entitlement has been mounting here over a long period of time, starting with talk radio in the 1980s, and continuing with other forms of echo chamber media right into the cyber era. And, similar to the situation in the middle East, the ones promoting violent revolution are motivated by some form of ideological purity or fanaticism.

The crux of the problem over here is that the 2nd Amendment rights movement has literally become the Trump card for people who wish to impose their political philosophy on the country as a whole. This is why you see so many of the extremists make overt or veiled threats in what used to be an election process that had reasonable standards of civility. Al Gore and John Kerry accepted defeat following close elections, and now we have a candidate who is stating before the election even takes place that the only way he will lose is if the election is rigged, and he is stating this to many supporters who are armed and have an enormous sense of entitlement. Hopefully that statement will not have a major violent effect, but it has set a new low for election rhetoric.

We have problems in our country, but overall, most people have food and shelter and some form of happiness in their lives. Most people want to get along with each other, understand that violence is not an effective way to solve problems, and work to address problems though negotiation and compromise. This recent movement to play the political violence card on a large scale is an internal threat to civil society.

 

[sr71plt]

Well, to be fair, folks tend to talk crazier and with less responsibility on this forum than we see out there in real life. It's not good "out there," but it certainly doesn't reach the heights of hatred and craziness from as high a proportion of those posting (or at least the separate alts posting) that I see posted to this forum.

 

[Hard_Rom]

The US armed forces are pledged to protect the country from it's enemies. Foreign or domestic.

Bog only knows how Canada could house, cloth, and feed American refugees. Mexico could build a wall to keep them out but we couldn't. Winter would be very difficult in the camps. Then there is the issue of violent types using the camps to stage attacks back into the US. Young braves could easily go off reservation to attack the US. In the camps the civil war could be carried out by refugees of both sides. Of course they would be all disarmed as they crossed the border. It would be hard to see Canadian forces having to forcefully disarm American refugees. Even as refugees fleeing to safe havens in Canada they may still wish to keep their guns.

It might be best if Canadian, NATO and UN forces seized Michigan as a safe haven for those fleeing the war. We would have to militarize the Great Lakes. Seizing Florida would be a good idea. Maybe keep refugees as far away from our borders as possible.

The end does come up suddenly like a dead end road. It usually peters out bit by bit until it is impassable. Defeated politicians calling for violence has ruined many an African nation. Even winning politicians jailing political opponents can drive opposing supporters to violence. A lawless armed population is a grave danger to peace and order.

If California seceded they could make a go of it alone. Alone they are the #7 economy in the world. The mountains could allow them to stop illegal migrants and refugees from entering.

But lets hope it doesn't come to that.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It would be hard to see Canadian forces having to forcefully disarm American refugees. Even as refugees fleeing to safe havens in Canada they may still wish to keep their guns.

LOL those aren't American's they would be Canadians making it home.

It might be best if Canadian, NATO and UN forces seized Michigan as a safe haven for those fleeing the war. We would have to militarize the Great Lakes. Seizing Florida would be a good idea. Maybe keep refugees as far away from our borders as possible.

NATO and UN couldn't take Miami.

If California seceded they could make a go of it alone. Alone they are the #7 economy in the world. The mountains could allow them to stop illegal migrants and refugees from entering.

But lets hope it doesn't come to that.

Why would they stop illegal migrants and refugees? That's racism!!! California would never do that. California is full of fucking retards that would gladly collapse their economy and society to take on all the refugees.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Nobody has approached me about revolution.



Is there, like a recruitment HQ in your 'hood?

 

[Que]

Nobody has approached me about revolution.



Is there, like a recruitment HQ in your 'hood?

Hillary's record and positions on guns are unpopular period they are unpopular with Democrats even. Democratic gun owners don't have the interest in showing up to vote for the author of Bill Clinton's assault weapons ban. That was another one of Hillary's little projects.

So Hillary's decided to double down on what she always does blame other people so people should go out to vote otherwise they won't have this strong leader to put down the Rebellion that's going to happen that she's trying to foment.

It's all part of her trying to make people who might vote for Trump even less likable than she is which is quite an accomplishment. I doubt anyone personally likes her for any reason. She's not a good person and she's not even nice to her friends.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

She only has donors...

 

[coati]

Well, to be fair, folks tend to talk crazier and with less responsibility on this forum than we see out there in real life. It's not good "out there," but it certainly doesn't reach the heights of hatred and craziness from as high a proportion of those posting (or at least the separate alts posting) that I see posted to this forum.

I agree that talk on this forum reaches a bizarre level of hatred, but it reflects the disturbing link between domestic weaponry and political ideology within the Republican Party. This is no longer hate speech and violence threats in little enclaves of marginalized groups. It has become a significant part of the base for a major political party. In an effort to get votes with fear tactics, a major political party has released a genie from the bottle.

In the end, many of these folks who feel entitled to impose their ideologies at gunpoint will be locked up and far many others will simply age and drop out, but this fear-based movement will probably cause a lot more strife before it runs its course. People who have become accustomed to a relatively peaceful and functional society will continue to be shocked by the cultish movement that has been building for the past 40 years.

There is a huge difference between desensitizing media-based violence and real violence. The armchair "revolutionary" pontificators in this forum and in our society are contributing to the breakdown of civil discourse. This is a time for more statesmanship and courage, not more fear and anger.

To people on this forum who constantly feel disturbed, agitated, or depressed: There is a better way to live, but it requires two major steps, admitting that you have a problem and reaching out for help.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

*chuckle*


And the Democrats use gentile language, display gentrified manners and are the innocent bystanders being strafed by this one-party drive-by hate...