Is a revolution coming?

[thatcountrykid]

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

"We the people are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts, not to overthrow the constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the constitution" - Abraham Lincoln

Two of my favorite qoutes. America is a great nation founded on the ideals of liberty. Im sure that Many will agree with me that american leadership has become corrupt with men interested in only personal benifit than maintaing the original ides of our country.

I was thinking today about the recent events in my country and the state of the people. It seems to me that alot of people are unhappy with our nations leaders and i know i am. Do you think america is heading towards a revolution?

I think its the responsibility of the people to refresh the tree of liberty and defend the constitution to their dying breath. So what do you guys think. Is Americas leadership corrupt? Are we heading towards a revolution? Will you fight in it?

[HistoricWrath]

I certainly feel like some sort of radical or profound governmental change particularly in party control is about to happen. I feel like the revolution we are on the presipice of is more like the revolution of 1800 when Thomas Jefferson was elected and you saw a shift of control from the federalist a to the Democratic-Republicans, rather than an armed revolution like that of 1776.

[Celtic.]

will I fight in a revolution? no I wont. Im not very patriotic at all.....I mean at all. America has been corrupt since it began as a country so of course its corrupt now

[HistoricWrath]

"Fight" by doing your civic duty by voting wisely (if you're 18 by the next election)and educating yourself about the candidates and not just believing the picture that the media paints of either candidate.

[Celtic.]

"Fight" by doing your civic duty by voting wisely (if you're 18 by the next election)and educating yourself about the candidates and not just believing the picture that the media paints of either candidate.
-_- I probably wouldn't vote....ever.
Like I said im not patriotic

[thatcountrykid]

will I fight in a revolution? no I wont. Im not very patriotic at all.....I mean at all. America has been corrupt since it began as a country so of course its corrupt now

Please explain its corruption from the beginning?

"Fight" by doing your civic duty by voting wisely (if you're 18 by the next election)and educating yourself about the candidates and not just believing the picture that the media paints of either candidate.

I beleive an americans civic duty isnt to vote for the lesser of two evils but to do what will bring the best to his country even if that means his life.

[HistoricWrath]

Alright whatever floats your boat. But can I ask why you "aren't patriotic"?

[Celtic.]

Please explain its corruption from the beginning?


Really? Ok. taking the land away from the Native Americans thus killing them raping the women and putting them into slavery. Or how it was built for liberty and justice for all but the slaves had no justice....

[thatcountrykid]

Really? Ok. taking the land away from the Native Americans thus killing them raping the women and putting them into slavery. Or how it was built for liberty and justice for all but the slaves had no justice....

Slaver ended in the country and after the revolution it was attempted to end slavery but and agreement was signed for it to continue in southern states for a certain amount of time. However this is off topic. Please do not go off topic.

[HistoricWrath]

Really? Ok. taking the land away from the Native Americans thus killing them raping the women and putting them into slavery. Or how it was built for liberty and justice for all but the slaves had no justice....
Last time I checked slavery was officially abolished in 1865. The sins of the past do not automatically taint and discredit a nation for eternity.

[Celtic.]

Last time I checked slavery was officially abolished in 1865. The sins of the past do not automatically taint and discredit a nation for eternity.
slavery ended but What about freeing the slaves and having them fight for equal opportunity and freedom of speech Something Americans (quote un quote) already had...

if you wanna get modern then what about Immigration laws?

but lets get back on topic

[HistoricWrath]

I'd love to get back on topic. I'm not in the mood to get into a historical argument.

[Celtic.]

It seems to me that alot of people are unhappy with our nations leaders and i know i am.



Your unhappy with Obama?

[thatcountrykid]

Your unhappy with Obama?

Extremely

[Sir Suomi]

Ha, have fun with that "Revolution". Have you seen Syrian government and Syrian rebel engagements from early on in the war? Imagine that but about 100 times worse.

[Celtic.]

Extremely

i saw that coming. Why?

[HistoricWrath]

Get back on topic! Leave the Barry bashing to another well deserved and needed thread.

[thatcountrykid]

Ha, have fun with that "Revolution". Have you seen Syrian government and Syrian rebel engagements from early on in the war? Imagine that but about 100 times worse.

Dont underestimate the power of the people. During the Americn revolution only 3% of people rose up and fought.

i saw that coming. Why?

And why did you assume that? I dont lime hime because he is a liar, he does what he wants and not the will of the people, he is breaking his oath and perverting the constitution, and has added more debt than anyother president. I could continue but i dont feel the need.

[Sph2015]

I certainly feel like some sort of radical or profound governmental change particularly in party control is about to happen. I feel like the revolution we are on the precipice of is more like the revolution of 1800 when Thomas Jefferson was elected and you saw a shift of control from the federalist a to the Democratic-Republicans, rather than an armed revolution like that of 1776.

This! Right here!

-_- I probably wouldn't vote....ever.
Like I said im not patriotic

Voting isn't a patriotic issue. If you refuse your one right to interact with how this country is run, you loose any right to complain. Like seriously, if you hate it so much, find someone who wants to shut the whole thing down and vote for them.

Which leads me to my last two points.

1. No way in hell do I want to live in a war zone. So I have no desire for a revolution of that sort.

2. There are more than 2 parties. When Americans finally grow a pair and stop voting for "the lesser of two evils" and actually start voting outside of the Democratic and Republican parties, we'll see the system be restored to a government that actually reflects the views of its people.

Your move, America

Well. That got a little dramatic on my part.

[Sugaree]

-_- I probably wouldn't vote....ever.
Like I said im not patriotic

Then shut up and let the rest of us who DO feel some level of patriotism do it. Like Sean said, if you don't vote, you pretty much have just given up your only voice.

[ryzzz9]

there's a quote from Adam Smith I read somewhere that basically says when there are a tiny amount of rich people and bunch of poor people, violent things happen. I wouldn't be surprised if a revolution of sorts happens. Money and power can't oppress a LOT of angry, hungry people from rioting for very long (French revolution happened this way too).

[Sugaree]

there's a quote from Adam Smith I read somewhere that basically says when there are a tiny amount of rich people and bunch of poor people, violent things happen. I wouldn't be surprised if a revolution of sorts happens. Money and power can't oppress a LOT of angry, hungry people from rioting for very long (French revolution happened this way too).

Uh, no, the French Revolution centered around the economic troubles France was in at the time thanks to the Seven Years' War and their assistance in the American Revolution. The people were also upset about the ineptitude of King Louis XVI and the continued decadence he was awarding to the aristocrats of society. I suggest you look up your French History, specifically about their own financial crisis in this period, the Estates-General of 1789, and the National Assembly of 1789.

[thatcountrykid]

Uh, no, the French Revolution centered around the economic troubles France was in at the time thanks to the Seven Years' War and their assistance in the American Revolution. The people were also upset about the ineptitude of King Louis XVI and the continued decadence he was awarding to the aristocrats of society. I suggest you look up your French History, specifically about their own financial crisis in this period, the Estates-General of 1789, and the National Assembly of 1789.

Please stay on topic.

[Emerald Dream]

I think you all need to stay on topic (with the OP), and stop backseat moderating each other. This thread is about neither slavery (way to try and force that into an unrelated topic) nor about the French Revolution. It's about the current government and state of the country.

[HistoricWrath]

Voting isn't a patriotic issue. If you refuse your one right to interact with how this country is run, you loose any right to complain. Like seriously, if you hate it so much, find someone who wants to shut the whole thing down and vote for them.

Which leads me to my last two points.

1. No way in hell do I want to live in a war zone. So I have no desire for a revolution of that sort.

2. There are more than 2 parties. When Americans finally grow a pair and stop voting for "the lesser of two evils" and actually start voting outside of the Democratic and Republican parties, we'll see the system be restored to a government that actually reflects the views of its people.

Your move, America

Well. That got a little dramatic on my part.

Beautifully spoken my friend

[Sir Suomi]

Dont underestimate the power of the people. During the Americn revolution only 3% of people rose up and fought.


See, that might work, if we'd still be living in the 19th Century, and it was mainly muskets and cannons being used. Instead, however, we're living in the 21st, and warfare has changed a lot. Unless we could get our own military's cooperation, we'd have bands of untrained idividuals people, armed with mainly small arms, and semi-automatic rifles, going against professionally trained soldiers, armed with fully automatic rifles, armored support, a navy, and most importantly, and air force. In today's battleground, whoever controls the skies controls the battleground. Any opposition would be decimated as soon as they left went above ground.

[Celtic.]

This! Right here!



Voting isn't a patriotic issue. If you refuse your one right to interact with how this country is run, you loose any right to complain. Like seriously, if you hate it so much, find someone who wants to shut the whole thing down and vote for them.

I agree. I actually want to move to Canada. However I never said I hated America.

Why start a revolution in the first place. What good would it do?

[HistoricWrath]

I don't think an armed revolution would acomplish anything. But if we make real changes to who is in the legislative and executive branches, there WILL be change that will happen quickly. The deadlock in the legislative branch is one of the main reasons that we are in the mess we are in. Getting rid of most of those senators and representatives and replacing them with competent politicians will make such a hugely beneficial difference.

[Celtic.]

by corrupt leaders who are we stopping, Obama? I don't think hes corrupt. I happen to like him. what senators?

[thatcountrykid]

I agree. I actually want to move to Canada. However I never said I hated America.

Why start a revolution in the first place. What good would it do?

To stop the perversion and destruction of an amazing nation. The country isn't too far gone. The constitution can be restored.

[Celtic.]

To stop the perversion and destruction of an amazing nation..

Whos destroying it so we can stop them?
Republicans?
Democrats?
or individuals from both sides?

[Kahn]

I don't think an armed revolution would acomplish anything. But if we make real changes to who is in the legislative and executive branches, there WILL be change that will happen quickly. The deadlock in the legislative branch is one of the main reasons that we are in the mess we are in. Getting rid of most of those senators and representatives and replacing them with competent politicians will make such a hugely beneficial difference.

Where are the "competent" replacements for these Congressmen? Why aren't they all already in a position of power? The gridlock was designed to happen, the Framers wanted a bi-partisan legislative branch to stop one agenda from gaining too much power.

It begins with the education of the people. A revolution isn't needed, preservation of our culture and country is; our society is the first to be so impersonal yet individualized. We're dominated by computers and television, phones and social media. Symbols that were cherished and meant something to us are being used as cartoons in advertisements. We're more concerned with killing boredom than domestic policy or actual human issues. More people prefer to interact online than in person, and in person people are still connected to social media, interacting with others via text or instant message. Less than 3% of us regularly read. We're so into the reality we spin in our sensantionalized journalism that we're beginning to lose touch with our traditional values.

Government is becoming less and less transparent, federal organisations can be 'secret' and held from public knowledge, the Federal Reserve continues to drive us into debt. And nobody is getting mad. We're worried 'madmen' hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan actually threaten our livelihood, when in reality the biggest threat to our livelihood is.. ourselves. We elect our leaders based on the tie they where and the handsomness of their smile. They say words but it's always what we want to hear, or what we need to hear. They will feed us all the bullshit we want, and we'll eat it all up.

If you want change start by finding it within yourself. Enough with the mindless slaughter over ideology. Every single person is living as vivid as an experience as the next and we're are at a time in history where we have tools capable of amazing things, but we'd rather use them to watch porn play games and watch football. Take a step away from the bullshit and read book written by our ancestors, read the bible you so often disregard. Learn about history if you want change and understand that when history is written, the conquered perspective is never considered. Even the history being written now.

We could touch the stars, if only we'd let go of the egotistic reality we've created.

[thatcountrykid]

Whos destroying it so we can stop them?
Republicans?
Democrats?
or individuals from both sides?

The person is the problem. I dont care about the party.

[ksdnfkfr]

I think modern day Americans are too lazy for that.
Occupy Wall Street was as radical as it will get.

[thatcountrykid]

I think modern day Americans are too lazy for that.
Occupy Wall Street was as radical as it will get.

Do not stereotype a nation. The british though the colonists were farmers with pitch forks and we whooped. ( not trying to offend our friends across the pond)

[Cpt_Cutter]

there's a quote from Adam Smith I read somewhere that basically says when there are a tiny amount of rich people and bunch of poor people, violent things happen. I wouldn't be surprised if a revolution of sorts happens. Money and power can't oppress a LOT of angry, hungry people from rioting for very long (French revolution happened this way too).

While that may be true, the weaponry and armaments that the Rich and powerful people have can stop just about anything. While I don't really concern myself with american politics except for when it gets on the news over here, It seems fairly obvious to me that a revolution would end up with a fair few dead revolutionaries, and not much else. The national guard have Abrams main battle tanks. While I'm not even going to get into gun ownership laws(That's one hell of a can of worms), to my knowledge even america doesn't let the basic population own something that could put even a noticeable scratch in the paint of that. Short of a large portion of the army and the strategic weapons reserve rising up too, the resistance would have no chance in hell.

[Woryh]

I wish america did not suck :(

[Cpt_Cutter]

To stop the perversion and destruction of an amazing nation. The country isn't too far gone. The constitution can be restored.

At this point with the US national debt, it was too far gone when Saddam was still in power. At this point it's not going to help much.

[thatcountrykid]

I wish america did not suck :(

America doesnt suck.

[Woryh]

Yea it pretty much does. Maybe if the people we elected to do there jobs actually did those jobs maybe it would be a better place.

[Kahn]

Do not stereotype a nation. The british though the colonists were farmers with pitch forks and we whooped. ( not trying to offend our friends across the pond)

They were also aristocrats and some of the fundamental leaders of the Revolution had at one time been a part of the government and/or British military.

To the Brits during the Revolutionary era, the war with the colonists was just another war. They had gone through cycles of war and peace, just as we do now ( like father like son?), and the general population held little concern for their fellow Englishmen across the pond.

[thatcountrykid]

They were also aristocrats and some of the fundamental leaders of the Revolution had at one time been a part of the government and/or British military.

To the Brits during the Revolutionary era, the war with the colonists was just another war. They had gone through cycles of war and peace, just as we do now ( like father like son?), and the general population held little concern for their fellow Englishmen across the pond.

Yes the aristocrats funded and former brit military mrn planned but there would be no war without patriots. The men that fight for the freedom of a nation.

[Gemma11]

I really don't see America ever having a revolution or civil war in our life times. The technology gap between the police+military and civilian population is to huge that any real attempt to rise up would be squashed.

I also don't see a bunch of Americas military going turn coat like what happened in Syria because every unit will have soldier/marines/airmen/sailors/coast guard with different political views. So you wouldn't be seeing the 82nd airborne or a air craft carrier just swapping sides.

Even if they did the US military is so interconnected that if a large section left that they would fall apart with out their supplies, reinforcement and intelligence from different units all over the country.

Plus where are these rebals going to be based? This hypothetical war wouldn't be like the civil war with north vs south with those nice clean borders to fight over.

So that leave the other option of a guerrilla war. So are America's own citizens going to start attacking it's own infrastructure? How do you fight a guerrilla war when both sides live in the same place? The whole idea of fighting a guerrilla war is to win the hearts and minds of your own population and make it not worth the invaders time to stay around.

Even if these rebels manage to win with their AR-15's and pump action shotguns against the US military; who is then going to be in charge? Who makes the new laws? Who will replace the old government?

[Harry Smith]

If you want another revolution then read some of the stuff that JFK and RFk were saying in the 60's before there death, the ideas of Camelot managed to inspire a whole country. That's the closest the US has come to a revolution but the likes of LeMay and other right wingers in the security group stopped that.
This is the 2nd best speech of the 20th century by a mile.
jrspHo8uvmg

[EddietheZombie]

Answering the OPs question, no i dont think so. I think were going to have to stay with the corruption for a while. And unlike some said, we cant change legislation because they dont even look at the petitions and the senators dont listen. I blame most for the corruption, but i believe obama is the ring leader.


Really? Ok. taking the land away from the Native Americans thus killing them raping the women and putting them into slavery. Or how it was built for liberty and justice for all but the slaves had no justice....

Im Indian and im not patriotic either, but if its going to effect me, my family, and my children, im definitely getting involved.

Eddie out.

[shotgungirl]

I really don't see America ever having a revolution or civil war in our life times. The technology gap between the police+military and civilian population is to huge that any real attempt to rise up would be squashed.

I also don't see a bunch of Americas military going turn coat like what happened in Syria because every unit will have soldier/marines/airmen/sailors/coast guard with different political views. So you wouldn't be seeing the 82nd airborne or a air craft carrier just swapping sides.

Even if they did the US military is so interconnected that if a large section left that they would fall apart with out their supplies, reinforcement and intelligence from different units all over the country.

Plus where are these rebals going to be based? This hypothetical war wouldn't be like the civil war with north vs south with those nice clean borders to fight over.

So that leave the other option of a guerrilla war. So are America's own citizens going to start attacking it's own infrastructure? How do you fight a guerrilla war when both sides live in the same place? The whole idea of fighting a guerrilla war is to win the hearts and minds of your own population and make it not worth the invaders time to stay around.

Even if these rebels manage to win with their AR-15's and pump action shotguns against the US military; who is then going to be in charge? Who makes the new laws? Who will replace the old government?

Completely agree with this.

Anyone that thinks they can turn the US military against their direct leaders (even if a lot of us may think they are a big ole bag of ass) is a very...ignorant person.

And for that matter, I take a lot of offense to the people saying "America sucks" and what not. This country, MY country, does not suck. Have we hit a slump because some of our leaders are way less than ideal? Absolutely. But I'll be damned if I am gonna sit here and let someone say my country sucks when I have lost some of my brothers and sisters in arms so people can hide behind a computer and yap that opinion.

[sqishy]

The revolution is here, it's not happening instantly, but you can see the change. It's just that resistance to this revolution is getting stronger as the revolution accelerates.

[HistoricWrath]

Anyone that thinks they can turn the US military against their direct leaders (even if a lot of us may think they are a big ole bag of ass) is a very...ignorant person.

And for that matter, I take a lot of offense to the people saying "America sucks" and what not. This country, MY country, does not suck. Have we hit a slump because some of our leaders are way less than ideal? Absolutely. But I'll be damned if I am gonna sit here and let someone say my country sucks when I have lost some of my brothers and sisters in arms so people can hide behind a computer and yap that opinion.

Preach! You can love your country and still be very disgruntled with your leaders and government

[Vlerchan]

I'd consider myself a student of history and I've of read of men and woman going to war for all sorts of near-sighted issues but engaging in a revolution because a handful of preferred reactionary policies aren't being implemented is definitely up their amongst the worst of them. I'm not going to focus on the impracticality of taking on the US - and most likely her financially-tied allies - but rather the reasons why someone would make any attempt to stage a revolutionary action due to a handful of easily reversible legislation changes - a fair few of which I actually support, but that's irrelevant. I could understand if it was Marxists or anarchist looking for huge change, but democracy is totally set-up to deal with minor issues such as small tax-hikes and an unpopular ObamaCare programme.

Though I'll allow myself be humoured: thatcountrykid, After the revolution has ended and Obama's despotic - right-wing by European standards - regime has been crushed by the will of the people and a new democratic leader rises in his place, what changes do you expect to see made? What's wrong with the current government and why is violent insurrectionist action your perceived fix to the problem?

[Harry Smith]

Completely agree with this.

Anyone that thinks they can turn the US military against their direct leaders (even if a lot of us may think they are a big ole bag of ass) is a very...ignorant person.

And for that matter, I take a lot of offense to the people saying "America sucks" and what not. This country, MY country, does not suck. Have we hit a slump because some of our leaders are way less than ideal? Absolutely. But I'll be damned if I am gonna sit here and let someone say my country sucks when I have lost some of my brothers and sisters in arms so people can hide behind a computer and yap that opinion.

Yeah the US military or CIA would never oppose their commander in Chief ask JFK.
The US has a problem of being reliant on killing, the military industry complex makes billions off warfare, it's pretty arrogant to retreat into nationalism- The US has major problems that it needs to sort out such as its support for Israel and illegal drone strikes

[thatcountrykid]

I'd consider myself a student of history and I've of read of men and woman going to war for all sorts of near-sighted issues but engaging in a revolution because a handful of preferred reactionary policies aren't being implemented is definitely up their amongst the worst of them. I'm not going to focus on the impracticality of taking on the US - and most likely her financially-tied allies - but rather the reasons why someone would make any attempt to stage a revolutionary action due to a handful of easily reversible legislation changes - a fair few of which I actually support, but that's irrelevant. I could understand if it was Marxists or anarchist looking for huge change, but democracy is totally set-up to deal with minor issues such as small tax-hikes and an unpopular ObamaCare programme.

Though I'll allow myself be humoured: thatcountrykid, After the revolution has ended and Obama's despotic - right-wing by European standards - regime has been crushed by the will of the people and a new democratic leader rises in his place, what changes do you expect to see made? What's wrong with the current government and why is violent insurrectionist action your perceived fix to the problem?

Oh just the corrupt leaders interested in only personal profit and the destruction of the constitution. The government is fine its just people like obama.

[Vlerchan]

Oh just the corrupt leaders interested in only personal profit[2] and the destruction of the constitution.[1] The government is fine its just people like obama.
[1]: That's incredibly unspecific. What issues do you have exactly - destruction of the constitution isn't going to cut it here - with the legislation brought in since Obama was democratically elected to rule - twice, I might add - by US citizens. I'm not asking for specific bills here - though that would be helpful - but rather an outline of changes that you hold to be detrimental to America.

I'll also ask again: what sort of leader - be specific - would you like to see in his place?

[2]:Do you have any proof that the changes imposed by Obama and his (i)liberal cronies were for financial gain or is that just speculation?

[thatcountrykid]

[1]: That's incredibly unspecific. What issues do you have exactly - destruction of the constitution isn't going to cut it here - with the legislation brought in since Obama was democratically elected to rule - twice, I might add - by US citizens. I'm not asking for specific bills here - though that would be helpful - but rather an outline of changes that you hold to be detrimental to America.

I'll also ask again: what sort of leader - be specific - would you like to see in his place?

[2]:Do you have any proof that the changes imposed by Obama and his (i)liberal cronies were for financial gain or is that just speculation?

I want a person who is still pround of America and will stay true to their word and uphold the constitution of the United States. Obama isnt a ruler. Presidents arent rulers. Kings are rulers.

An that is just what i see in our "leaders"

[Sph2015]

And for that matter, I take a lot of offense to the people saying "America sucks" and what not. This country, MY country, does not suck. Have we hit a slump because some of our leaders are way less than ideal? Absolutely. But I'll be damned if I am gonna sit here and let someone say my country sucks when I have lost some of my brothers and sisters in arms so people can hide behind a computer and yap that opinion.

Everyone on this website needs to take this to heart. We forget that most of us feel this way about our individual countries to some extent. Just a thought.

I'm not going to focus on the impracticality of taking on the US - and most likely her financially-tied allies - but rather the reasons why someone would make any attempt to stage a revolutionary action due to a handful of easily reversible legislation changes - a fair few of which I actually support, but that's irrelevant. I could understand if it was Marxists or anarchist looking for huge change, but democracy is totally set-up to deal with minor issues such as small tax-hikes and an unpopular ObamaCare programme.

This basically sums up the entire issue. Right here. We. Are. Fine. Lol

[TheBigUnit]

So what do you guys think. Is Americas leadership corrupt? Are we heading towards a revolution? Will you fight in it?

yes its curropt like any other country,

meh not really unless some major scandal happens, itll basically require something big to happen and a really disgruntled political party,

depending on what happens really

[Cpt_Cutter]

I want a person who is still pround of America and will stay true to their word and uphold the constitution of the United States. Obama isnt a ruler. Presidents arent rulers. Kings are rulers.

An that is just what i see in our "leaders"


But how had the constitution not been upheld?

How has Obama lied (Don't actually know if he has or not on this one, don't follow american politics)?

Technically Obama is both a ruler and a leader, no-matter how much you dislike him, Due to being democratically elected to both rule and lead the nation of the United States of America.

[thatcountrykid]

But how had the constitution not been upheld?

How has Obama lied (Don't actually know if he has or not on this one, don't follow american politics)?

Technically Obama is both a ruler and a leader, no-matter how much you dislike him, Due to being democratically elected to both rule and lead the nation of the United States of America.

Ever hear about gun control?

Rulers have absolute control. Presidents dont.

[Delete Me]

Obama has done more to hurt this country than almost any other president. He doesn't even have a legitimate birth certificate. He's funding the war in Syria. He's trying to take guns away from the people and we all know how that ends. Adolf Hitler ring a bell? Wake up people.

[Cpt_Cutter]

Ever hear about gun control?

Oh god, not the gun-control debate again. To try and stay on topic, ill answer it as concisely as I can. People don't understand that parts of the constitution were written at the time, specific for the time. I.e, the amendment that was basically written so that the city militias could continue to operate even after the defeat of the British, while they were still perceived as a threat. Now however, the united states has no need for a city/state militia to defend the nation, and therefore the amendment is not (in my opinion) needed. It would be like an amendment saying you needed to help clean the town well every second weekend. Not necessary due to the changing to the times.

[thatcountrykid]

Oh god, not the gun-control debate again. To try and stay on topic, ill answer it as concisely as I can. People don't understand that parts of the constitution were written at the time, specific for the time. I.e, the amendment that was basically written so that the city militias could continue to operate even after the defeat of the British, while they were still perceived as a threat. Now however, the united states has no need for a city/state militia to defend the nation, and therefore the amendment is not (in my opinion) needed. It would be like an amendment saying you needed to help clean the town well every second weekend. Not necessary due to the changing to the times.

This is the last post i will make on guns in this thread. The constitution is not time specific. It is a living document. That is why ammendments can still be added. Guns are still nessecary.

[Gemma11]

This is the last post i will make on guns in this thread. The constitution is not time specific. It is a living document. That is why ammendments can still be added. Guns are still nessecary.

Why should the views of some politicians from the late 1700s be what the USA is based on?

Sure they had some good ideas such as freedom of speech. But remember that they also thought that slavery should be legal and that denying woman the vote was a good idea.

The founding fathers lived in a different time; they didn't and couldn't of predicted the world we live in today just like anyone else from back then couldn't of.

Would you want a doctor from the American revolution to treat you for an illnesses? I know I wouldn't. So why would you have a politician from back then make your laws?

Also can you please explain why guns are needed?

[thatcountrykid]

Why should the views of some politicians from the late 1700s be what the USA is based on?

Sure they had some good ideas such as freedom of speech. But remember that they also thought that slavery should be legal and that denying woman the vote was a good idea.

The founding fathers lived in a different time; they didn't and couldn't of predicted the world we live in today just like anyone else from back then couldn't of.

Would you want a doctor from the American revolution to treat you for an illnesses? I know I wouldn't. So why would you have a politician from back then make your laws?

Also can you please explain why guns are needed?

They are the politicians that made this country free and the constitution isnt a law book. Its rights of the people and that is the second right in a free nation.

[britishboy]

They are the politicians that made this country free and the constitution isnt a law book. Its rights of the people and that is the second right in a free nation.

Why on gods earth do you think a revolution is coming at that it is justified?

[Harry Smith]

The US have had their revolution from the inside out, you've got arms company such as Lockheed who've made billions off unjust warfare in the last 10 years. I don't understand why there wasn't an uprising when George Bush stole the election in 2000 and then proceeded to spend 46% of his first year on holiday.

[Kahn]

They are the politicians that made this country free and the constitution isnt a law book. Its rights of the people and that is the second right in a free nation.

You're right the Constitution isn't a law book, it's the Doctrine of the Nation, the Supreme Law of the Land. It's more than just our basic rights; it's literally the foundation of the American government.


Why should the views of some politicians from the late 1700s be what the USA is based on?

Because the Constitution was written to be a flexible document that can adapt to the issues of the current generation. The politics of the revolutionary era relate surprisingly well to issues we deal with now, my friend. Don't feel so disconnected from your ancestors. Those men set precedents, built our politic from the ground up, and have inspired a new age of Democratic government. I feel it would be an injustice if we didn't try to preserve their ideas.

The root of America's problems begins and ends with the people. You are part of the problem. We are a society ruled by Laws, not Men. Read that again and let it sink in before you continue. We are not a nation of brutes and jackals. The corruption that's rampant throughout our government can easily be mitigated with a well educated, concerned populace. If people began to care about the psuedowars we wage and the bankers that leech off of us, do you really think there wouldn't be clamor for reform?

There's so much more that can be done to reinvigorate this country besides instigating a needless war that will only end in American blood spilled. I would really like to remain civilized, if not for the preservation of society, for the men who had to spill their countrymens blood in order to leave us with this once noble nation.

Just stop entertaining this idea. It's bollocks.

[Stronk Serb]

If you are so determined, don't talk about change, just do it. Everybody is nagging, but doing nothing. That's not how you win a revolution.

[MechaSniper]

I'll do what i can to survive

[Gemma11]

You're right the Constitution isn't a law book, it's the Doctrine of the Nation, the Supreme Law of the Land. It's more than just our basic rights; it's literally the foundation of the American government.
I'm not arguing the importance of the constitution for structure of the USA. I was suggesting that basing your country on a document from 226 years ago without review is misguided. Don't get me wrong I understand the idea of don't fix what ain't broke but I think that not everything from back then is relevant (eg. Needing state militias that are armed by the individual soldiers)

Even Thomas Jefferson believed that the dead should not rule the living and suggested that the constitution be rewritten every 19 years (source: http://news.illinois.edu/news/07/0212constitution.html)

Though I think we might be getting off topic from op's question.


There's so much more that can be done to reinvigorate this country besides instigating a needless war that will only end in American blood spilled. I would really like to remain civilized, if not for the preservation of society, for the men who had to spill their countrymens blood in order to leave us with this once noble nation.

Just stop entertaining this idea. It's bollocks.

I was never suggesting the USA have a revolution. I actually made a post a page or two back on why I think it wouldn't happen.

[darthearth]

Yeah the US military or CIA would never oppose their commander in Chief ask JFK.


Do tell, what is this supposed to mean? :mad:


I hear complaints about "corruptness" and such all the time, the trouble is people who say this don't usually explain themselves. The reason why we have a problem in congress is the fact that progressives and center-left people were too lazy to vote in the 2010 elections that occurred right after the census, and the right-wing zealots used the gerrymandering process to draw congressional districts that now split them up. The right-wing zealots cared more about local and non-presidential year elections, so they were able to transform the House. We can see by the Senate and President that the country is moving in general toward a more progressive direction. Look at Pennsylvania, more voters voted Democratic in congressional elections there, yet they have a disproportionate Republican majority in their delegation.

The real divide is in the people of the U.S. themselves, not the so-called "corruption" of the politicians, people say the same things, each thinking it's the other side that is the problem they mention, therefore the same get elected. Progressive citizens are beginning to outnumber the conservatives, and the conservatives therefore speak of "revolution". Is this not correct? I don't see progressives talk of revolution, does anyone?

[Harry Smith]

Do tell, what is this supposed to mean? :mad

JFK had major battles with the Joint chief of Staffs, people like Curtis LeMay pretty much wanted to whole of Russia without any good reason. Throughout the whole of JFK's term in office the Military were going against his every move

[BlueIsTheColour]

JFK had major battles

Battles which he ultimately lost - I wonder why :)

[CabbageMedul]

"Fight" by doing your civic duty by voting wisely (if you're 18 by the next election)and educating yourself about the candidates and not just believing the picture that the media paints of either candidate.

Voting for who's going to be the next terrorist and lying douchebag in charge? No thanks.

[HistoricWrath]

Voting for who's going to be the next terrorist and lying douchebag in charge? No thanks.

The only way you can get rid of the as you call "terrorists and lying douchebags" that are already in charge is by doing what our political system was built on and voice your opinion and use your right to vote that was provided for the sole purpose of you having a say in your government. The power of the people is the only real thing that keeps tyranny in check.

[Yolo98]

No need for a revolution , the standard of living in the west is good enough at the moment

[thatcountrykid]

The only way you can get rid of the as you call "terrorists and lying douchebags" that are already in charge is by doing what our political system was built on and voice your opinion and use your right to vote that was provided for the sole purpose of you having a say in your government. The power of the people is the only real thing that keeps tyranny in check.

It seems the people are losing their power.

[Elvalight]

Heck yeah.

[Azunite]

America is probably the last country on Earth to have a revolution. But since its inhabitants are mostly ignorant, they believe their country is getting sucked in disease, famine, poverty and complete dissolution of state and human rights.

[Storm'sGame15]

Maybe a revolution will come, I'd prefer that it doesn't. Also what I wish is that people would stop blaming the president. People need to realize that members of congress actually hold more power than the president does. If your sick of bad leadership start with congress. So I would hope a change happens to congress and those who are elected in it. If this happens maybe a revolution won't be needed.

[Stronk Serb]

Umm, the population is pretty docile, like sheep. Nobody would want to do ut and it's too late, the army outguns any possible uprising.

[thatcountrykid]

Umm, the population is pretty docile, like sheep. Nobody would want to do ut and it's too late, the army outguns any possible uprising.

Military's rebel.

[Cpt_Cutter]

Military's rebel.

Unless it is a military coup good luck getting enough of them on your side to succeed. No matter how many people rebel, they cant do shit to a mach 1 F-16 doing a gun run with its Vulcan.

[Korashk]

Unless it is a military coup good luck getting enough of them on your side to succeed. No matter how many people rebel, they cant do shit to a mach 1 F-16 doing a gun run with its Vulcan.
People who say this have never examined history. America CONSTANTLY fights with third world countries and accomplishes basically nothing.

Reminds me of something I read a few minutes ago on Facebook.

When I think of an invading foreign army taking over the US and trying to militarily occupy it, I don't gleefully imagine Red Dawn type-scenarios; I consider several other things:

1. Afghanistan, which has less than 1/8th of 1% of the wealth per capita as the US has, has not been successfully occupied by the most powerful military the world has ever known.

2. The US has more small arms per capita than any other country in the world.

3. With a few hundred dollars and a trip to home depot and a few hours work, I can build a device that will easily disable a tank that costs millions.

Item #3 is related to item #1. We have so much more wealth than Afghanistan, that we could wage a guerrilla war far more efficiently and far more effectively. I'm not the only person in American with the knowledge and skills to make 'tank-disabling devices'... hell, I'm probably not the only person in my neighborhood with that kind of skill.

Back during the Vietnam war, an Army general estimated that to fight a successful war against a guerrilla army would require 15,000 regular soldiers per every guerrilla fighter. By the end of the war, he revised his estimation to 60,000 regular soldiers per guerrilla fighter.

If we must have a military (and in the current paradigm, we must—we don't live in a voluntary society yet), it must be strictly defensive in nature. It's not too unrealistic to imagine a world in which the US had a bare-bones defensive military, stationed here at home and a nuclear arsenal and basically make an announcement to the world along these lines:

"Ok, we won't get involved in your shit if you don't get involved in ours. And, if you are stupid enough to try to take us over, all I can say is good luck. Your army will be bogged down and your economy destroyed while you fight an unwinnable war against some of the best-armed, wealthiest guerrilla fighters in the world...

"...and, oh by the way, if you are that stupid, we've got some nuclear death that will be heading your way a few minutes later."

Now, of course, I am an anarcho-capitalist, and I wouldn't want to see such a government as that (or any government) but I think that a government that would make that kind of announcement to the world would be less bad than the one we've got now.

Anyone want to revise this, amend it, or tell me I am a fucking fool?

I think my point is that people don't consider the wealth we have here when they imagine invading foreign armies. To buy the same materials to build a 'tank-disabling device' an Afghani might have to work weeks or months, whereas, I would only have to work a few hours.
https://www.facebook.com/antimilitarism

EDIT:
Basically, if poor people with little to no access to modern technology can fight the US military to a stalemate, what makes you think that rich, well-armed people with access to advanced technology wouldn't be able to?

[Stronk Serb]

Military's rebel.

Part's of it do, they'd be lucky to take several bases. They would have to make-do with whatever they have left or salvaged. They won't stand a chance.