Folks it's about not cooperating with the system any more............

[socialist_n_TN]

There are two threads that I read today that stood out to me. One was about a student loan debt "strike" and one was about members of the military refusing deployment. And in both of those threads there were people who were basically saying not to do it because you gave your word. You gave your word you would pay back that money. You gave your word that you would obey orders. Sorry, but that reasoning doesn't work anymore.

It used to be that corporations wouldn't fuck you over for a buck. Or at least they said they wouldn't. It used to be that politicians WANTED people to vote. Or at least SAID they did. It used to be that politicians would do the will of the people. Or pretended to. There were a lot of things that "used to be". Or maybe just "pretended to be."

Nowdays? THEY DON'T EVEN PRETEND TO GIVE A SHIT ANYMORE! To paraphrase Carlin, it's a small club and we're not in it. And they make that plainer and plainer every day. If they can't suppress the vote, they'll steal it, so voting won't get it done. The only thing that has a ghost of a chance of accomplishing anything for the working class and poor, is non-cooperation. Is it a guarantee that non-cooperation will work? Nope, but it's all we have.

[villager]

1. when people are self-policing, refusing to "rock the boat" too much, lest their masters disapprove

(or -- gasp! --their credit ratings suffer!), then really, the Owners of Society have already won.

[socialist_n_TN]

3. Yep they buy into the bullshit that .........

it's a "mark on your permanent record". I did a Chapter 7 bankruptcy in '94 and had to do a Chapter 13 beginning in '97. By the time I paid out the 13, my credit score was in the low 600s. Six months more it was in the 700s. The only thing not recoverable from is death. And maybe slavery to the capitalist owners.

[the other one]

2. Well ranted

rec

[socialist_n_TN]

5. Thank you.........

What will it take for some folks? These people claim to be Democrats and yet they don't make a peep when elections are stolen, voters are suppressed and Democratic politicians are shot and wounded or killed. Does it have to happen to each one of them individually before they'll get upset enough to throw that proverbial monkey wrench into the system?

[tblue]

91. +1. Good question. nt

[russspeakeasy]

4. It is going to have to get ugly.

Nice doesn't cut it anymore. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the situation we are in, is comparable to the French, prior to the revolution.

[socialist_n_TN]

7. Or to the Russians prior to October '17.........

The ONLY way the PTBs are going to pay attention is if you fuck with their money. That means strikes. Work stoppages and payment strikes. Soldiers are going to have to refuse to obey orders and we've all got to stop cooperating in the system that they constantly game to their advantage. Nothing else is going to work.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

11. Historically, it's the only thing that has ever worked.

[socialist_n_TN]

17. Yep. There's no guarantee, but.........

it IS the only thing that has ever worked when things get to this point.

[TheWraith]

20. Yeah, that really worked out great, didn't it?

Your proposal is about as grounded, realistic, and useful as the stuff coming out of the Paul supporters. Same pseudo-anarchic college sophomore political philosophy with a slightly different spin.

[socialist_n_TN]

25. Well we've all known whose side you're on..........

for a while now. Thanks for confirming it again.

[alittlelark]

36. +100

[chknltl]

44. plus another one hundred.

[villager]

49. ...another one hundred and one

[Odin2005]

62. +1,000,000,000,000

[truth2power]

82. And +1000

Furthermore, you are correct....Fuck with their money is ALL they understand.

[white_wolf]

34. Tell me, would you consider Albert Einstein to be sophomoric?

After all, he called for a democratically controlled centrally planed economy in his article "Why Socialism?" Though, I know I'm wasting my time on you, since we all know whose side you are on.

[FrodosPet]

69. How often is the turnover for the planners?

What kind of penalties would they be subject to for incompetence and corruption?

Trotsky mentioned having the state control the media - can their be a true accountability without having an independent press? That is probably THE BIGGEST thing that turned me off about him.

Centralized planning always seemed like a bad idea. I tend more towards local responsibility, with the federal authority acting to set fair weights and measures, set universal standards for safety, and provide the foreign policy for the nation. But generally, the person or people on the local level who have a vested interest in something seem like the best people to make decisions. Not universally, but often enough.

Beyond that, centralized planning entails centralized, inescapable authority. It allows politically appointed bureaucrats with too much power. And, considering the logistical impossibility of electing every department head, or even cabinet level officer, the idea that this problem can be handled by pure democracy seems unlikely.

Yes, we need to prevent private individuals and corporations from having excess power. Giving individuals who work for the government even more power just does not strike me as the way to do it.

[DireStrike]

105. Both systems have their issues

With centralized planning at least you know where the power lies.

Expanding democracy is the most important project for humanity right now, as it is the only way we can get anything done on a large scale (aside from brutal dictatorship.)

Also, we'd like to get rid of central authority in the long run... the question is how to get there.

[socialist_n_TN]

118. "...can there be a true accountability without having an.........

independent press?" Are you saying the press is independent now? A mass medium costs a lot of money to operate. Done correctly, a state controlled media would give the average person the same control as Rupert Murdoch. However, in our current system the ONLY people who have control over the media are the wealthy. The people have nothing.

But that's why it's key to overthrow ALL branches of the bourgeoisie system, the economic, the political, and the social. If the government is ACTUALLY controlled BY THE PEOPLE, why would it be a problem?

As to the authority question, immediate recallibility is the key there. As a Trot, I also have a SERIOUS problem with a bureaucracy. It was LITERAL life and death for people who believed like me just a few decades ago.

[FrodosPet]

119. We have the Internet

It may not be MASS media, but the number of outlets for people's voices are richer than they have ever been. The fact that we are conversing here about subjects that would have gotten people blacklisted, locked up, or disappeared in the 1950s impresses me.

As for "controlling the mass media" - the rich can blow billions of dollars, but if no one is watching, they are just pissing in the wind. It is the AUDIENCE who controls what the media will focus on.

Authority needs to be distributed. Otherwise, it will be co-opted by a small number of people who are more ruthless and assertive than the rest of us. To me, it matters not whether it is a private or governmental entity. It's all a case of WHICH people. And people who have a legal ability to incarcerate and confiscate need to have their power limited.

BTW, what is IMMEDIATE accountability? How does that work? Are they fired, imprisoned, or lined up against a wall?

And how do THE PEOPLE, collectively, control the government above and beyond the current system? Do we elect cabinet level secretaries, instead of having them appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate?

I'm sorry, but it is SO HARD getting details of the day to day workings and descriptions of an American socialist society from the socialists that I have quizzed. Buy for a dollar, sell for two, I understand. Socialism, who works for whom, where do the paychecks come from, what does it take to "start a business" (open a store, offer one's services as a plumber, electrician, mow yards, etc), honestly confuses me. So many "flavors", so many confusing phrases...

[Zalatix]

46. Uh, who's side are you on again?

[tavalon]

51. Psuedo?

No, it's anarchic, and it's correct. Guess we won't be seeing you at the barricades, then?

[hobbit709]

68. Which side are you on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Which_Side_Are_You_On%3F
"Which Side Are You On?" is a song written by Florence Reece in 1931. Reece was the wife of Sam Reece, a union organizer for the United Mine Workers in Harlan County, Kentucky. In 1931, the miners of that region were locked in a bitter and violent struggle with the mine owners called the Harlan County War. In an attempt to intimidate the Reece family, Sheriff J. H. Blair and his men (hired by the mining company) illegally entered their family home in search of Sam Reece. Sam had been warned in advance and escaped, but Florence and their children were terrorized in his place. That night, after the men had gone, Florence wrote the lyrics to "Which Side Are You On?" on a calendar that hung in the kitchen of her home. She took the melody from a traditional Baptist hymn, "Lay the Lily Low", or the traditional ballad "Jack Munro".[1] Florence recorded the song, which can be heard on the CD Coal Mining Women.

Reece supported a second wave of miner strikes circa 1973, as recounted in the documentary Harlan County USA. She and others perform "Which Side Are You On?" a number of times throughout.

[Caretha]

113. Absolutely Fab!

Everyone should listen.

You see, we may not all be miners, but we are all in the exact same position.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

104. Bullshit.

Change comes from disobedience.

[sulphurdunn]

108. Yes, the idea of revolting

against tyranny is unrealistic and sophomoric. I think that every time I salute the Union Jack at a baseball game and sing God Save the Queen.

[RZM]

37. The US actually has very little in common with Russia in 1917

Particularly the kinds of things that made February and October possible. For one, we aren't in the middle of losing a huge war that has cost us millions of lives. Our political system is not in a state of flux, nor are we coming off of centuries of absolute monarchy. We're not a peasant country, we aren't rapidly industrializing, and we don't lack democratic traditions. By 1917, the Tsarist system was fundamentally unstable, as was the short-lived provisional government. The exact opposite is the case in the US today. Our system is actually remarkably stable.

I'm not saying don't argue what you're arguing. I'm just saying that we're talking apples and oranges comparing the US in 2012 to Russia in 1917.

[socialist_n_TN]

40. We're in the same situation as far as ...........

what's needed to change things.

[Zalatix]

47. How about the French Revolution?

[RZM]

55. Don't know as much about France

But I don't think there's a whole lot in common there either. First off, it was a different world in the late 18th century. You had an absolute monarchy, a primarily rural population, etc.

One thing we do have in common there is debt and a financial crisis. But there have been many other financial crises too throughout history, so I'm not sure that particularly similarity means a whole lot.

[tavalon]

53. Remarkably stable?

That's the illusion. Same as it ever was? Nope. Last fall, a spark happened and our stable US tilted. A tear happened in the fabric. I don't see it as stable at all, anymore, and I'm one of the lucky proles, with a stable, unionized, privately unionized job. If I can see it, so can you. Open your eyes and look through the tear.

I'm reminded of a scene on Game of Thrones. Let me butcher it here. Lord Varys: Are you fond of riddles? Tyrion: Why? Are you going to tell me one? Varys: It's a riddle about a king, a priest and a rich man, in a room with a sellsword. Each wants to buy the sellsword. Who will the sellsword go to? Tyrion: Sellswords go to whomever has the most power. Varys: Which one is more powerful, then? That's the question and the illusion. Wouldn't it be the one with the sword? And yet, it is not.

I believe the comparison the OP was making was being on the edge of that knowledge. The knowledge of who is actually in power. If we figure it out, it will be the raging spark that becomes a raging fire. That is where the comparison to Russia and France came from, IMHO.

[RZM]

56. Just don't see it

Nor do I see Occupy as a major destabilizing force. Had it grown exponentially, maybe it could have been. Instead the opposite has happened. It's not much talked about at all anymore, even here.

[tavalon]

64. It could have been

and still may be. It was a minor destabilizing force, allowing those who chose to, a look behind the curtain. I myself have been pulled back from politics to a really, really big, bad thing happening in my own house. But I hardly think such things are happening all over. If OWS coalesces again, I think it could be a major destabilizer, hopefully many magnitudes greater than what happened in the 60s.

[Diclotican]

83. RZM

RZM

The Russian Tsar Nickolai 2 of Russia said in 1916, the year before the russian revolution, that " in no time in history, have the russians had the better, we are in a stable country, with a united people behind the emperor and the military.. " Next year the emperor Nicolai 2 of Russia was deposed, first in the February revolution, and after the October revolution, it all ended rather for the emperor, the family, and ten of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of russians, nobles as peasants alike...

I do not hope it Will be the same faith in the US, but I do fear that if nothing is being doing, it could end up in the same endgame, as the americans have nothing to loose than to do a revolution, - of sorts.. If the situation is bad enough it might end in a scenario no one want to be in....

But then, it is correct that the US are not in a major war yet - who had cost US millions of lives - even though it could be debated how stable the political system really are...

Diclotican

[coalition_unwilling]

93. We've just lost (or are in the process of losing) two

wars: Iraq and Afghanistan (albeit without military conscription). And the concentration of wealth in this society (where 1% control 40% of the wealth and 10% control 80% of the wealth) probably rivals that of 1905 Tsarist Russia.

That said, there are still enough differences to make the comparison not particularly useful.

[RZM]

94. The war comparisons don't work at all

By 1917, the the number of Russian soldiers either killed, wounded, missing, or captured ran into the millions. And the war was being fought in Russia itself. This was total war and Russia had a lot of trouble meeting these demands.

Iraq and Afghanistan are certainly not total wars and are much smaller in scale, at least from the US perspective.

[coalition_unwilling]

95. Good points. I'm not sure I'd even dignify Iraq and Afghanistan with the label of 'war' myself, but

that is the dominant trope out there and, when in Rome . . . After the trillions spent on 'defense' over the past 75 years, though, to be defeated by 3 rag-tag bodies of irregulars (Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan) makes the expenditure one of the classic boondoggles of all time. Oh wait, we 'defeated' the USSR so the money wasn't entirely wasted

I basically agree with your larger point that comparisons to Russia 1905/17 are not particularly useful to analyzing or understanding the current situation. I think France 1789 (where a newly emergent bourgeoisie confronted a decadent and outmoded aristocracy and monarchy) is more a propos to our current situation. Even there, though, comparisons fail to advance understanding, as France in 1789 was still largely agrarian whereas we are mostly post-industrial.

[Dont call me Shirley]

110. In RE to not calling them wars: ask the Iraqui and Afghani people that.

[coalition_unwilling]

111. Yeah, I take your point. On a related note, I've been told

that the people of Vietnam refer to 1954-75 as "the war with (or against) the Americans."

[southerncrone]

48. They've stopped playing ball w/us long ago.

They just gave us the illusion that we were still players in the game & not just pawns. The only way to stop them is to stop playing the game at all; especially as pawns.

Stop buying from corporations, if at all possible. Pay a few cents more to support mom & pop stores. Learn to do for yourself. Utilities might be a problem, but cut back wherever you can--at least feed the machine less. In this case, LESS is MORE.

They cannot rely on themselves, most have no usable or constructive skills at all. They would surely parish. I say let them eat their stocks & bonds. Our monetary system will probably have to collapse to take away their power. For this to work, however, we all (99%ers) have to be on board together--no dissenters.

[Blanks]

75. The problem in my opinion is that everyone has their own agenda.

If everyone agreed on a single act of defiance and carried it out; that would send a message.

For example if everyone decided to not mow their lawn for a certain period of time. 3 weeks or 4 weeks in solidarity over a certain issue. Maybe put up a placard in support of whatever it is they're supporting (the 99% for example). This act (and I just came up with it right now so it isn't really thought out) is really a non-act and not only does it not require any effort, but actually requires less effort than normal. If a large percentage of the country didn't mow their lawn; gasoline consumption would be reduced. Additionally, how many people make a special trip to the convenience store to buy gas for their mower?

Also because it is something that is personal (as opposed to occupational) persons who work for the government can show support (law enforcement, firemen etc) whose job may actually require The putting down of protests.

Then you don't have to camp at zucotti park for people to know that you support the movement.

The problem with the occupy movement is that it lacks leadership, and a plan. It is my understanding that the goal is to 'get the money out of politics'.

How? We're gonna camp out until you do. If I was the one with the money; I'd just pretend the movement didn't exist too.

[Marr]

60. Or the United States in the late 1800's/early 1900's.

The system is little more than a means of keeping regular people from having any influence.

[coalition_unwilling]

92. Frederick Douglass already said it back in the 19th Century:

[FrodosPet]

67. So we have a Napolean in our future?

Cripes.

[Hotler]

116. YES! YES! YES!

Nothing is going to change until more people feel the pain. Too many on BOTH sides of the isle have the attitude "I have mine. Fuck the rest of you." I've said it before and I'll say it again. Let the repugs have 2012 and bring on the pain. As long as NASCAR, pro football and baseball etc. keep selling out the pain is not near enough.

[pscot]

6. There's a step or two beyond "non-cooperation"

And that's where we seem to be headed.

[socialist_n_TN]

8. Sure there is, BUT..........

If you can't be in the streets, you can support by not cooperating.

And it's not time for any of this. YET. The mass hasn't reached critical. YET. But it IS headed in that direction. I just hope that these people that are so worried about their credit score, at some point, become just as worried about becoming neo-serfs.

[xchrom]

9. How people can excuse extracting profits

Out of the young - 1 of the few real resources a nation has - is beyond me.

You honestly don't care about 'national security' if you think that's ok.

[socialist_n_TN]

16. The young have always died for Wall Street.........

And they'll continue to die for profit until we change this rotten system.

[Zorra]

10. +1

[polichick]

12. Things won't change until the people stop accepting the status quo...

Like the good Rev's ad says.

[WillowTree]

13. So now we're supposed to emulate what we detest in others?

Sorry. Count me out on that one. I'll hang on to my own integrity if it's all the same to you.

And even if it isn't.

YMMV

[marmar]

27. How much integrity is there in continuing to support an utterly and obviously corrupt system?

nt

[socialist_n_TN]

29. Thank you marmar. That was my point.........

It's foolish to play by the rules when they don't.

[WillowTree]

58. Be my guest. But you know why they say it's folly to roll around in the mud with a pig, right?

You just get dirty and the pig likes it.

Think about it.

[FrodosPet]

70. Hey! Let's commit economic suicide

If we're lucky, those rich bastards may have to limit themselves to 5 new cars a year instead of 10.

Austerity is GOOD if we volunteer for it.

[truth2power]

85. And I thank you , marmar. You and socialist n tn are on the right track. eom

[Zalatix]

57. Feel free to continue playing the game by THEIR rules.

[mckara]

14. Hear, Hear!!!!!

[white_wolf]

15. +1

[SoutherDem]

18. Today we have a dysfunctional congress

AndTHEY DON'T EVEN PRETEND TO GIVE A SHIT ANYMORE!

You are certainly right. What is bad is these dirt bags keep getting reelected.

[socialist_n_TN]

19. That's because the electoral system in a bourgeoisie ......

"democracy" has ALWAYS been set up to cool and modulate the revolutionary impulses (IOW, REAL change) of the working class. It takes a long time and a lot of money to run for office and it always has. Now thanks to Citizen's United it's even worse than it was.

[cbrer]

65. Dysfunctional?

It seems to me they're functioning quite well. With their chosen agenda. Which ain't ours.

But you're right about them not giving a shit about the 99%. Afer all, it's not THEIR problem...

And your choice of the term "dirtbag" is making me channel Clint Eastwood. I like it! I like it!

[TBF]

21. Non-cooperation and getting in their face -

when we move from occupying the park to occupying Jamie Dimon's penthouse apartment we will be making progress.

[socialist_n_TN]

24. Well, as I said in another post.........

It takes all kinds of actions. I'll probably one of those who try to occupy Dimon's penthouse apartment. But everyone can help just by not cooperating. Anything to get into their pockets. That's the only thing they understand.

[Eddie Haskell]

22. I agree.

Carlin was a prophet.

[socialist_n_TN]

23. Naw, just a socialist..........

Anybody's who's read Marx recognizes everything that's going on. The prescriptions are there too.

[Marie Marie]

26. Maybe I'm a hopeless optimist (not really) but,

I think we can see small signs that this constant over-reach by the Republicans is finally starting to bite them in the ass. They've pissed off women, gays, hispanics, middle class workers, students, unions, disenfranchised voters, the poor, those disgusted by Citizens United, etc etc. The recent polls of voters are beginning to bear this out. Is it enough? I hope so.

[socialist_n_TN]

28. Actually I hope so too because..........

the working class is not ready yet. We need more time for education, agitation, and organization before we're ready to face the fascists.

The problem is, I'm not so sure that it matters WHO they piss off. I think that they think that they've got the system gamed enough to steal another election and nobody will call them on it. We'll see.

[southerncrone]

50. Agreed.

It's as if they are deliberately pissing off large groups of contingencies in an in-your-face-sucka manner. They smirk & chuckle cuz they've got the voting machines rigged.....again. They'll make sure they study "the math" better this time. Then we become a police state overnight. Hello feudalism.

[Brigid]

30. Carlin didn't go quite far enough.

Not only is there a club and we're not in it, we have no way to get in.

[socialist_n_TN]

32. Well, most people don't go far enough for me Brigid.......

But you're right. Unless you're born into it, you ain't getting in.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

31. Holding signs, yelling, and having pre-approved marches will change things, surely.

[socialist_n_TN]

33. Ah yes, We just get SO much done with those..........

"pre-approved" marches into those "Free Speech Zones". You and I both know nothing changes until you fuck with their money.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

38. .....heh.....

Don't you think it's kinda funny that you need to have a permit to protest?

Do you suppose these folks had a permit?

[img][/img]

[Spitfire of ATJ]

35. During the Monica nonsense

The Republicans were told the American People did not WANT details about Clinton's private testimony to be made public and their answer was "We don't care".

It's gone downhill from there.

[socialist_n_TN]

39. And that's the whole point. They really DON'T care............

And unfortunately WAY too many of the Dems ALSO don't care. Most pols of both parties are too busy fellating the capitalists who are "making it rain". THAT'S who they care about, not us. And that's why we will need extra-electoral remedies.

Welcome to DU BTW.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

41. One of these days we're going to see votes trump cash

Oh wait,...it actually happened here in California.

Ya never hear about that, do ya....

Thanks for the welcome.

[clang1]

42. It is Neo-America

Change it, or accept it.


THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO CHOICES.














Meanwhile.....The Progression continues....

[socialist_n_TN]

43. Yep. Whose side are you on?.....

That is the key question for the here and now.

[clang1]

112. Not yours n/t

[Caretha]

114. And I'm not on yours....so get off my lawn

"Not yours n/t"

Noted.

[socialist_n_TN]

115. Yep. It's always nice to know where people stand.......

The problem will come when the capitalists have stolen his/her pension, taken away all of the "socialist" safety nets, and he/she becomes a "useless eater".

He/she might be on their side, but they ain't on his.

[Mira]

45. Well reasoned, and well stated. K&R

[woo me with science]

52. DU Rec nt

[Lifelong Protester]

54. I agree with you

Today there was a post here that basically was scolding everyone who listened to the media of 'their side' and didn't reach out to the 'other side'.... I guess that might have worked in the 'old days' but I would have to agree, the powerful would be more than happy for us to reach out to 'their side' ...then devour us like sheep.

I wanted to say "Hey, you guys reach out to us first". And of course, that ain't gonna happen.

[Starry Messenger]

59. +1

[Odin2005]

61. Guillotine time.

That's all I'm gonna say.

[DeSwiss]

63. Awaken! - K&R n/t

[Egalitarian Thug]

66. An American refusenik movement would work if enough people participate.

But there's the rub, getting Americans to do anything that does not involve watching a box and writing a check gets harder every year. If 15% of us withdrew our consent by not participating in the system, the system will crash.

Looked at another way, if everybody that lacks health care simply took what little money they have out of any financial institution (cash) and stopped buying anything from any company whose owner is not on the premises, that would spark a sudden and quite dramatic fire at the top of the food chain.

45 million people suddenly saying "no" can break the chain. No signs, protests, tear gas, beatings, or arrests required, just stop playing their game.

[Macoy51]

72. The Rules Were Changed Mid-game

Several years ago I would have said that you have a moral obligation to pay your mortgage. Now, I see it as just a business decision. What made me change my position? In short, the banks changes the rules/conditions in the middle of the game. I feel my moral obligation ended the day that the banks were given billions of my (taxpayer) money.

If a bank can bribe Congress to give them my money against my will, then I have fulfilled my moral obligation to repay my mortgage. I will continue to pay, but only because the cost/benefit analyst says paying my mortgage is the best choice. I have advised several friends to stop paying their mortgages because that was the rational choice for them.

Now on the issue of soldiers refusing to deploy, I disagree. The rules have not changed mid-game. Like it or hate it, we have been at war for over 10 years. Anyone who joins the Army/Marine Corps WILL deploy. And most likely several times. Active Duty/Reservist/National Guard, it does not matter, you will deploy. So, if you disagree with the war, or just don’t want to deploy, then don’t join the military .


Macoy

[lunatica]

74. Banks and corporations used to be expected to follow a moral obligation too

It was part of regulating them. But like any other entity, if you take away the obligation they will become corrupt. So if people are supposed to continue having the moral obligation to pay then shouldn't banks have the moral obligation to make it possible for customers to afford to pay? Isn't that your basic banking 101?

[Shankapotomus]

71. Letting Republicans be themselves

and calling them out on it every time is so working and will pay dividends in the future. I say we stay calm and let the Republicans implode.

[Leopolds Ghost]

73. K&R

[historian]

76. Exactly!!!

Gandhi had it right by advocating boycotts. Hit them where it hurts: on the bottom line!!!! Our so called pillars of society are so far removed from reality or even a basic understanding of humanity, that recriminations and appeals to decency or integrity will simply flounder for a bit then sink with the rest not worth thinking about (in their point of view)
Do you have a 50 inch tv? Then you dont need a 60inch one. Car is 2 yrs old? It will last another 10years if you take care of it. Price of gas too high? Walk or ride a bicycle. Movies too expensive? Since most of them are rubbish anyway, buy a book for a few dollars and read. You can make popcorn at home for a dollar instead of 10.00. And so on folks.

[dkf]

77. You don't cooperate with the system and it won't cooperate with you.

The question is: are you willing to take the consequences.

[datasuspect]

78. the system compels you to comply

cooperation is not a part of this formulation.

they say jump, we are to say "how high."

this isn't how free people live.

[dkf]

79. You are free to not take out loans or join the military.

But I agree that debt means loss of freedom.

[datasuspect]

86. most of this country is a backwater

dangle a carrot like a steady paycheck (military) or a step up the ladder (student loans) in front of lost of people who have practically ZERO opportunities available, it becomes easier to see why people make the decisions they make.

that's where the loss of freedom exists: it's disingenuous to proclaim what you are free to NOT do. Especially when doors are pretty much closed across the board in all the various $8/hour wage slave backwaters that make up the majority of this country.

the idea is to EXPAND opportunity.

[dkf]

87. The American educational system doesn't teach kids the first thing about financial literacy.

And then they become adults who've never bothered to learn on their own.

Sad.

[datasuspect]

88. That is by design

The american education system exists primarily to create obedient consumers.

There is no financial incentive for the ownership class to create more competition for the wealth they hold.

[dkf]

98. How to pay off your credit cards for one.

How much interest you pay on a 30 year mortgage.

[Ednahilda]

80. Read yesterday's entry on "The Picket Line"

It is an exceptionally good discussion on this very topic: Ammon Hennacy's One Man Revolution. The entry is longish, but it is excellent. Best of all, it is something that each and every one of us can do right now, on our own. Get going!

link:http://sniggle.net/Experiment/index5.php?entry=27Jun12|

(I hope I linked this correctly. I'm not an especially adept computer person.)

[chervilant]

96. The author of the blog you linked

liberally ( ) quotes my fave philosopher, Henry David Thoreau.

Another quote I find essential in these difficult, exponential times:

We need to be the change we wish to see in this world.

Mohandas Gandhi (1869-1948)

Gandhi also observed:

An armed conflict between nations horrifies us. But the economic war is no better than an armed conflict. This is like a surgical operation. An economic war is prolonged torture. And its ravages are no less terrible than those depicted in the literature on war properly so called. We think nothing of the other because we are used to its deadly effects. ...
The movement against war is sound. I pray for its success. But I cannot help the gnawing fear that the movement will fail if it does not touch the root of all evil — man's greed.

[chervilant]

81. I agree until your last sentence.

We also have Satyagraha, and we MUST use it! We must relentlessly continue to inform the pathetic right-wing sycophants (psychophants?). We MUST help them understand that the vile, greedy corporatists do NOT care about them.

More and more people are waking up. We have to help them understand.

[INdemo]

84. "it's a small club and we're not in it."

I remember when I was a new recruit in the USN and I might have been brainwashed but I may have been one of the last to believe that we truly had a purpose to be in Vietnam. I thought then that I was privileged to be a citizen of the greatest country on earth...but now in my sixties I believe that perhaps my grandchildren will not enjoy the democratic way of life and the freedoms I enjoyed...We have become the corporate United States with no checks and balances left for our mistakes or our government "overstepping their bounds" to be corrected. We have a Supreme Court that is a third legislative branch or just another right wing group that has the power to force the ideology of their party onto the citizens.Never thought I would see in my lifetime elected officials bought by the highest bidder of this mafia group that controls our society.Elections have become a formality and if the person on the ballot plays by their rules they win..
Yep...
"it's a small club and we're not in it."

[mick063]

89. It is the duty

of us older folks to inform the young that things have drastically changed for the worse. If you have never experienced a world with a strong middle class, you simply don't know any better.

I'm fairly close to retirement. I'm living a very comfortable life, but not foolish enough to believe that the money grubbers won't take my life savings at their first opportunity. My father didn't face such a dire situation.

Take it from this old man......the threat to my father's world is no longer just a threat. There have been drastic changes since Reagan, and none have been good for the common working man.

[raouldukelives]

90. Great rant. 100% agree.

Its been pretty evident for years that we have been shifting away from I suppose what you would call the "spirit" of America. Money has become the new freedom. Heck, maybe it has always been that way but in my short life so far all I have seen has been a steady shift towards the want and worship of money on grand scale.
As a kid growing up I saw many examples of ways that prior Americans had tried to create a better world for their children, for the next round of protectors of the ideals of freedom, liberty and justice for all. I saw people working good Union jobs. I saw people with healthy pensions. I saw hospitals, libraries, mental health care, environmental protections and strong American companies that people were proud to work at.
Since my youth and Pres. Reagan all I have witnessed is dismantling. Nothing has been built on, no one has picked up the torch. Only the vampire squid. The loathing of the ideals of people having access to education, clean water & air, health care and good jobs and the love of the sweet money and power. The Romneys, The Gordon Geckos of this world literally destroying the things that prior patriotic Americans built up by a lifetime of hard work and sacrifice. Latching onto them and leeching them of all their wealth in the blink of an eye and leaving a wasting shell behind. Crushing the very things that the originators felt would make life better for the next round. Because in the end, isn't that all we have? Isn't that the entire idea of the United States to begin with? That ever striving push from the dawn of mankind to have freedom, to not have their children suffer the way they are suffering, to make life better?
Not since the "greed is good" mantra hit full stride. That dismantling happened swiftly and has only increased in its effectiveness because of all the people joining up and helping. The wannabe Geckos, the children of the Reagan revolution. The very backbone of Wall St. The quiet and helpful drones who do all the heavy lifting, who try to convince others to join in the cycle of destruction for profit. Wars for profit, denying health care for profit, killing forests, oceans, education, our own country and its ideals. Its fading fast and every day spent in the service of corporations is only a day further into destruction for all children of this world.
Which side are you on indeed.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

100. Students should look to Canada for directions

on how to conduct a loan debt "strike", or maybe threaten to "drop out in mass".

[Nuclear Unicorn]

101. Just remember the other side gets to play with the same rules

What about all the freepers who don't want to cooperate with the ACA?

[jwirr]

102. There are many students who will stand together but I really feel for the soldiers who do this. They

are correct to refuse but they are going to get hit hard by the PTB.

[truedelphi]

103. Glad to be rec 123. n/t

[MineralMan]

106. Ah, but my personal ethics are independent from anyone else's.

My word really is my bond. If I break it, I disappoint myself.

You might have different ethical principles you follow. I know mind, and I will follow them, regardless of yours.

[socialist_n_TN]

117. You know, if you loaned me $100 I'd move Heaven and Earth.........

to pay you back. Chase? Not so much. But don't misunderstand what I was talking about. I'm not using politics as an excuse to not pay the bills. I've got two credit cards, a car loan, and two mortgages and they're all paid current. At this time.

HOWEVER, at some point in the future when the shit hits the fan and a large minority or even majority of the country decides to STOP cooperating with the system because of the egregious damages caused by the capitalist system, those bills will NOT be current. They're current at this time because it's convienient for me to have them. The same with work. If and when a large minority or even majority of people decide to stop working so as not to cooperate with the system that's using their labor to enslave them, then I'll stop too. And I'll probably be one of the first to do so. After all, I did take off work THIS year on May Day, even though very few in my little burg did. I missed a day's pay to make a statement. But until then, it's education and agitation and organization preparing FOR that day.

It doesn't do much good to just do something like this on your own. But if MILLIONS of people are organized to do these types of things AT THE SAME TIME, then we can have an effect.

[CleanLucre]

107. Everyone who buys their shit cooperates with the system

[Dont call me Shirley]

109. Do not cooperate with the fascist system, do not cooperate with tthe war makers, do not cooperate

with the banksters, do not cooperate with the immoral drug companies, do not cooperate with the earth rapers and poisoners, do not cooperate with the phony 4th estate, do not cooperate. THEY DONT COOPERATE WITH US!