What would happen if what is happening in Egypt happened here?

[FarLeftFist]

How would our govt. handle it? Do they have a plan for something of that magnitude? We are always concerned about human rights in this country, but for some reason I feel that the results would have been far bloodier here in America, like the violence against the protesters would be much greater. Another reason I'm glad Bush is gone and Obama is President. But a protest of that size, duration, and magnitude I don't believe has ever occurred here. What do you think the plan would be or how it would play out here in America?

[elocs]

1. Not to worry. It won't happen here. As bad as things might be, most people are too comfortable. nt

[Better Believe It]

28. That's what some said in 1929 about working people. In 1934 the shit hit the fan! It took 5 years

[Enrique]

2. they definitely have a plan

watching the protests in Egypt, one thing that struck me is the near total lack of guns among the protesters. If protests happened here, they'd send some people from Blackwater dressed as a protester to shoot up a bunch of people and then they'd have an excuse to crack down.

[Catherina]

11. They tried that in Egypt. Failed miserably. Fearless protestors

nabbed over 150 of those guys and detained them, tied up, in a subway station.

Then they published all their names & pictures of the Interior Ministry/Secret Police ID cards they were carrying.

They'll try it again, no doubt about that. Suleiman needs an excuse badly now.

+1 that they definitely have a plan.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Interesting thought experiment, though it would not happen here

We can not get a general strike going...mass action in the streets is even further out.

[AndyTiedye]

42. A General Strike Would Just Allow Them To Send Jobs Offshore Even Faster

and bring in a few fresh planeloads of H1b's to take the ones that have to be done here.

The cheap labor repiglickins would love to see us try a general strike.

[CrossChris]

4. Ever seen pictures of New Orleans after Katrina?

Probably something like that.

[Waiting For Everyman]

5. "It Can't Happen Here" Ever hear of the 60s?

It Can't Happen Here (Mothers of Invention)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKITpVovTAE

Oh, but it did happen though - kinda like this...

Trouble Every Day (MOI too)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiVFfOOm_GI&feature=related

Volunteers (Jefferson Airplane)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_0sg0XDfmg

60s music wasn't about fictional events. I remember tanks in the streets (DC too) and convoys of them on the interstates, uniformed armed soldiers on street corners, martial law, curfews, multiple cities burning, people killed, people disappeared, no-knock breakins, the whole 9 yards.

It can happen here. It just takes right match - same as there.

[sufrommich]

7. I wouldn't use the 60's as a good example.The republicans

got a lot of mileage out of the revolts of the 60's and still use it to their advantage now.

[Waiting For Everyman]

12. It ended a war and it brought about civil rights though. That's change.

The 60s was a mass revolt that went for a loooong time. It wasn't diplomacy that ended the VN war, and civil rights laws didn't get passed because some politician simply thought it would be a good idea. The USA has done this before, people forget that. It wasn't done all at once, as this is, and the US is a much bigger place which makes it harder logistically.

As far as the Republicans' spin - that's the price we pay for making actual change. Revisionism is the face-saving game of the loser-cowards afterwards. It means nothing. As far as the people who buy it - they're the ones who wouldn't stand up for anything themselves anyway. They follow whatever wind blows... but the wind can change direction anytime.

[sufrommich]

18. The 60s will be remembered much more as a cultural revolution

in this country than a political revolution. The Viet Nam war ended because both the war and the draft had become unpopular with the American middle class.The Civil Rights movement has started way before baby boomer college kids got involved with it and was moved ahead by Lyndon Johnson(hardly a hero to the young protesters of the 60's).The truth is, there was a backlash against the political radicals of the 60's that resulted in Nixon getting elected. It was also the last time truly liberal Democrats like Eugene McCarthy were able to make a serious run for the Presidency ( although Kerry was the exception here)because the republicans successfully blended the democratic brand with 60's radicals and it worked.To this day, they float that old cliche out and it still does the trick for a lot of people.

[Waiting For Everyman]

27. Without feet in the street, we'd still be in VN and still be segregated.

I was there, and I know. Spin doesn't equal fact. The Democratic party is still suffering for cracking down on its own demonstrators, such as at the '68 convention - an incredibly stupid move, similar to the mistake Mubarak may make now too. The Dem party threw away a lot of young voters doing that, and didn't get many of them back for a long time, if ever... if not for that, some of the Republican wins in the last 40 years might not have happened.

The Dem party still hasn't made that fault right, and is still paying the price for it.

[sufrommich]

33. Yeah, I remember the era too,as do lots of baby boomers

here. Where did all those "young voters" go? You might want to check out the voting patterns of our age group,it's not me doing the spinning.Those young demonstrators didn't disappear off the face of the Earth. Research public opinion polls from 1968,Nixon's numbers went up after the Democratic Convention,although the public viewed the police riots in Chicago negatively,the Democrats were viewed negatively as well.

[Scruffy1]

46. it didn't end the war.

The war kept going on until the troops ended it by refusing to fight.

[Better Believe It]

31. You weren't there. You don't know.

So the Republicans have gotten a lot of mileage out of the civil rights, labor rights, women's rights and gay rights movements of the 1960's.

Nonsense.

Care to explain how they have gotten a lot of mileage out of those mass movements? Or is that just some talking point you picked up in college or on the web?

Like I said, you weren't there and you clearly don't know.

[sufrommich]

34. I'm 53 years old. The movements you mentioned are

cultural movements,as I originally stated. Politically, this country is more to the right than it's ever been.

[Better Believe It]

38. So you were born in 1957. You weren't a participant. They were political movements,

led by political people and organizations that raised specific political demands and won many of them.

Read the history of those movements.

[sufrommich]

41. If they were political movements, they certainly didn't do much to

change the the political direction in this country, which has got considerably more conservative as baby boomers age.Why ignore the elephant in the room? What age group do you imagine is the biggest block of voters in the US? Political movements tend to change the landscape of politics,has that happened?

[dmallind]

6. You want to force Obama to step down and refuse to accept Biden?

Then the Constitution tells us what happens - we get President Boehner. Have you though this through?

[FarLeftFist]

8. No I'm not advocating for this at all....

Just a thought as to what American procedure would be. I'm very happy to have Obama as my President. With more protests called for this friday it seems as if the Egyptian people are actually pulling off something the entire world thought wasn't possible.

[JVS]

9. Unless it's teabaggers doing the plutocrats' bidding, they'd be mowed down like a lawn.

[OHdem10]

10. If GOP in power, Martial Law.

[BzaDem]

13. We have a democracy. If people don't like the leaders, they can replace them in the next regularly

scheduled election, which happens quite frequently.

All of this equating Egypt to America (not you, but some others) is really just a bunch of complaining about not being able to convince enough Americans to agree with them. But people being dissatisfied is not at all a sign of a lack of democracy -- no democratically elected leader will ever have unanimous support.

[nxylas]

15. Yes, and the moon is made of green cheese

And Santa brings presents to all good children at Christmastime.

[cali]

16. OK, if you don't buy that, try this on for size: We have the illusion

of a democracy and most people buy into it.

[BzaDem]

19. Your post is a perfect example: there will always be a few who think "me not winning" is somehow

equivalent to "there is no democracy."

There have always been a few in both parties who think this, and it is really nothing new.

[nxylas]

20. No, the point is that it doesn't matter who wins

I don't altogether buy the argument that there is no difference between the two parties. There are some good people in the Democratic Party. There are no good people in the Republican Party. I believe that Barack Obama ran with good intentions. But corporate power is now so entrenched in government that elections have become little more than political theater, and that was even before Citizens United. There's more to a democracy than getting to choose between President Goldman and President Sachs every four years. As Wendell Berry has observed, giving people a vote but not a choice is a common feature in many modern dictatorships.

[Bluenorthwest]

32. So CA just rejected Whitman, with tons of cash

and elected Jerry Brown who ran for peanuts. Oregon just elected a new Democratic governor who is very different from the Republican challenger, the Democrat an physician, the Republican a third rate former pro-athlete with no experience in government at all. The Democrat, like Brown, has already been governor of Oregon in the past.
So you'd say that is not a choice. Not sure how that works. We elected Peter DeFazio to go back to the House, his rival, Art Robinson was an utter nutter, here's a quote "The whole public school system is child abuse." Take a look at the link. http://whoisartrobinson.defazioforcongress.org/

If you can not see a difference, I don't know what to say. You see Robinson V DeFazio as a vote, but not a choice. I do not agree with you, period.

[WatsonT]

26. Let me know

when we have a president who stays on past his term.

[tekisui]

48. Elections have the benefit of keeping people complacent.

Our elections, however, are a high-priced long running and superficial ad campaign. Our choices are narrow and candidates exceedingly few. Actual opposing voices to the status quo are drummed out by big money.

We have the illusion of self-determinative leadership, and that keeps us from growing too angry to take to the streets. If we ever quit believing in that illusion, we could see some real people power. Of course, our militaristic leaders would squash us if there was ever a real movement.

[Inuca]

14. An even better question

what would happen if martians landed here?

[Cleita]

17. First we would be herded into free speech zones

far enough away from our elected officials so as not to cause them any grief. Then the media would totally ignore us so that no one would know it's going on. Instead the media would broadcast 24/7 about some murdered debutante or coed. Finally, they would call us hippies and communists indicating we were unAmerican. If you don't believe me, it's what happened when Bush pushed to go to war with Iraq. Huge demonstration against the war were mobilized and the American people were totally ignored practically spit upon by the oligarchy.

[Scruffy1]

47. Ding, Ding Ding-we have a winner

[shanti]

21. the camps are ready n/t

[sufrommich]

24. Glenn Beck nods his head in agreement. nt

[shanti]

45. even a broken clock is correct

once a day....

thanks for your concern :eyes:

[cutlassmama]

40. Yep. Look up Fusion centers. They are already in place.

[Lucian]

22. People are too fat and lazy to do anything here.

Getting off the couch and turning off "Jersey Shore" is something that's difficult for many, if not most, Americans.

[Better Believe It]

29. Oh come on. I'm tired of hearing that old tired crapola.

How long do you think it took people in the United States to respond on a massive scale to their plight when the Great Depression hit?

You probably don't know so let me tell you.

Almost five years, five long years!

And in 1930, 1931, 1932, 1933 and wellinto 1934 some out of touch liberals claimed working people failed to organize because of their body weight and physical laziness!

And when working people did finally organized on a massive scale the same alleged "liberals" attacked them for being too militant and aggressive!

So cut the crap already and learn something about American history beyond what the corporate schools teach.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. Yeah, it is Jersey Shore, last week the meme was American Idol

300 million Americans, plus. Jersey Shore just set a viewership record last week, they had 8.9 million watching for an hour. This leaves us with 23 hours, and oddly enough, still more than 300 million who have never even seen the show. I just saw one recently. It is an amusement. Are you under the impression that this is the first nation or generation with amusements?
I just get so sick of trying to figure out how folks think some show getting single digit percentages of the population is holding sway. Don't get me wrong, Jersey Shore is a hit, I mean Glenn Beck would do most anything to draw such an audience even once. He's another one who is supposed to hold all American's attention, but less then 2 million watch him, he topped at 3. More people hear Hartmann in a week than see Beckk.
So the fact is most Americans have never seen Jersey Shore. Not even heard of it. So odd that you see it as the central feature in our culture. Misanthropy and wisdom are not the same thing.

[Better Believe It]

39. I and many activists watch American Idol. I also play computer games and go to sporting events!

I must be a lazy, brainwashed person easily distracted by entertainment and amusements!

:)

[Lucian]

44. Woah, an outlier.

Those don't happen.

:eyes:

Since when does "many" and "most" mean all?

[Lucian]

43. When I said "Jersey Shore,"

I implied any and all television programs.

Americans are fat and lazy and watch way too much tv. A small number of people don't. Just a small number.

[bigwillq]

49. Good post.

:thumbsup:

Never watched the Shore. Used to watch Idol at times. Haven't it a long time.


You make some good points in this post.

:hi:

[AngryAmish]

23. It would make the first Civil War look like a day at the waterslide

Much closer to La Violencia in Columbia.

[WatsonT]

25. Poor comparison

we haven't had a president who refused to step down when their term was up. Also the population is far more spread out which would affect the logistics of any mass protests. Egypt's population is concentrated in a narrow region along the Nile, making mass protests more practical and effective.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. You mean if we had a President who would not leave for 30

years?

[BobbyBoring]

37. I was really worried

about Bush declaring martial law before the 08 elections. He gave us tarp instead~

[jp11]

35. Martial Law.

If people in cities around the country stopped going to work, protested and took up 'camp' in public spaces/streets etc the state governors would act all on their own and if/when that failed police action they'd go to the government for help with troops or national guardsmen whatever legal process was needed.

Even IF a large enough percentage of people protested and it would have to be significant to spread around our country they'd need to be able to survive the weeks (so far) without stores/banks ie supplies opening or only opening sporadically and the inevitable looting/crime that would come with it. The crime and closure of streets/businesses would all 'force' or provoke a police action to quash it, our country 'has to be open' for business, short of millions of people protesting so that it would be a riot if police/troops tried to stop it right then and there the response would be to nip it in the bud as it is/was perceived to be spreading/growing.

I doubt the party the president belongs to would 'save' the people if they proved to threaten the great machine of our markets, at best it might buy them a few days/weeks before the decision to bring order was given, unless of course there were far too many people to fight/arrest/terrorize.

If things continue on the track they seem to be in this country we probably have a couple decades before people 'wake up' if not longer. We shed even more jobs our working class future is even bleaker and there seems to be nothing planned to fix it, just more small 'recoveries' and growth we should all be happy for while millions remain umemployed and a good percentage of will not find jobs again those that do will have to settle for less or two jobs.

[RandomThoughts]

50. I wont settle.

Even if it brings down the entire top 5%, although I hope it only brings them back into a more moderate form, and does not have to remove them completely.

And I am still due beer and travel money.