HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » We need a Revolution but ...

Tue Apr 5, 2016, 09:06 AM

 

We need a Revolution but not violence.

Violence is an authoritarian tool used to terrorize We The People into submission. Any violence by us is welcomed by the state to justify much higher levels of violence against us. A goal of protests is to awaken the public to the inequities and corruption of the current political and economic systems. Being violent obscures this message. Currently the state is careful not to “unjustly” imprison protestors and thereby possibly produce sympathy for the protestors. If protestors are violent then the state would be justified, at least in the minds of the public, to imprison them longer, and treat them with more brutality.

There is an excellent article about non-violence in the book, “Occupy: Scenes from Occupied America”, by Rebecca Solnit. The article is called, “Throwing Out the Master’s Tools and Building a Better House”.

From the article:
"The powerful and effective movements of the past sixty years have used the strategy of people power. It works. I changes the world. It's changing the world now. Join us. Or don't join us. But please dont try to have it both ways."

Senator Sanders is calling for a revolution but not violence. It's time to fight back against the oppression of the Ruling Class that has taken our homes, our jobs, our retirements and in some cases members of our family sent to war to die for larger profits for the Ruling Class.

5 replies, 725 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply We need a Revolution but not violence. (Original post)
rhett o rick Apr 2016 OP
forest444 Apr 2016 #1
hereforthevoting Apr 2016 #3
forest444 Apr 2016 #4
stone space Apr 2016 #2
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #5

Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Tue Apr 5, 2016, 09:09 AM

1. Hence, Bernie!

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible," Kennedy famously said, "will make violent revolution inevitable" (God forbid).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 5, 2016, 09:24 AM

3. I feel, and I have gotten some blowback for this

That the person who we would be least likely to see a riot under is Bernie. And I fear it's coming sooner than anyone thinks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hereforthevoting (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 5, 2016, 02:00 PM

4. I agree on both points.

Bernie is exactly the wall of contention we need, should the economy collapse in the near future (as some are warning it might).

Having said that, the Fed proved to have a virtually unlimited capacity for printing dollars to bail the banks out of their bad bets in 2009 ($20 trillion or more, off the books), without collapsing the dollar.

As irksome as it might be, we had better hope they can still work that same magic when the next casino banking hangover hits - which, as you pointed out, might be sooner rather than later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Tue Apr 5, 2016, 09:17 AM

2. It makes me sick whenever I see folks here at DU advocating gun violence at political rallies.

 

Especially when such posts are left standing by a jury.

Thank you for this.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 5, 2016, 06:02 PM

5. I think things will get stranger before they get better. We are seeing the end times for Capitalism

 

We know it's not sustainable. Just how far down can we go before we strike back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread