And that’s not a good thing. Simon Black on food, revolutions, and other matters. (Nothing you don’t already know, but some good reminders, nevertheless.)
The main difference is that Westerners have been brainwashed into believing that the civilized people voice their grievances in a voting booth rather than doing battle in the streets.
It’s a false premise. Unfortunately, so is violent revolution.
As my dictionary so perfectly defines, “revolution” has two meanings.
First, it can denote an overthrow of a sitting government, whether violent or ‘bloodless’.
But in celestial terms, ‘revolution’ denotes a complete orbit around a fixed axis. In other words, after one revolution, you end up right back where you started.
This of course immediately brings to mind Benjamin Franklin’s famous quote that we now have “A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it.”
And Jefferson probably is chuckling: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/11/hurt-obama-reveals-his-obliviousness-at-monticello/
I’m not sure the author ― or Ron Paul ― sends any comforting or conclusive words to the reader. (At least not to me.)
I agree that voting is not the answer, and violence probably would bring us around to “the same old thing.” While Ron Paul is telling us to “be prepared”.
But for what?
[If the following links do not come through together, I’ll send them separately.]
Civil war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war
Revolution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution
Rebellion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellion
All three definitions imply the possibility of a takeover. All three can result in a country/region/leadership continuing in the same or worse shape than it was. And all three have, throughout history, made a mess of the area(s) fought over (except possibly a few years after the American Revolution).
Yet… hoping for a regime to collapse on itself is senseless. Even if TPTB learned something from those who went before, they always BUILD on what went before, they never start over with new and improved policies, or another way of approaching problems, and they never admit their opposition might be right (if it ever was). Convinced they know better than anyone else, they ride the country into the ground, but will never give up control *at any cost.*
My question is: Isn’t there some other way to get the job done except talking or fighting about it?
Maybe MamaLiberty could invent that simple tool she mentions in “Last 4th of July”. That would shake up TPTB. (But I can’t find a link to her story.)
Strikingly enough, these are precisely the sort of things being said by the Pravy Sektor demonstrators/revolutionists in Kiev: they are no more interested in integrating with the EU than with the Russian Federation. The Ukrainian “Right Sector” regards Putin’s Russia as a violently repressive oligarchy (which, of course, it is) and the EU as a stifling nanny-statist and redistributionist bunch of busybodies (which, of course, it is). This is a sentiment shared by much of Slavic Europe- the famously obstreperous Czechs are particularly vocal in that regard. The trigger-pullers and rock-throwers in Kiev and Lvov are increasingly no longer talking about the either-or of Europe-vs-Russia, but rather about bottom-up systemic change to the way in which things are done in their country.
And I say good on them.
The reason revolutions always have their thermadore, when the revolution eats its’ own, is because the mindset of the people never changed. They bought into the idea of poaching other people’s lives, wealth, and property for their own benefit under the previous government, and they will establish the same under the next. One tyranny for another.
The only, ONLY, essential element of a free society is the moral code that says “I have no claim on you.” That one moral code, if broken, leads to all of the other theft and slavery that inevitably results.
Revolution will never change anything until the People change the larceny in their hearts.
Useful insight here, at least.
Reform is new makeup on the tyrant’s face.
Revolution is a tyrant with a new face.
As long as people submit to external governance, that’s all they’ll get.
Fortunately, government itself is making it impossible to submit and actually survive. Greater and greater numbers of people have already begun withdrawing from the system, no ideology required.
There is a lot to be said for the Levin plan.